How do capitalists justify the immiseration of many to the benefit of one as anything but an act of pure evil?

Communists get out

Yes. Which is ironic considering Marx and Engels themselves were racists. Engels for example outright said some races are subhumans and should be enslaved, which is several magnitudes worse than anything say, Donald Trump ever said.

There's literally nothing wrong with gmo produce

Daily reminder that the right also sees it as pure evil and are anti-capitalists themselves.

Commies are retarded enough to put reaction and even fascism in the same bag as capitalism, even though reaction was the original opposition to the bourgeoisie and fascism started as a socialist/syndicalist movement.

Marxists are basically stupid as fuck and ignorant of anything other than Marxist perspective.

The thing is the bourgeoisie and communists are on the same page when it comes to reactionaries. Communists are explicit in saying that capitalism is better and more desirable than feudalism.

>and fascism started as a socialist/syndicalist movement.
This is an oversimplification. Fascism has a lot of roots in socialist and syndicalist groups (not necessarily Marxist groups mind), but by the time it crystallized as an ideology of its own it wasn't by any means socialist. At least not in its purest incarnation anyway.

Fascism started as national syndicalism in France before the Italians took and updated it, and if there's one thing all forms of fascism have in common it's being disgusted with capitalism. Even Mussolini himself was originally a socialist.

This is also why people labeling Pinochet a fascist are grade A idiots.

>Fascism started as national syndicalism in France before the Italians took and updated it,
This is what I mean when I say "by the time it crystallized as an ideology of its own". It wasn't really until the Italians that fascism became a proper ideology, prior to that the various proto-fascist movements (like national syndicalism) were more like nationalist-themed deviations of other ideologies.

>and if there's one thing all forms of fascism have in common it's being disgusted with capitalism
Fascists were very disgusted with contemporary capitalism. But they didn't necessarily have anything against capitalism as a rule. Such as Mussolini for instance who made a distinction between contemporary capitalism and what he termed heroic capitalism.

Though, various schools of fascism had different views on this that can be totally at odds with Mussolini. In this area fascism didn't really survive for long enough to develop a common orthodoxy.

> Even Mussolini himself was originally a socialist.
This is true. But by the time he became a fascist he totally renounced socialism, egalitarianism, internationalism or really anything that would add socialist character to a movement.

>oral hygiene is a modern problem

>You don't really believe that the myth of """"""equal"""""" opportunity has any ground in reality, do you?

Yes I do today. If I lived during Marx's time, I probably wouldn't.

I mean, China got 2 million new millionaires in 2014 alone. Now that's nothing compared to how many Chinese who are middle-class and working class, but it's a vastly more beneficial system than what existed when Marx was alive, which was essentially a system of Old Money people(e.g royalty), just continuing to hoard their wealth.

I personally don't think Marx was honest about the potential of capitalism to be good to the person in even the most dire straits.

Different era senpai

>thinking the new millionaires are a sign of social mobility instead of old money growing richer

Since there was 2 million new millionaires in China in 2014, I am inclined to believe it is New Money.

In fact, I'm inclined to believe that most rich people today are New Money people. The only exceptions I can think of are people who are still part of royal families, and the Rockefellers and Rothschilds.

Even back in the day peasants had much healthier teeth than noblemen because they didn't eat unhealthy sugary shit every day.

>muh different era
Idiot argument. By this logic we should completely throw marxism out of the window since it's created as a critique of 19th century robber baron capitalism and not the modern form.

O boy, you are retarded.

equality of opportunity > equality of outcome

read some rawls faggot

But we should

It's 100% correct. This is also why the poorest Africans have much healthier teeth than westerners today.

The problem with communists is that they simply don't understand the nature of innovation and growth.

>How do capitalists justify the immiseration of many to the benefit of one as anything but an act of pure evil?

because objective morality doesnt exist

>You don't really believe that the myth of """"""equal"""""" opportunity has any ground in reality, do you?

Nope.

Also your system is unworkable

Who exactly is preventing you from saving some money from a wage job and/or taking out a loan to start your own business?

If all the capital owned by the US was owned and controlled by the workers, we might be able to manage a $50/hr wage, since labor + capital = productivity.

It's the most moral form of genetic evolution in human society.

Communism and Socialism allow shit people to produce more shit people at the cost of valuable people. A de-evolution of sorts.

