ITT we BTFO capitalism in one image

ITT we BTFO capitalism in one image.

>surplus value of labor

>OP benefits from Capitalism every day.

Allowing the employer a profit doesn't mean the employee is paying the employer.

>unironically believing the LTV
Capital creates wealth just as labor does

pol will defend this.

>36% of the income of the 1% comes from literally doing nothing but having money.

>put some capital in the middle of nowhere
>spontaneously operates itself

We're not that advanced yet, dumbass.

>Antarctica isn't worth anything because no one lives there to exploit it
wew lad nice argument

>Antarctica isn't worth anything because no one lives there to exploit it

this is literally true.

WEW
>to be this cucked by your masters.

>this is literally true.
why ?

I've made a claim
all you've done is say the LTV is rightt

Successful entrepreneurs, especially ones rising from poverty, btfo this

>OP's ideal world is realized
>everybody works for themselves
>everybody makes everything by hand, because if you buy a machine you have to pay the person you made it a percent of your income because it was their machine that made it
>there are billions of brands
>most people dont even make $100 a year, their products are drowned out by higher quality, better advertised, and higher quanitity products
>workers begin to wisen up and start to form working groups together to make more of this better product
>working groups are led by the original creator of the product
>working groups begin to become giant groups of people working to make more money
>leader of the group directs everything and asks someone to invent an efficient way to make product for money
>to afford this and to afford living the leader has to take more money than the workers are earning
>also because their family invented it, they are taking a percent of the workers income, who are making and selling their product
>people begin to complain that this is unfair, as the leader of the working group did not do anything except invent the product and oversee its production
>OP's ideal world is realized

>What are overheads
>What is investment
>What is risk
>What is opportunity loss

All raw materials, land, resources have zero value until labor is mixed into it.

>and who made THOSE products?

A worker... with the money that the business guy provided.
What's the point this strip is trying to make again?

The price of those products change constantly. The capitalist takes a lot of risk on investing his money. If the price of the product falls and the factory can't sustain itself, then the owner gets fucked, not the workers.

...

>My theory is correct by merit of itself
Land, Labor and Capital all produce wealth

A century ago labor created more wealth than capital. Labor organizing was a genuine way to right the wrongs of exploited workers

today, capital creates more wealth than labor. when people talk about automation, the concern is usually that the robots will literally take people's jobs. that's incorrect. the issue is that going into the future labor will not produce enough wealth by itself to maintain a living and people will have to take welfare in some form

Communism had it's chance a century ago, but you failed. the only way to achieve it would be to destroy capital and make labor more valuable, but that is effectively exploiting someone to free them from exploitation.

regardless of Trump or anyone, the most likely future scenario is a corporate welfare state where proles get the benefits to live comfortably in return for their labor and obedience to the state while those who own property control the government. the only alternative solution is giving workers private ownership of capital to supplement the income they receive through their labor

>36% of the income of the 1% comes from literally doing nothing but having money.
your retarded around 70% of rich people lose theyre wealth in the second generation if they dont work or do something with it

Why do you guys respond to this obvious bait that?

Fun fact. The guy making the product would incorporate himself if he didn't get hit with an upfront 15% tax for being self employed. He only sees 7.5% of that FICA tax as an employee.

The game is rigged for large businesses.

>We lie and make up empirically disprovable bullshit to justify stealing

Surplus value of labor doesn't exist, since economic science has shown that the only value of labor is what you can sell it for. The Labour Theory of Value is provably false. Marx had to actually make up an entirely new definition of value that has nothing to do with money in order to hold the theory together, but this "new value" has no objective means of determination.

...

21STPBP

...

based leaf

disprove this gommie instead of just posting infantile memes
I'll be waiting :^)

>le "labor has value" meme
>literally BTFO by a leftie

This is such horse shit. Ultimately, the capitalist (or his father or grandfather) saved some of his wages instead of blowing every penny like the typical white trash working class piece of shit. Then he bought his first machine.

Anyone can be a capitalist. It's all about delayed gratification.

its kind of funny to see how the commie still missed the point about the imperative of actually moving and selling the product while still managing to outcompete everyone else. He instead decides to double down on the already solved point that the worker is the one that actually makes the product and for some reason this means its his to claim.

Try harder faggot

>accusing someone of the exact bullshit you're doing

I'm sorry you lost your MSM job and had to take up shilling a Vietnamese textile forum

>the only alternative solution is giving workers private ownership of capital to supplement the income they receive through their labor

Stock Market, and Stock Option have been a thing for 150+ Years.

