"But.. But.. it's their hard-earned money! even if it will solve for world hunger, poverty, and our medical problems. It's still theft!!"
One must be a fucking idiot to think that bourgs' money is theirs. They stole it from their labor.
If you work on 15$/hour, save all your money, and work 24 hours a day, you would still have to work more than 300 fucking years to reach half of Jeff Bezos' wealth. He must be god if he earned all that through "hard work".
I hate it when leftists ignore conservative claims that "taking the rich's money is theft" and just say "But it would solve for this and this problem!"
No it isn't their own wealth at all. Always reply that it is stolen or taken from exploited labor so its not theirs in the first place to consider it "theft". Don't let them have this point.
Just wanted to rant after seeing many leftists ignore this point and subconsciously agreeing with neolibs over it.
Rich people not "deserving" their money was one of the biggest realizations i made in my entire life, felt stupid the following months.
Caleb Edwards
Any leftist worth their salt wouldn’t agree that it was their deserved money. The wealth of the rich is built off the poverty of the poor. Capitalism, like all exploitative modes of production, relies on social theft. This is why liberals shoot themselves in the foot by not acknowledging exploitation or the labor theory of value. Moral arguments can only go far
Levi Mitchell
Am I doing something wrong here? My man says if I was paid $15/hr for 24 hours of work a day and I saved all of my money, in 300 years I'd have half of Jeff Bezos' wealth. That doesn't sound right, but neither does it actually work out mathematically. It seems that results in about $39.5mn. That would be 0.05% of Jeff Bezos' wealth.
Eli Young
Would it being theft actually change anything? It's not like there's a god that will punish you for stealing rich people's money. Just do it. Who cares?
Isaiah Brooks
We live in a political reality that privileges moralism. So it gives us moral superiority to frame the bourgeoisie as the thieves. Plus, it's fucking true.
this is the biggest ideological hurdle. once you realize that the richest people on the planet and their rich families mostly just sit on their asses for their wealth you will become a communist.
for some reason it took richard wolff explaining it for it to truly click for me. We don't live in a society based around "how hard you work is how much money you will have". its just straight up "what family you were born into/how hard you can exploit others"
Interestingly enough even Friedrich Hayek supported than capitalism isn't a meritocracy, and that this fact actually plays in its favour.
His argument was that success in capitalism owes as much to fortune as to work. The reason why not being meritocratic plays in favour of capitalism is that if it were it wouldn't be accepted by the working class. It's one thing to be poor and blame bad luck and hope for an improvement in the future, it's another to be poor and be told that it's because you deserve it. Basically another take on the Steinbeck quote "socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires"
Nicholas Fisher
leftists don't ignore that, read fucking John Rawls' Theory of Justice for a start. While there are things I disagree with him on, his main premise is correct and explains why others shouldn't be able to excessively own a lot of property or possess a ton of money.
Elijah Evans
The category of theft cannot be applied to a renegotiation of the social contract since it is exactly this social contract that defines the category of theft.
Propertarians are idealists who believe property has some abstract existence to it outside of material relations. You cannot argue them out of this because it's axiomatic.
Tyler Fisher
Um actually, great inventors only get 2% of the value from their invention, whilst the rest of society gains 98%, as calculated by daddy Nordhaus. Name me 5 inventors who cared about anything other than profit.
Andrew Miller
The problem with that picture is that in countries like Iceland and Lithuania most people were free men, and lived great.
James Lopez
wooosh
Landon Garcia
Rich people deserve all the money they have because they started businesses. Try to change my mind.
Jonathan Hughes
they don't work it, they don't twerk it
Jordan Foster
You have not convinced me. Starting the business is more valuable than any work the workers do.
Justin Wood
well it's not actually
Robert Flores
It's late and I'm tired, so I'll leave you some infographs instead of a text-wall.
The spending of a bourgeoisie business owner to make a profit is basically a artificial necessity created by private ownership and markets when actually supply-demand would make the entire point moot.
First image got clipped off, but the bottom half isn't important. Read and good night, hopefully you'll see sense. If not, please leave Zig Forums and, for the time being we'll all lurk on 8ch in peace
Kevin Howard
The workers would not have jobs and the goods and services the workers create and provide would not exist if the business was never started.
