100% of socialists cannot come up with a good answer this question...

100% of socialists cannot come up with a good answer this question. How will communism ever win if they can't answer such a simple question?

Other urls found in this thread:

stat.fi/ajk/satavuotiassuomi/suomimaailmankarjessa_en.html
usatoday.com/story/money/business/small-business-central/2017/05/21/what-percentage-of-businesses-fail-in-their-first-year/101260716/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

They do have an answer though. The 'fair share' is 100% of everything you earn

It's not their 'fair share'
You're basically paying people to not be poor in public
Wanna get rid of that hobo? Just give him enough money to drink in the pub and let him watch tv the rest of the day.
You're not losing much money, he's not getting much, but you can have a walk in the park again without having to explaining your kids what 'blowjob for a bottle of vodka' means

"It doesn't matter people should just share."

why are niggers the worst philosophers?

Under communism everyone has to work or you going to be arrested tho :^} a doctor cant live without a farmer and a farmer cant live without a doctor

>Wanna get rid of that hobo?
Yeah, but instead of creating an entire social system based on taking money from people involuntarily, why not just let businesses be prosperous enough to NEED to hire more people?

Top fucking kek. Marxism is based on the idea that the bourgeoisie is stealing the value that the worker produces.

>Communist 1: Dude, what if we treat human beings like computers?
>Communist 2: Great idea!

Difference is that there is no hobo under communism because he has to work

>ignoring the fact that every achievement you have in life is first and foremost a product of our collective infrastructure

Jesus christ you people are stupid.

Because you sre being treated like a princess in your work nowadays and not just anozher cog in the system huh

but the worker is too dumb and not motivated enough to create value himself. he NEEDS an employer so that he can be productive. the reason your idea is stupid is because instead of people being the employers of other people you want the government to be the employer, which is stupid because government is too slow to react to market conditions

through violence

...

the same as everyone else's, except those who don't work, they starve.

niggers aren't people though

and what do you think is happening right now, buster? work is never going to be easy, and it never has been. we live in a fallen world, we don't live in paradise.

...

yes but the numbr of jobs is up to the market to decide, meanwhile this way you employ everyone, construction workers would be working 2 hour shifts instead of slaving away their entire day doing the work of four men so the company can save money

Well the workers are more than welcome to leave and start their own company, smartass. What's that? That's "too big of a risk" or "you can't afford it"? You're "not sure it could pay off"? Well how do you think the owner got his start, eh? Big risk, big reward.

I’m not exactly a traditional socialist but in my mind 20% is a reasonable figure to keep the state going.

But I’m not in favour of current socialism because it encourages laziness. In my eyes if you don’t work or have worked then the state owes you nothing.
All the social welfare and healthcare should be reserved for working citizens.
Foreigners also do not qualify for state benefits unless they have lived here several years, are fluent in English and have a just b earning a decent amount.
>inb4 muh civc nationalism
This would almost stop imergraton and we would only end up with whites or smart Indians, so barely any.

Socialism can work you just have to keep it out the hands if soft cunts who think you can help everyone.

Please post the rest of this. I'm sure I'll get a good laugh out of it.

so you want to give away 1/5th of everything you make just so bums can get drunk in their own government sponsored home and government owned companies can continue to offer the same dismal level of service indefinitely without any form of consequences to spur them to improve their quality of service whatsoever?

that's what you really believe?

Good point

>owners of companies
>not working at all
more like they work 100 hours per week but okay, leftists gotta have muh ebil capituhlist narrative I guess.

che murdered thousands in cold blood and yet you put him on a t-shirt. as a Godless sinner though, murder is not among the list of things that make you feel compassion, however.

...

"As the owner, I bear the investment risk. If the company does not make enough money, I'll be owing the bank money for all the equipment you see in the factory. I also manage all relationships with suppliers and clients, so that the laborers can focus on their productive task. Company strategy and marketing is also handled by myself. What is your point, Mr Consultant?"

>But I’m not in favour of current socialism because it encourages laziness. In my eyes if you don’t work or have worked then the state owes you nothing.