>If all the capital owned by the US was owned and controlled by the workers.

Our society would collapse.

You do realize workers can hire management, right? That's how coops work.

Sure, but your assuming workers are rational actors who will hiring the best man for the job and let him do what he has to do.

I assume the opposite.

Nice meme.

Good luck marrying a teenage virgin in a feudalistic society. Poor women were essentially the collective sexual property of wealthy men.

Why?

You really think the decisions of the board of directors are wiser than those made by professional managers or, in the near future, AIs?

Why?

>he fell for the first night meme
>>>/enlightement/

see

Believe it or not, teeth are actually a lot healthier in "primitive" diets low in refined sugar and processed carbohydrates. The Mennonites/Amish don't die early IIRC.

>equality
Somewhat misleading term. The human species is very, very diverse, but each one of us is still a human with the same natural rights.

It is. We need extensive oral hygiene because we eat trash, hunter gatherers and primitive people manage just fine without a toothpaste.

nice broscience

Somewhat true. There are still many Africans with dental issues though.

Capitalism is the philosophy of git gud

They'd pursue their collective interests, rather than the interests of profit. That's a good thing.

Because the working class lives paycheck to paycheck practically in the entire history of capitalism??
Have you ever thought of that?

That doesn't explain why you don't take out a loan to start a business.

Also it's your own fault if you don't save money the vast majority of the time. Very few of these "paycheck to paycheck" workers are living without unnecessary luxury expenses. You can also work a second job.

This is metameta

No they wouldn't, even if they were smart enough to figure out what their group interests were, they would soon start infighting and forming factions like any other group.

But they probably are not that smart and would appoint however promised them the least work and the most free stuff.

That certainly explains the majority of brain-deads in the financial industry who only get in thanks to nepotism.

You do realize there are, today, in the United States, many successful cooperatives operating in many different industry sectors, right?

I am aware of co ops yes, and I think there are several good reasons why they will never out compete traditional firms.

At most they are an interesting competitor who has the potential to keep other firms on their toes

>goalposts
Your argument was that they couldn't work because most people are incapable of rallying behind group interest, the very fact that they exist and are successful prove you wrong.

There is a distinction between such a firm competing in a capitalist system and:

>If all the capital owned by the US was owned and controlled by the workers

They are not equivalent

That's because co-ops put their owners first, like every other company, which in the case of co-ops, are the workers. Co-ops are good for the worker and outcompete other firms in the welfare of the worker. If only workers were more educated about employee ownership.

Regan was far from perfect, I am not opposed to workers owning stock as long as they are free to buy more and sell what they have, but that really is not what we are talking about

> to the benefit of one
kekarooni

>How do capitalists justify the immiseration of many to the benefit of one as anything but an act of pure evil?
How do communists justify this?

>unnecessary luxury expenses
Bullshit
>
Yes goy, go work for a few more pennies for my uncle mr Nosestein, some year he could even loan a few shekels

>gibsmedat

OK, continue wasting money on shit you don't need, I'm sure Bernie will win next election.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Stalinist_left

They're actually more stable than conventional businesses IIRC.

>continue wasting money
I wish I could, but my boss already did that for me by buying a new yacht.

If you own a car you're spending money you don't need to. You can use a bicycle or walk instead and can choose to live in areas where the places you need to be at like your office aren't a hundred miles away. Anyone can live on federal minimum wage and save money, you're just choosing not to.

>Because I have enough money to move closer to my job..

>muh equality

A plane ticket from one coast to the other costs less than $300. You can go anywhere in the country for an extremely affordable price and accept a job in a region with as low a cost of living as you feel comfortable with.

The guy is confused because they aren't traded publicly (for obvious reasons), and because co-ops don't report the highest profits, because co-ops balance worker welfare with owner profits, because the workers are the owners, unlike a traditional firm where owners and the management that works on behalf of the owners sets the policy. So a co-op worker might be willing to earn less for better working conditions, which looks bad on paper in terms of profitability. On the other hand a traditional firm will seek to maximize profits, and implement unpopular policy, because as long as they can keep the positions filled, they're going to squeeze their workers for every bit of productivity they can.

>le marxism is equality meme
>marx hated equality and thought it was bourgeois as fuck
>marx thought socialism would have inequality by necessity
>marx thought communism would have no need for ideas like equality because no one would want equality
Equality and the welfare state are a capitalist meme.