Zachary Lewis
Back to basics, bucko. Value is produced by the labour embodied in a commodity. One imparts value only inasmuch as he spends time and energy to get raw resources from the earth into the hands of consumers as an item of usefulness. This should go for the capitalist as well, except he doesn't stop reaping surplus value from his employees, he constantly siphons the value they create as profit for himself. Value isn't some magic element that springs to life from the fingertips of an "entrepreneur".
Henry Powell
If someone is smart enough to get rich just from overseeing their employees, they deserve to be rich.
Jaxon Morgan
banned and fucked in the ass
Nolan James
The business could not exist without the workers performing the labour to create the goods or service. All the bourgeoisie takes on is the risk of possible failure, which is no more than the risk any other gambler takes on save for the fact that his failure inherently creates inefficiency, waste, and has his employees shoulder most of the burden as they now exist in a state of financial insecurity.
This also completely misses the point as well, you're still arguing on the basis of metaphysical "rights" and what the bourgeoisie "deserves". Sometimes you have to deal with a tool or technology which causes strain or damage because it is the only tool you have at the time. However when a better alternative is made apparent, so too is the necessity to adopt such an alternative to progress forward made apparent. Cotton picking was exchanged for the cotton gin. The oxen and horse was exchanged for the motorized tractor. And so too now, must the obsolete role of the bourgeoisie and the outmoded economic system of capitalism be exchanged for the public role of the worker and the economic system of socialism. This isn't a question of morality, but historical necessity. Not a question of rights, but public efficiency.
nothing to do with smarts, its because of socio-economic position such people usually start out in. Not to mention that they're getting rich by being essentially head secretaries
Not even that, head secretary would still be an occupation. The owners of major companies don't generally even manage or plan their companies directly, they hire other individuals to do so for them.
Tyler Ramirez
To clarify on the cotton gin, I meant picking the seeds out of the cotton, not the actual picking of the cotton in the fields. Though for the most part this has largely been automated as well.
If someone was born into the bourgeoisie, one of their ancestors was smart enough to start a business and get rich from overseeing their employees. If starting a business and getting rich from overseeing your employees was easy, everyone would do it.
Christopher Rodriguez
Banned for lacking reason and goodwill.
Jaxon Torres
That business being perfectly possibly slavery, or scamming the state by selling weapons, delivering only a portion and paying off the bailiff to write down that you made the full delivery (this is how Voltaire got rich btw). Remind yourself that a lot of the great fortunes were forged in the XIXth century, a time where the French army quite literally shelled the proletarian houses (with their families inside) for simply refusing to work.
John Roberts
Stop, I already addressed this here and you completely ignored me. I am not the user here . The bourgeoisie could be literal puppy petting pacifists who throw flowers and sing kumbaya and their ancestors hippy nature cultists, and it still wouldn't invalidate them being an archaic component of the obsolete and defunct class system of capitalism.
Grug invent and make shoe. Other grugs decide shoe is good, also make shoe. Many grugs make shoe because shoe good. Grugs work together to make best shoe and make shoe faster.
New grug give many shiny stones to shoe making grugs so they make shoe for new grug. New grug sell shoe for many stone, make more stone than is giving to working grugs. New grug does same to hunter and forager group, both now paid in stone. Grug give shiny stone to diggers to dig big hole then to other grugs to tell how good big hole is. Grug makes people give stone to look at big hole. New grug has much shiny stone and even pays chieftain to get what he wants. Grug think something wrong.
Grug goes to rich grug. Ask rich grug, "Why you deserve much stone? Many grugs work but you make more stone than them all together." Rich grug say many things.
"I make big risk giving stone to grugs. What if noone visit hole? I loose much stone!" "Look at lowly grug. Even he now has many stone." "I make decision to pay stones. Without me, no grug make stone." "I smart. I work much. I tell many grugs how to make me lots of stone!"
Grug misses good old days when grugs work because it help other grug. Grug mad.
Rich people deserved their hard-earned money because they did well enough to keep their slaves (us) working for them. But that doesn't mean we cannot rob all of their property, because why not? We will gain free time, affordable education and healthcare, dignity as true citizens, not wage slaves. Only moralfags would complain about this. If capitalists can let us live a life of dignity, then we has no reason to oppose them. But history had repeatedly shown us that capitalist will never let us have that right, they will drain us to the last drop of blood, all of their promises will become lies. So take arms, comrades, to the final victory!
how could i never thought about that? of course the government would nuke it's own country
Levi Ortiz
Well, want to commit suicide with everyone instead of just giving their hard-earn shekels to us? I've lost the last remaining of my respect to those smart and rational people now.