That's just the world. You're describing the world as it currently is and always has been.

why is this nigger so pale

Animal Farm is a communist utopia

He was making fun of niggers and why should I care about some sub humans, fuck off back to melbourne jonno I think shielas fucking theo again

Second panel is even more retarded than the first.

what is the capitalist's fair share of MY labor? if my labor makes the capitalist $200/hr why am i only making $20/hr?

100% of capitalists cannot come up with a good answer this question. How will capitalism ever win if they can't answer such a simple question?

Bourgeoisie by definition dont participate in production. Those who do are called petit-bourgeoisie.

The service is only so bad because it provides for everyone.
This is a backwards way of looking at socialism. Realistically you cannot serve everyone wigkout some kind of post scarcity economy so it needs to be reserved for workers only.

This would massively cut down on current spending because we would no longer be subsidieing neets and foreign people.

Obviously I know in reality government programs are pretty bad but you can’t just accept that as a given without wanting it to improve

100% of capitalists can answer that.
Who bought the machinery that allowed you to produce 200$ of product per hour?
Who pays the suppliers for the input into producing 200$ of goods?
Who manages the relationship with the final client, while you spend 8 hours producing 200$ of product per hour?
Who assumes the business risk, in case it ends up being unprofitable?

Also, unlike taxes, you are free to break the contract with the capitalist. Don't like getting 20$ per hour? Don't work for the company.

It’s only lazy because we live in abundance and have everything provided for us by government if we do wished.

I love Dutch Capitalism.

The government should be made for the people and by the people, and it's only role should be to ensure that the government doesn't become too powerful. Cuck.

Boooyaka

>Who bought the machinery that allowed you to produce 200$ of product per hour?
the capitalists used wages they stole from their own laborers to buy machines from other capitalists who were stealing wages from laborers that made those machines
>Who pays the suppliers for the input into producing 200$ of goods?
the capitalist which he made via stealing surplus value from the workers
>Who manages the relationship with the final client, while you spend 8 hours producing 200$ of product per hour?
the capitalist hires managers to do this who he also steals wages from
>Who assumes the business risk, in case it ends up being unprofitable?
the capitalist but all of his money is stolen from workers
>Also, unlike taxes, you are free to break the contract with the capitalist. Don't like getting 20$ per hour? Don't work for the company.
the bourgeoisie/proletariat relationship isn't symmetrical all of the power lies with the capitalist the workers barely have a choice they are forced to work for $20/hr because the capitalist steals from the community via the enforcement of private property

Capitalism is the game, and you're the player. You're just losing because you aren't playing.

I'm winning though.

>he capitalists used wages they stole from their own laborers to buy machines from other capitalists who were stealing wages from laborers that made those machines
well sure, if you look at it that way, but you might as well say that you stole energy from all of the animals and plants that you ate, not to mention the innocent lives of all of the bacteria you have digested unknowingly, in order to live long enough to come up with such a stupid idea as communism

Until everyone quits their hard jobs and sit around drinking all day. Then everyone starves when all the farms don't want to tend their crops. Then you have forced labor, then it's the race to the bottom where everyone does the least they can get away with. Again people starve, very little is produced in the society.

so you be saying workers are mere bacteria and animals to the capitalist owning class?

i read your whole post, and you just sound mad that you're too afraid (or possibly too incompetent) to do what virtually every human bean has done since the beginning of time, which is work hard to improve your standing

Capitalists are motivated by satanic Randian objectivism

Every company starts with the founder getting an idea, and doing countless of hours of research on if the idea is any good. Then there's the risk aspect, it could fail and the founder get badly in debt. Commies fail to see the massive amount of work that is needed before a company starts working.

What's your point, fuckface?
The dole isn't the same thing as collective achievement

>hen everyone starves when all the farms don't want to tend their crops.
Wrong. there will be a group of Chinese who will get up early and make food out of rice and stuff. They will start the entire capitalism engine up again, and then in 2000 years it will come full circle, SJW's marxists, all whining wondering where all this "unearned" privilege came from

What do you think I just described?

Or did you just have an adverse reaction to the word socialist and assume it was some standard state handouts for all?

