• pizzahoe@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    These capitalist and billionaire cocksuckers sure love socialism when they socialise their losses and fucking take our tax payer money to bail themselves out. if you’re working class and don’t support socialism, you should look into it more. Propaganda from these blood sucking billionaire ghouls have made most of us blind to the better life socialism can offer us.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That isnt socialism, thats the capitalist state doing its job of protecting capital. Socialism is when the proletariat own the means of production.

      • pizzahoe@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes i agree. Just pointing out the fact there’s no free market. When they lose, they still win by taking our hard earned money and using it to further their interests. I’d be happier if it were used for our welfare instead.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Id argue that the free market incentivizes the capture of politicians but I think we are on the same side here.

  • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    The delusional thought process is fantastic.

    You have, maybe 2k users here, defederate a new insurance a day, and users are constantly finding lack of content; but yeah it’s the normal user who is quite in the corner 🤣

  • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean… I’m a capitalist who doesn’t defend billionaires and also doesn’t feel left out… ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

    • gayhitler420@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you though?

      Do you own the means of production and employ people to operate it, paying them a fraction of the value their labor produces?

      Are you able to live comfortably without working for the foreseeable future? Do you exert outsized control over municipal, regional and state government far beyond your “vote” if you live in a place that claims to be a democracy? Does that control come from your power over the means of production that you control?

      Supporting a society controlled by the people described above does not make you a capitalist, being one of the people described above does.

      • dafo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I do not agree with you, gayhitler420. That sounds as polarized as US politics.

      • pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Are you able to live comfortably without working for the foreseeable future?

        I’m pretty sure that’s just a strawman version of capitalism. Plenty of capitalists who had their life’s work taken during a communist revolution and were at best told they could come back as a manager worked plenty hard. Didn’t save them.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, capitalism is the system that creates this. Capitalists are the ones living comfortably at the top of their piles of money while we work to make them that money.

          And yes being a capitalist didn’t save them from having to work like everyone else, boohoo evil commulism.

      • huge_clock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oxford English Dictionary defines a capitalism as :

        1. ​a person who supports capitalism

        2. a person who owns or controls a lot of wealth and uses it to produce more wealth

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Capitalism is what allows billionaires to exist. If you are pro-capitalism, you are pro-billionaires. They are the real capitalists because the are the ones with real capital (and capital = power).

      Even if you support better worker pay, trans rights, healthcare or what have you, you are just asking big money for it, not actually taking it. They are the ones deciding in the end.

    • huge_clock@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right? There are pros and cons with every system. People disagree based on value judgements not based on misinterpretation of facts. People in their echo chambers will have you believe that everyone on the other side of the political spectrum all thinks the same way “the same people who say X also say Y!” Rarely is that the case. Most people are actually centrists who have their own independent beliefs on a wide range of topics.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not everyone on my side of the political Spectrum thinks the same way. But if you are pro capitalist. You simply aren’t thinking. Capital, markets, and currency. All existed before capitalism. The only thing capitalism did was justify the wealth and power of the wealthy and Powerful Beyond being simply born to wealthy powerful people. Now you get to be a wealthy powerful person by having capital. Which ironically just so happens to be most common among people born too powerful people. New boss same as the old boss. Funny how that works.

        • TAG@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I hate capitalism, I just don’t know of a better alternative. Nordic socialism is just capitalism with a big government. Soviet socialism failed miserably (it turns out, it is very hard to plan an economy). I have never heard a solid plan for communism that works on a national scale, never mind a plan for transitioning to such a society.

          On the other hand, capitalism works reasonably well most of the time and we can just fix issues with it when they crop up (and we have a big backlog of issues to fix).

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Capitalism does not work reasonably well most the time. Unchecked it leads to countless busts and Booms that leave the average person destitute. You really should look into the history of the early 20th century. The only reason we even still have capitalism. Is because of two massive world wars. Slaughtering and grinding up many tens of millions of people. As well as passage of basic Social Security nets. We’ve largely at least abandoned the spirit of. If if not in practice as well.

