plinky [he/him]

  • 100 Posts
  • 386 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 8th, 2022

help-circle



  • if you own more than 1000 in 30 years treasuries, you get a wall as a lazy bum. but for real, the goal of socialism is to work less, have control over what you work for and how much you work. As we don’t have full automation, edge case (able bodied, physically, mentally, socially) and not looking for work person shouldn’t automatically be considered a person we should fight for (i for one think those people are actually very rare, cause it’s boring as shit). Somebody grown and milled the flour you eat, you have to give something back (or you can do coop living, but have fun explaining there why you don’t want to do anything). Or you can live in log cabin with a gun, but that’s another thing, and not something those people would call lazy.

    Now, there is a lot of work society doesn’t deem profitable and thus not compensating (be it elder care or young people care, home work etc), so again you can construct argument around that person not being “lazy” actually.

    The danger of this argument, appearing reasonable on its face, is constructing labyrinth of means testing which hurts more people than it helps.

    But when people imagine this type of person, they are doing some sort of reagan “black people in cadillac”, and likely being racist as well.

    so choose your thingy as counterargument (means testing hurts more than helps, finance bros are more dangerous, caring for kids is work actually, “how did that work out for y’all since 80s, crackers?” - don’t work on people on the internet, cause it’s upper quintiles, “natural unemployment rate” is a thing they decided to accept)

    also poster nr2 probably pays more to his owners than taxes, the little crab in the bucket.









  • Supply and demand are irrelevant to marxist framing (it’s all hidden in phrase “socially necessary labor time” - aggregate bag of everything society needs) of profit. Capitalist arrives at the scene, looks at the cost of inputs and workers and decides whether its profitable to do stuff. Because the only thing he can vary on production stage is price paid per labor (after all, cnc machine costs more or less the same - it’s fixed expense (constant capital or capex in modern lingo). if he cannot find a way to couple variable expense (price of labor) to the fixed expense to average expected profit rate, he just won’t start producing stuff. N.B. - that they are irrelevant doesn’t mean they aren’t real. Cute curves of demand mean jack shit for price of food, it’s inelastic or whatever. By marxist logic, porkies would produce food until they find acceptable return on investment, not until demand is satiated (which is why in imperial core everyone subsidizes agriculture, but that’s whatever). if the standard of roi was 50% you better believe they would watch you starve instead of expanding (see rents in usa)

    Now, modern porky fights a lot of fights: can he remove regulations via lobbying? (e.g. chemical industry) can she lower wage, say by importing immigrant workers? (e.g. farms) can they ship out the production to other country? (e.g. mining) can they feasibly induce demand (create societal necessity of something)? (e.g. iphones) can they protect market share by paying off ad agencies? (e.g. coke) (most of the stories of modern daring capitalists are induced demand btw, nobody sings the praises of 3M ceo, before the 70s, it was more about reducing downtime (ford, mcdonalds etc)

    but every single one of them wouldn’t get profit if they’ve paid the workers 100% profits back (obviously). after all, capitalist holds some pieces of electronic data that says they are obliged to part of profit and decision making, they can do jack shit all the time and still gets some proceeds from labor of 1000s people employed)