>that quote
Can't you ask that to big business owners? Employees do work that you didn't do and it gets you money.

yeah, and Jesus Christ is a supernatural Cheech Marin, dude

This is a very shortsighted way of looking at it.

Youre living & working within the socialist society. Youre contributing money from your earnings for the betterment of this same society. Education, healthcare, municipalities etc. This contributes much to the generations after yours.

But if you act like a nigger yelling "what do i care about others? they aint kin, dont even know them" youre just as much a part of the problem as them.

Can't tell if you're trolling or just too retarded, but I'll entertain you.

>the capitalists used wages they stole from their own laborers to buy machines from other capitalists who were stealing wages from laborers that made those machines
That's nonsense. Someone starting up a company has to purchase the machinery via: a) their own money; b) bank loan. It is impossible to "steal" from the laborers if the machinery hasn't been purchased in the first place. Also, remember that there is no guarantee the $200 product will be sold in the first place.

>the capitalist which he made via stealing surplus value from the workers
So you admit that there are other business costs, aside from paying the laborer 20$ an hour? That's the whole point, friend.

>the capitalist hires managers to do this who he also steals wages from
But the sale manager does not "produce" a good. Rather, he rends a service. Please refer to the previous reply.

>the capitalist but all of his money is stolen from workers
So you admit that there's a risk in the capitalist's own hands. Doesn't said risk deserve a reward?

>the bourgeoisie/proletariat relationship isn't symmetrical all of the power lies with the capitalist the workers barely have a choice they are forced to work for $20/hr because the capitalist steals from the community via the enforcement of private property
They are not. I work for a company and I voluntarily signed a work contract. Same as everyone else in every western country.

an employee can't grow a company, therefore creating more jobs. some people have skills that are more valuable than trained labor. the world isn't equal. no two countries are equal. some have rivers. others have mountains. yet others still have fields. some happen to have a nice climate where people prefer to live and will pay a premium to live there by outbidding others. that's how it all works. see now? lol of course you don't.

NEETism should be punishable by death.

>This contributes much to the generations after yours.
Rather it steals value from future generations. It also steals valuable experience and wisdom from future generations.

Except that when the state and government are in control of education, healthcare and municipalities etc the end result is less efficiency, at least here in America. The private sector is vastly more qualified to handle these things. It's sad that you Euros are so brainwashed to believe that life cannot exist without big brother.

Bullshit! There's no ideas without people doing things.

...

...

An employee agrees to a legal, written, binding contract to work for an employer. Don't agree with it? Fine, don't work for that employer. Go work for someone else or become self-employed. No one is forcing you to do anything, except pay taxes.

I gotta respectfully disagree.

Regards, a socialist country that has been ranked #1 in quality of life over and over again.

stat.fi/ajk/satavuotiassuomi/suomimaailmankarjessa_en.html

>the end result is less efficiency, at least here in America

no it's the same over here too. socialism fails everywhere it is tried because it doesn't let humans be people. people make mistakes, and mistakes have to have consequences that are harsh enough to make said person stop making mistakes, otherwise that person will suffer the pain of death (metaphorically).

>You're not losing much money
you have to be 18 to post here

We have a well functioning private sector in most areas of construction, industry, education and healthcare.

But the government run places are of such high standard that the private ones rarely compare in quality.

I don't think being a leader should entitle a person to millions while an employee gets minimum wage.

>socialist country
are there private businesses in finland?
how easy are they to create?
does it have to be owned by the workers?
can you trade ownership of a company (aka shares) in a public market?

>Regards, a socialist country that has been ranked #1 in quality of life over and over again.
lol by who?

>state.fi website
>no we are the best in the world, seriously we are number 1, don't question it, don't even think about comparing us to other places it's not worth looking

>I don't think being a leader should entitle a person to millions while an employee gets minimum wage.
Well, that's your opinion, but it's the opinion of other people who need to get things done that it in fact, is worth the investment, and in fact is a bargain! Learn, son.

That's what managers do, experts and stuff. Owners just sit and get fat.
>risk
government will bailout you, you can get rid of creditors by claiming to be bankrupt while you have a load of other things, just registered through loopholes on funds and that hobo.