            Capitalism has been a failure at every level. Constantly. That isn’t a justification or Praise of leninism. There’s a lot of other ideologies on the Socialist side Beyond leninism. And they don’t require large National level government. Look into them sometime.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Soviet socialism failed miserably (it turns out, it is very hard to plan an economy).

            Did you actually check? Because based on a bunch of metrics I saw the USSR did pretty well compared to the feudalism that came before it and the capitalist “democracy” that came after its illegal and undemocratic dissolution.

            • TAG@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know (and have discussed it with) plenty of people who lived in the former USSR. Everyone I spoke to agreed that it was a mess.

              Of course, there is clear selection bias in who I spoke to (they are people I am friendly with and most of them reside outside of Eastern Europe) and all of them only experienced the Soviet system after it had gone through Stalin.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Here is an illustrative anecdote since we are trading those:

                I miss free housing, social justice, positive constrictive ideology, bearable work relations (or would it be more proper to say conditions?).

                Age is…far above 30.

                I admit, I haven’t encountered social justice or ideology in my very early ages, but I had opportunity to feel benefits of free housing (since my family got a nice 3bd-room flat in their possession), and…my parents worked much less than I do, and never worked at home.

                https://www.reddit.com/r/AskARussian/comments/sxdi3q/comment/hxtgsbd/

                Here is data: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1128057/russia-opinion-on-dissolution-of-the-ussr-by-age/

                Note that the people who were adults before its collapse overwhelmingly want it back, and that Russians only supported its continuation back in the 90s referendum at 55ish percent compared to much higher percentages in the non-Russian SSRs.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There are three kinds of lies. Lies, Damned lies, and statistics. First you lose points by linking to a supposed study behind the paywall. Second you lose points by that study being conducted by The Fraser institute. A solidly right wing group. With a less than credible reputation.

            I apologize for only attacking the messenger on this. Though that should be enough to dissuade anyone from trusting it. But you didn’t link to anything that actually proves your point that we could read to argue against their flawed methodology, definitions, sampling, and data Gathering strategy. I’m sure we could attack and pick apart those endlessly. But I’m not going to pay 30 bucks to do it.

            • huge_clock@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              This is a study by an independent researcher from the University of North Dakota. The economic freedom index is published by the Fraser institute. There is no alternative index at this time. Here is a link beyond the paywall. Here’s a few others as well:

              https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-015-9616-x

              https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11482-017-9543-6

              You’re welcome to share your own studies on economic freedom and happiness btw. . I’m “not thinking” yet i am the only one sharing scientific literature.

              • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                First their SSL certificate is misconfigured second my DNS here at work is blocking access to it for now.

                Second. Economics psychology Etc are not any sort of hard science. They struggle to even show correlation sometimes. Let alone causation. And statistics is certainly not a science in and of it self. Making your confident claim of scientific literature adorably naive at best or wildly spacious at worst.

                Combined with the fact that I have strong doubts that this study includes actual honest studies of socialist economic structures. Typically it’s just “leninism bad hurt durr”. Which I agree with. But Leninism=\=socialism. Did they actually go out and survey communes? Or honestly categorize social democracies? Most of these so-called BS scientific studies don’t.

                And honestly I could link you any number of studies showing the countries with strong support for labor and protections for labor have a much higher satisfaction than countries that don’t. The problem is I don’t believe you’re being honest. And that that would be a waste of time. But you are welcome to go to Google and search if you’re interested.

                • huge_clock@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You seem to be really good at coming up with excuses why you can’t access the data or why the data isn’t admissible for this or that reason. And awfully good at coming up with reasons why you cannot produce any data. Too much so IMO for someone that makes the claim of others of being intellectually dishonest and that they cannot think for themselves.

                  But it’s okay. Why don’t we just agree to disagree? That was my original point. Some people have centrists views on the economy where they believe in socially progressive causes, free markets and strong institutions. That this view is both rational and supported by data. That disagreements are based not on misinterpretation of facts but on differences in values.

        • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          All you have to do is go find people who came from nothing and built themselves a good, comfortable life. Ask them what they did to be successful. Decide whether you’re willing to do that amount of work - then do it, or don’t.

          I don’t understand why this is so complicated for people… You don’t need money to be content with your station in life. I was happy when I was young and poor, and I’m happy when I’m late 30’s and solidly upper middle class. Maybe I’ll make the millions someday with a great idea, and maybe I won’t.

          I don’t care about billionaires as long as they keep signing my 6-figure paychecks. Better than the $5/day I got bailing hay as a kid on the farm where I grew up.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Define nothing. And then Define wealthy. Then we’ll talk. Bill Gates did not build from nothing. Jeff Bezos did not start from nothing. Elon Musk did not start from nothing. Harlan Crow did not start from nothing. The Koch brothers did not start from nothing. The Mercers did not start from nothing. Peter Thiel did not start from nothing. Mitt Romney did not start from nothing.

            A ton of people who pretend to start from nothing. Started out with more access and resources than many people could imagine. More than many people will ever see personally in their lifetime.

            No one making minimum wage in the United States can afford their rent anywhere in the United states. Millennials and younger are struggling to even buy homes or be financially secure. Most Americans are a single emergency medical or otherwise from being bankrupt. It’s the biggest indicator of your future wealth and success is who you were born to.

            The reason you don’t understand why this is so complicated for people. Is because you don’t understand the basic supposition being made. Most people don’t and that’s the problem. The fact that most people use the phrase “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” out of context and unironically should be a massive indicator of how uneducated people are on the subject. But everyone is capable of understanding if they want to. Please do some reading on the subject. Even a small amount. It won’t take much to help get you up to speed.

            https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/schooled2lose/

            https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/14/full-time-minimum-wage-workers-cant-afford-rent-anywhere-in-the-us.html

            https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-house-home-real-estate-mortgage-rates-rent-debt-boomers-2022-9

            https://www.norc.org/research/library/most-working-americans-would-face-economic-hardship-if-they-miss.html

            • InputZero@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I expected you to be a pro-capitalist shill but then you pull out this. Bravo. I misjudged you. Going back to where you said you support capitalism, I think your idea of capitalism is just outside the bullseye. Like you obviously understand a lot, I don’t need to explain much to you. I think your inaccuracy comes from linking currency with capitalism, which a lot of people do. They’re not the same thing. Keeping in mind I’m going to keep things in the most basic terms, capitalism, socialism, communism, are all different forms of distributive justice. Capitalism says, whomever contributes the most capital to an endeavor deserves the most distribution, labour is just a cost. Socialism says, whomever contributes labour deserves the most distribution, and communism says everyone deserves equal distribution regardless of labour and capital. You’re really close to the bullseye though, so close I’m not sure my comment is even worthwhile.

              • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                think your inaccuracy comes from linking currency with capitalism, which a lot of people do.

                To quoth my first post in this thread.

                Capital, markets, and currency. All existed before capitalism.

                Also, I’m generally anticapitalist. Perhaps you meant to reply to someone else? I’m of the school that thinks we should abolish the concept of unlimited private property in favor of something like personal property with much more reasonable limits. And think capitalism should only be allowed with regards to unique items that aren’t generally “necessary” for society. Paintings, tchotchkes, etc.

                Also your definition of communism is a bit exclusive of actual Libertarians and anarcho-communist. Isn’t it? I think you are referencing leninist theory? Which has never held up in practice. The rest of it though generally tracks.

                • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I just want you to know - you have Asperger’s syndrome. (entirely unrelated to your points - all of which are objectively wrong and don’t warrant a response.)

                  You wanted me to get up to speed - but you may not have been aware you are slow… Hope this helps.

      • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, a lot less after January of 2021… I was at 4.3 mil, and lost about 1.2 mil. (starting from less than zero, first child was born on Medicaid).

          • LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Don’t be big mads because they answered your question.