> the issue is that going into the future labor will not produce enough wealth by itself to maintain a living and people will have to take welfare in some form

This is the same view as the Luddites, automation just made goods cheaper, as it tends to do. You will not simply fully automate all goods at maximum capacity, with no-one able to purchase the goods.

>actually moving and selling the product while still managing to outcompete everyone else.

The owner doesn't do this either.

He just pays people to do this for him.

Of you wanna have the top guys job, either work your way up through his company and take it from him or start your own business and do a better job than him, produce a more attractive product.
Capitalism is like Darwinism. The weak die out. The strong thrive.

>lose the argument
>gun the guy down

>Stock Market, and Stock Option have been a thing for 150+ Years.
Yes. what's your point ?
>This is the same view as the Luddites
no it's not. luddites thought machines took their jobs. i addressed that in my post

>All raw materials, land, resources have zero value
that's complete backwards bullshit

If it had no value, no one would desire it in order to leverage labor.

you are a faggot child and you have a poopy butt. Fucking get out.

>The weak die out. The strong thrive.

You do not make the most money due to strength.

You can be as honorable, virtuous, and loyal to your people, but that will merely hold you back.

In truth, what you are describing is the Jew.

You are literally glorifying the concept of the Jew, as a traitorous, vicious, and disconnected merchant as being the definition of strength, while hating the real life applications of this.

Review yourself is all I ask.

Your retarded success-makes-right non-morality is on par with a 2 year old who has yet to grasp object permanence or ownership.

your posterity is white privilege and needs to be quelled

So why doesn't the worker just work independently? Nothing is stopping him, if he can truly just get his own machines and sell his own products.

There's also a big flaw in the logic here. The worker provides money using the boss' machines, but somehow before the boss had the machines he still got the money from workers producing products on those machines. It also doesn't take into account the fact that the boss is supplying the worker with materials without which the worker couldn't make anything.This image is terrible.

That doesn't refute what he said at all.

If being the one overseeing and providing the proper incentives for these things to stay in track doesn't seem like an important role in any organization then you clearly have no idea of how people work. Without any kind of potential punishment by a boss for underperforming then most people will not give their best at perfoming any task, specially the most menial ones.

My point being that the owner has the massive resposability of deciding the direction of his company by distributing the incentives properly.

>>Capitalism is like Darwinism. The weak die out. The strong thrive.

And that is why things like government regulations on business and social welfare programs exist, because we have these things called morals and ethics that tell us that economic efficiency has to take a backseat to other things that matter more then the mere accumulation of money and products.

>morals are good to dupe folks into my ideology
>morals are a spook when it inconveniences me

>Without any kind of potential punishment by a boss for underperforming then most people will not give their best at perfoming any task, specially the most menial ones.

This doesn't apply to the boss? Also, the incentives are money right? The money produced from the worker's actions.

You don't need a boss to give you money if you are the boss and give yourself the money for your work.

>Not posting the real image
GET OUT NIGGER

hail zozzle hail victory down with kek!!!!!

Kill yourself, you /leftypol/ shill.

Success and strength go hand in hand for whites. Jews subversive and slimy, stealing the white man's wealth and corrupting capitalism. On the other hand, poor people who stay poor for most of their lives are either brought down by illness, or lazy and weak.

If you feel like the higher ups are wronging you, you are free to seek employment somewhere else.

how does a tree with fruit have no value?

>economic trickery exists when i want to hate the jews
>economic trickery doesn't exist when i want to defend paying my boss for yelling at me

The anchor is buried deep, huh?

>supporting dysgenics

Nothing matters more than advancing the genetics of your race.

The boss is the one who is responsible for the company (if we are talking about a company with a single person at the head of it with no board of directors). If the boss doesn't ensure that the profits are coming in he loses his job and the company folds.

Workers can always move to another company if a company shuts its doors due to piss poor management.

delet this

Middle class people are stupid. They have infinitely more bargaining power than they could imagine yet they give it away to fulfill this self-deceiving illusory attitude that makes them feel better than other wage slaves. It's really actually quite pathetic how easy they are to con.

>poor people have the money to travel

If they had the money they wouldn't be working a shit job that pays nothing in the first place.

You seem to imply that success = strength. The Jews are successful, so they are strong, by your logic, in which case they are also rightfully where they are.