The external sources are posted on the site and available to check for anyone

Your juvenile attempts of ridiculing the site doesnt make the facts any less true lmao

Nope, there will be a bunch of guys with guns who will take your family hostages and beat you for not working for them. That is how it starts - with straight robbery.

bull fucking shit ivan
usatoday.com/story/money/business/small-business-central/2017/05/21/what-percentage-of-businesses-fail-in-their-first-year/101260716/
> 80% of the businesses fail in 1 year
> but muh bailouts
yes, crony fuckers and their too-big-to-fail are also bullshit. which doesn't make any more right, you commie faggot

Your post shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Also, thank you for referring bailouts. This is a problem of not enough capitalism, rather than a failing. Only socialists think it is ok to use public money to save a private entity.

>Because he is dead
FTFY

>80% of self employed proletarians and their cooperatives fail in 1 year
Well, I guess that does prove communistic point of view. Pretty much gambling.

Ask this question for you boss and company owner

jesus christ this is the saddest attempt at goalpost shifting I've seen in ages. at least leftypol is more subtle
please refrain from posting

Sure thing, no capitalist would like to impose his spendings on someone else. Public spendings, private profits.
>not enough capitalism
You do realise that capitalism is private ownership of capital. Money, which you call public, are, in fact, in private ownership of group of 'state' capitalists, who use them as they want.

But they'll use every possible way of saying it except outright saying "absolutely everything".

depends how much that someone else has leeched off of the existing economy

>

underrated fpbp

This guy is home schooled and reads Osho books. What did you expect?

Communists can't think ahead though. When you're running a business if you're thinking in terms of the present, you won't have a future. That's a valuable skill, but it's also a lot of work to keep a company running, ergo keeping those employees employed. It's why business owners work 100 hours a week. Just because they don't work the same hours as a trained employee doesn't mean they aren't working just as hard if not harder. Only a brainlette would think that running a business was a life of being waited on hand and foot.

What? So the government/state controlling where the money is spent qualifies as capitalist to you? I don't understand.

Sounds like a question for the rich

>he has to work
and if he refuses?

>Nope, there will be a bunch of guys with guns who will take your family hostages and beat you for not working for them. That is how it starts - with straight robbery.
ah you mean like the russian revolution? or the cuban revolution? or the venesuelan revolution? or the cambodian revolution? or the chinese revolution? or the vietnamese revolution? or the german national socialist workers party revolution (nazi's in case you forgot)

wow profound logic there, bet you're well versed on both side's unbiased arguments and have formed your own opinion

name 2 modern conservative philosophers who have influenced you?

>100% of capitalists cannot come up with a good answer this question.

Fixed it for you.

Capitalists live by exploiting other people's labor.

>> 80% of the businesses fail in 1 year
that's because 80% of people open a business without knowing how to plan and run a business, duh. those are the people who need to stay in the trained worker role a bit longer until they figure it out

I'm sure the government makes awesome cellphones
BTW your country is not socialist

but people need money to live so they sell it for money. some people need more money, some people might decide, hey I don't need as much money right now, so i'll work for x amount. studies that follow individuals over time show that more than 80% people who work, in western capitalistic countries, move up 2, even 3 tax brackts, 95% move up no less than 1 tax bracket. that's how you know the system is working.

in socialist countries everyone is born into a "tax bracket" even though they don't have tax brackets, and they stay there. no upward mobility. just the same old shit every day, and it only gets worse for them. why do you think india was shit after ghandi? they went full on commie. russia? commie. china? commie. when did they start improving and becoming "power houses"? immediately after they stopped being commie.

>Still haves a free market
>Socialist

Current state of socialism : If it haves welfare and is well regarded, its socialism.

Ah yes, a burgois of the 1800s knows how the world works 200 years in the future

>and if he refuses?
In USSR we had a criminal article for that, Parasitism. Offenders were resettled for 2-5 years to harsh places were they worked hard to earn food. Also all their property was confiscated.

then he get liver cirrhosis and you hve to pay his million dollar medical bill