            They come back and attack them. “You idiot you are only a small time millionaire” 🤦‍♂️

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              How is that an attack? The petite bourgeoisie generally have more to gain from joining the proletariat in the class struggle, and almost none of them have caused suffering at a scale that justifies the same attitude had towards the haut bourgeoisie. (Now people who own multiple car dealerships on the other hand)

              It is only an attack if you think being a massive leech on society like Musk or Bezos is a good thing.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You also have less influence on the world around you than your farts. You have crumbs and you think you’re in charge because the people below you are worse off. You’re not going to have control until you organize together with the people on your side of the class conflict.

          • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Grew up on a farm, had no help, just decided to go get what I wanted like literally any and all Americans can. Like I said, first kid was born on Medicaid, we were on welfare for a couple years… Got a full time job at best buy… worked through community college, got off welfare… Took me about 11 years to get that first nice paycheck job where it takes others 4…but, that’s ok. Can’t control everything in life, live and learn.

            Just use the available programs, and get off of them as soon as possible so you can start contributing more than you took from them. It’s pretty easy if you just do it as a matter of principle. I received, now I give back. Once I’ve returned some orders of magnitude of what supported me, I can focus on what I leave behind.

            The fact that it was harder for me than it is for others doesn’t make me bitter or anything… I’ll just make it easier for my kids on the next go-round. It’s all good.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you took a statement about your class position as an insult. But I want to clarify, if you stopped working tomorrow would you have enough income for the rest of your life? If not, youre a member of the proletariat. If you could, youre petite bourgeoisie. You operate under capitalist logic but don’t have enough power to actually exercise control over the wider context your business exists in. You would be a small fish at the mercy of being eaten by larger fish. Better to not live in a system where anyone is a fish.

    • MrSqueezles@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      The volume of anti-capitalist and pro-China rhetoric on Lemmy is disconcerting. It makes me appreciate how good other platforms are at moderating state generated garbage.

      • Karius@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’ve left an anti-China warmongering echo chamber for a place where moderation isn’t predicated on silencing dissent against the west. The people you describe as ‘pro-China’ bots have plenty of issues with Chinese policy decisions. Accepting that the USA and capitalism more generally are evil forces in world politics are not state generated.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fact that you think that there is a huge difference between capitalist and China is part of the problem. They’re closer than you think. Not going to lie though. Leninists are just as bad as capitalists on this front.

        • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          The reason China has similar policies is because socialism/communism doesn’t work without a capitalist cow to milk.

          Do you understand what capitalism is relative to socialism/communism? That the entire premise is that no person owns the means of production, and therefore has zero stake in its success beyond their immediate involvement? How do you motivate people to reach for more, innovate, and strive for greatness when there is no semblance of capitalist enterprise? Nationalist pride? Do you threaten them? How many of the hundreds of examples do you need to see that this does not work?

          Star Trek is a beautiful concept on paper - but that’s the problem: as soon as you add humans, it goes to shit. Just look at the Hamas/Israel nonsense. Hamas literally does not care about their lives or children’s lives… The civilians are literally putting out videos stating they will intentionally put themselves under incoming bombs “because this is how we will prove your brutality”.

          There’s no chance as long as society has free will. There’s just no way for anything else to work in the long run.

          • h4lf8yte@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            How do you motivate people to reach for more, he asks, on a platform that is literally developed for free. Have you ever thought that people do certain things because they like them ? I see not every job is likable tho. But that’s a different problem, we can try to solve by technology. I know my opinion is also biased but in the end we should try to a bit more open minded.

            • FakinUpCountryDegen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That is definitely not the flex you thought it was.

              Yes, lots of individuals so lots of fun individual things that can be done by individuals for free - hell, you might even find enough people to do an entire open source project!

              But guess what?

              Those people have actual jobs. You’re pointing at hobbies that only exist because free time is afforded by decent jobs.