It's funny hearing a success-makes-right guy argue against the successful.

The mental gymnastics are spectacular.

>Capitalism is like Darwinism.

"Too big to fail" ring a bell?

you know how cheap travel is?
>The Jews are successful, so they are strong, by your logic, in which case they are also rightfully where they are.
unless people actually do something about it then yes

>I don't like feudalism
>HAHAHAH YOU BENEFIT FROM FEUDALISM HAHAHA

My Grandpa was multi miljonair ceo of stella artois. The biggest brewery in the world. I am poor as fuck. Can confirm

Not free markets

>If they had the money they wouldn't be working a shit job that pays nothing in the first place.
>to travel?
You can't find another job in the city?

>>Capitalism is like Darwinism.
>"Too big to fail" ring a bell?
That isn't free market.

>Workers can always move to another company if a company shuts its doors due to piss poor management.

Yes, because there are infinite companies! Dumbass, go out into the real world.

The rustbelt is what it is for a reason.

A company shut down business there; there weren't enough other businesses to make up for the lost jobs. Down-turn in the economy.

Seriously, wtf have any of you ever taken an economics course?

there is infinite demand for labor

I don't get these wagecuck defending capitalism.
You get abused by the capitalist yet you defend them, are you stupid or what?

So does that mean the worker will personally foot the bill for its maintenance and upkeep?

Prove labor theory of value is wrong.

>>economic trickery exists when i want to hate the jews
capitalism is a market + private property. all the problems you guys have with it come from finance which is not an inherent aspect of the system.
on top of that some leftists even accept the necessity of a market

besides, i'm literally advocating for workers to own capital and you haven't refuted my attack on the LTV
try again

There's not an infinite demand for labor... in fact there's very little incentive when you have the means for production to create enough demand for labor...

there's an infinite demand for goods as that is what's required to literally survive.

>You can't find another job in the city?

What if there are no jobs in that city, or the jobs left are even worse than the one you left?

You fail to realize the real world is a lot different than the capitalist utopia in your head. There are a finite number of jobs.

>The burger advocating for communism is accusing others of not understanding economics

>haha i can't wait for fully automated luxury gay space communism where no one will work xD

>You get abused by the capitalist
how?
field with fruit bearing trees is more valuable than barren land
yes there is
the price just needs to come down

There isn't an infinite demand for labor or an infinite demand for goods.

There are a finite number of people that have finite resources to trade.

There is a finite number of transactions to accomplish at any given time so there is an finite number of jobs to take care of those transactions.

You're both retarded and need to go outside.

I never said success makes right. Virtue and success are two seperate concepts. That's why we have laws and social order, to impose virtue. But if we're talking a natural viewpoint, then yes, whatever success is defined as is the highest good.
Consider the idea that there is no such thing as a fair fight, because if you're fighting to win its not in your best interest to fight fair. In full on capitalism this asymmetrical fighting is the defining trait; those with more power, "strength", are the ones who settle at the top. That's why there is no pure capitalist system in use, its not conducive to good business practice or fair markets. A mixture of social concepts must be inserted into the mix to make the market more fair and encourage good business practices.
Also, I notice you seem to be assuming a lot of things about me. First off, I dislike both capitalist and socialist systems, a good mixture of the two is best for producing healthy markets and societies. Balance is neccesary. And if we're talking what is admirable, if the Jew is so viscious in his success, is that not to be emulated? I believe the complacency and "civilization" of modern society is an issue in itself. We must not forget that for all our laws we live in an ultimately lawless world. Sometimes some ruthlessness is not only commendable but neccesary, especially when imposing the law.
Really there's a lot to be said about this issue that I don't think can be appropriately conveyed here. Just know that I think a healthy balance is the best course. Something good to remember is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This, I think among other things, is what we should be most aware of in any discussion regarding society.
Precisely. I see you have a good grasp on the concept.
Still, I once again fall in the middle. What is deemed good is not always good. Social morals are too succeptible to popular power than I would like.

In 25 years the jobs of nearly half of all white males in the United States will have been replaced, and whether you starve or not when the time comes depends only on your decisions now.

>Marxist claiming someone else's ideas are Utopian

>what if i setup all these parameters then you are wrong!

As a race, Jews are successful and strong, they're just also slimy, subversive and destructive to other races.

>muh mental gymnastics

I'm not the guy supporting socialism, and other culturally destructive ideologies which rely on utopian superstitions.