          • Eldritch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Real talk. Socialism works great for much of europe. Look into england, austria, pretty much any Scandinavian country they all have programs and systems focused on supporting workers. That they would never give up.

            Second are we talking Big C or little c communism. They are different things. And you are wrong immediately off the bat. Under communism which is not defined as socialism in its entirety. No single person owns the means of production. But people do own the means of production. Under big C communism, let’s call it what it is leninism. They have a warped and twisted definition of who the people are. Expanding it out to a single Nationwide party and that party’s dictatorial leader. That’s very different from communism. Under communism the workers own the means of production. Meaning that if you work in a factory. As a worker of the factory you own a piece of, and have a stake in the factory and its success.

            If people require capitalism to motivate them to strive for more. How did we get where we are? Capitalism has only existed a few hundred years. Human history goes back tens of thousands of years. How does that work? Because it really seems like we don’t need capitalism for that. And there’s no evidence showing that communism hinders it either. You do realize that even under the warped leninism that the Soviets used. They industrialized, expanded, had scientific and technological progress alongside the rest of the world. That doesn’t excuse the atrocities that they committed or the capitalists have committed. But that sure doesn’t seem like it puts a damper on striving for more etc.

            And if human nature is the biggest roadblock to socialism as you say it is. It’s just as big or bigger a roadblock to capitalism. Your argument against socialism is more of an argument against capitalism. Think about that. I think you mean well. But I also think you have very little idea about what you’re talking about. Which isn’t an insult. When it comes to some Western Nations and especially the united states. We are washed in propaganda and purposefully miseducated.

              • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It’s literally the only thing you have that’s even close. But you wouldn’t give it up. It’s certainly not a capitalist system. Prove how capitalist you are though. Give it up for a system like America’s if you think it’s so adorable.

                Strictly speaking universal healthcare isn’t socialist. But it is a logical outcome of socialist policy.

  • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mince you into fertilizer 😂 Reminds me of Soylent Green and Oddworld

  • RoyaltyInTraining@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Capitalists need workers to oppress. Without them, they would have nothing to give them a feeling of superiority. Mincing people into fertilizer would surely be a fun pastime for the rich, but it’s hardly a sustainable hobby

  • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For the anti-capitalists, I have a genuine question (sorry, I couldn’t find an “ask a commie” community):

    In the capitalist system there is a movement called Financial Independence Retire Early (FIRE) where people commit to living frugally in an effort to maximize savings and investments. The goal is to achieve a balance that allows you live off a safe withdrawal rate (around 3.5-4%) and then leave the workforce at an earlier than normal age. Some people commit to a life of minimalism and lean-FIRE with under $20k in investment income per year. I believe there is significant overlap with the van-life crowd and other nomadic lifestyles.

    Is this lifestyle compatible with, or is there a similar lifestyle within a communist system? To expand, can those with a different set of priorities trade away their later working days in exchange for less material things?

    • Little Trans Punk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let me put it this way. For capitalism to continue there’s an ever-marching goal of exponential profit. To get more profit you must work harder and the company must pay you less and work you longer. At some point you will be crushed. Nothing can expect exponential returns, yet capitalism constantly expects that.

      Communism wouldn’t need retirement because such a society wouldn’t have an exponential motive for existence. Work would be done as needed instead of constantly more and more and more. I wouldn’t mind being in my 80’s and still “working” because all the work I’d do would have a direct positive result on my community instead of more money for someone pocketing the excess value of my labor over what they paid me.

      Besides, who would need to push papers around for companies in an economic system that is moneyless and stateless? (communism is literally moneyless and stateless so USSR, China, Valenzuela, etc. are not communist since they have a state)

    • trailing9@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can only answer as capitalist. FIRE relies on accumulated interest. For workers it should be the same if 10 billionaires or 100,000 FIRE investors own their companies.

      UBI should be fairer.

      Both scenarios are the same. Work 20 years hard and then stop working.

      The FIRE owner have an interest in low wages for the workers whereas in UBI, more income for workers could mean more to be shared.

    • taanegl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      What? There are plenty of communist Lemmy subs you can ask in. I just think you haven’t tried hard enough.

      To answer your question tho, no - because there would be no need. Communism does want mandatory participation, but if checked and balanced correctly everyone would work within their limits and not be relegated to a lower class of living - because that’s sort of the point of communism. You’d work within your means until there was time to retire without being limited in access to services and goods. Theoretically, under a functioning communist system, there would be no manufactured scarcity.

      Tbh I believe both communism and our current form of capitalism centralises power and ownership way too much. Social-capitalism, or even libertarian socialism, might be the ticket. It would undo at least 200 years of psy-ops and gamed laws designed to favour the rich and vesting power in them, which is the issue of centralised power that we’re facing today - in what some call “late-stage capitalism” - or what I call the breaking point of society under a predatory, exploitative and imperialistic form of capitalism that seems more like the privatisation of the aristocracy than the supposed liberalisation of economy. Transparency, accountability and consequences for people in power and wealth is what’s sorely needed.

      PS: New public management is a con-job disguised as decentralisation meant to encumber governments under the guise of checking and balancing them, being effectively a psy-op in of itself to make people hate public services and taxes. As per usual, goddamn liberals - and I include socially conservative liberals in that polifical grouping. Dems and pubs are the same, want the same institutions and promote US imperialism - not fiscal independence, no matter what justification and mental gymnastics they put in the form of spreadsheets.

      PPS: Also, additionally, commodification of the housing market was a mistake. It will always be stupid and harmful towards society.

  • trailing9@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s the other way round. The fear of being left out makes the lemmies dance off a cliff.

    (I know, the movie was fake.)

    The capitalist sees that the lemmies keep dancing without wondering why the music is playing.

    • umbrella@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The capitalists are on a yatch somewhere not even aware of the squabbling poors. Dunno about music and dancing, but I just see you here defending them.

      • trailing9@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Let’s call the capitalists on the yachts billionaires.

        I am defending the capitalistic view that markets are key to wealth distribution. Socialists and communists agree. That’s why they want to replace them.

        My point is that there needs to be competition on all markets. There must be enough housing that rent becomes cheap.

        For that to happen, lemmies have to vote for politicians who change zoning laws to allow cheap housing.

        Instead I see lemmies having fun with revolutions, new technologies and debates about the inclusion of anarchists. Those are all beautiful dancing partners but they won’t reduce rent because there won’t be a revolution.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          thats literally our current system. its not working.

          funny you mention housing because its the most expensive it ever fucking been, after investors figured out it can be a fucking market.

          • trailing9@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s where I say you are a lemmy dancing to the music.

            You are lamenting the current system. You believe there is a free housing market when there is none. You think of the current system when I argue that voting must be used to make a change.

            The system is not working because the lemmies are dancing. Not believing in change is the music.

    • Gabu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Capitalism can never work, because it’s self defeating. The point of capitalism is to maximize immediate profits, nothing else - as a result, it will gladly destroy its own means of growth if as a result instant profits increase.

      • MoscovianSwampGuide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        But it’s working, many are happy. If you’re unhappy it’s probably your fault and not the fault of the system you are living in. Take ownership of your situation and improve it.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          20 percent of children in the US are food insecure and we have the largest prison industrial complex on the planet. If I had a shittier job and broke my leg I would end up homeless. My cousin who can’t hold down a job due to a chronic illness would die on the streets if she didn’t have family support. But yeah the system works.

          • MoscovianSwampGuide@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sounds like a lack of compassion in your family. Just build a unit and live together, makes live easier if you support each other. But no the system is the problem! Some people would be always losers, regardless the system.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              What about disabled people who have no family? What about people who have family that can’t support them financially? What about people who can’t afford to build a unit? The system is the problem. We are more insulated from it then most.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          If I drove a nail through your skull, many would still be happy. Does that mean it’s okay to drive a nail through your skull?

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          We tried that. Capitalists just end up skirting around rules or straight up funding politicians to deregulate.