>field with fruit bearing trees is more valuable than barren land
Yeah sure. So what. That doesn't disprove the LTV.

There is an infinite demand for labor, just not at the price point mandated by the government.

>it's the robots take people's jobs meme again
I've already addressed this
it is proof that Capital creates wealth independent of labor

If I plant and then harvest fruit on the barren field does it have more value than the fruit that someone just had to go pick?

>this thread

Not free markets. Pure capitalist systems are ironically harmful to the furthering of capitalists systems, just like socialist/communist systems, so we add some of both and it kind of works.

...

>BTFO capitalism
AT MOST my employer makes profit margin.

Which is about 6 percent of the money the whole company earns.

Assuming my employer truly is a lazy worthless leech bum, the government STILL takes about twice that out of my paycheck for a FICA program from which I most likely will never collect.

No... there's not. My family is worth 100 million and I make 240K a year or so. My family employs people, but they have no incentive to expand business because we have more money than we need, what we do have incentive to do is suppress how much labor is paid and we do that by artificially decreasing labor demand by not expanding... furthermore, there is no expansion without consumer equity. Consumer equity as you know has been dropping significantly throughout the last 30 years, but that's all irrelevant to us, because the power of our wealth becomes better as consumers as a whole become weaker, in comparison. There will NEVER be 0% unemployment because we would never allow it, as it doesn't benefit us.

No. Because nature did some of the work for the other person in that situation.

Just read Kropotkin, Conquest of Bread

Recognizing capitalism is shit does not automatically lead to communism.

False dichotomy.

Finance is manipulating money. Do tell me how you have capitalism without manipulating money.

Where did you even attack the LTV in the first place anyway? I need an attack to refute in the first place.

try again

>culturally destructive ideologies which rely on utopian superstitions
Perfectly put. These systems rely on perfection which is impossible.
That's why they look nice on paper but fail in execution.

Yes, no fucking shit. Which is why whether labor starves or not is dependent on the choices they make right now. Unfortunately for them, and quite indifferently for me, they are not smart enough to recognize this, my only fear is that there is a threat to our economic and political system on our present trajectory.

No now nature is part of labor?
hire more people
build a private army

>When your economic model is so successful the citizenry tries to run across the border to spread its influence

>Literal niggers from darkest Africa can scrape together the money to immigrate to new regions
>somehow the """"oppressed"""" proletariat cannot.

My dream job is one where I get paid to transform normal communists into good communists.

>unless people actually do something about it then yes
Why would people do something about a completely moral, and healthy situation?

>As a race, Jews are successful and strong, they're just also slimy, subversive and destructive to other races.

Business is all about being slimy, subversive, and destroying your competition.

And yet you seem to imply strength in a capitalist system is separate from these traits, when they are one and the same. Being a horrible Jew is what makes one successful in capitalism, and so that is what makes someone strong in capitalism. You praise strength, but strength in capitalism is inherently being backhanded and duplicitous.

You glorify these things without meaning to, and then defame then in a single breath.

>I'm not the guy supporting socialism, and other culturally destructive ideologies which rely on utopian superstitions.

Jesus Christ, just because I'm not a slut for capitalism doesn't mean I'm an idealistic commie.

False Fucking Dichotomy.

The real reason that few bosses exist and many workers exist is because a huge number of people squander their money every chance they get.

The boss could say things like "I've watched 99/100 business men lose everything because they refuse to control their costs. They run to the latest flashy trend without thinking about their customers and POOF. There goes the money! Spent on flash and trim that wasn't needed. I try to teach some of them the basic lessons and they won't hear it. It's got to be THEIR way or no way. That's all well and good until they out of money. You want the business done right? I do that. If you want ever ner' do well putting his hands in somebodies pockets let him take from yours."

Most people can't be bosses because most people can't control their costs.

you can have a barter system and capitalism. again, it is only a market + private property
you get issues with the system when usury is allowed and the legal aspect of currency is redefined

If you can't defend the LTV all you have to do is admit so friend

>completely moral,
>jews
>moral

>Literal niggers from darkest Africa can scrape together the money to immigrate to new regions

In reality, many of those "fleeing conflict" are economic migrants who actually had a means to make and thus have money, which they used to travel.

You bought into the narrative without realizing it.

>Business is all about being slimy, subversive, and destroying your competition.

Found the socialist whose father never amounted to anything.