>unnecessary luxury expenses
>Bullshit

Why are liberals literally incapable of not wasting their earnings? Here, I'll help:

>Buy potatoes, around $1 / lb at their most expensive
>Eat nothing but potatoes (~5 lb for all your daily nutritional needs)
>You're now down to spending $35 / week or $150 / month on food
>You still have over a thousand dollars a month leftover for any other expenses even if you're making the absolute national minimum of $7.25 / hour

>he doesnt pay taxes
>food is the main source of living expenses
Ask me how I can tell you haven't moved out of mom's basement yet

None of my post suggested you don't pay taxes and don't have other expenses.

>You still have over a thousand dollars a month leftover for any other expenses even if you're making the absolute national minimum of $7.25 / hour
You haven't even had a real job yet have you?

That thousand dollars a month goes towards other expenses. Taxes are an expense. Not sure what you aren't getting here.

>You haven't even had a real job yet have you?

I'm on a comfortable salary at the same position I've had for the past six years because I saved money during my 20s, learned how to program, and traveled to a low cost of living region instead of whining about capitalism on the internet.

>food is tax deductible
>somehow explaining that you can eat only potatoes means that theres no excuse for having other expenses that completely dwarf the cost of food
You're not fooling anyone.

Marx himself was a bourgeoise faggot, if real revolution happened he'd be the first to hang.

t. prole

>other expenses that completely dwarf the cost of food

None of my post claimed food was your largest expense. It's one example of a recurring expense that you're probably spending a significantly greater amount of money on than you need to. Stop making excuses.

Why would you even bring up foot then? No, it's clear that you don't actually have a job and have no idea how taxes work and you think normal people spend $20 a day on food or something. Plus you think it would be totally normal to brown bag potatoes to bring to work for lunch.

>If it's not the largest expense you have it isn't worth trying to spend less money on it

That's the kind of black and white retard thinking that's keeping you poor, user.

>have no idea how taxes work

I've said nothing about taxes, not sure why you keep bringing that up. You lose some of your money to federal taxes and maybe state taxes too depending on where you live. There's not much else to say about them. It's not like you're going to change how much you pay in taxes as a low income wage worker. So part of your gross thousand dollars after food for a month are going to go towards taxes. What else am I supposed to tell you about taxes?

>That's the kind of black and white retard thinking that's keeping you poor, user.
I don't even spend $5 a day on food because I was born to cheapass frugal parents even though they were college educated, and I cook, and I freeze meat when it is cheap and on sale. I'm not complaining about being poor. I see all these poor uneducated people who want good paying jobs, and keep thinking to myself, there are billions of people in third world countries that can do the exact same thing for cheaper. What's needed for lots of good paying jobs is a skilled workforce that can justify high wages. Likewise, I've been asked to cosign a loan, and fuck no, I'm not doing that, because that could sink me, and I know it could sink them. Even if they have a 90% chance of being able to be successful and pay off that loan and then some, that 10% that could ruin you is a lot of risk.

>What else am I supposed to tell you about taxes?
That you don't know how they are calculated and think they come after food.

>think they come after food

What? Just because I mentioned the gross amount of money you'd have on federal minimum wage after food on a potato diet doesn't mean I believe you don't pay federal taxes until after you purchase food. I don't know why you're reading in all this strawman bullshit.

Because that thousand dollars is not a lot of money after taxes, rent, phone/internet (try getting a job without a phone), commuting expenses, actually buying things you need instead of having your parents buy them, etc, unless you live in mom's basement.

The poorest American today is better off than any king in the middle ages. What the fuck are you talking about immiseration? Everyone is made better off by capitalism. You want to talk about the disenfranchisement of many for the enrichment of the few? Check out any communist country in history. Sick dictators breh. Communism is and will always remain a meme tier ideology

I literally said "You still have over a thousand dollars a month leftover for any other expenses." Those are the other expenses.

>after taxes your net income for federal minimum wage is still ~$1100
>$150 / month on food
>$500 / month rent
>$50 / month utilities
>$50 / month phone
>use a public library for internet
>don't pay recurring commuting expenses, get a bicycle

That's $350 / month you can save, $4200 / year, doing nothing but absolute bare minimum $7.25 / hour unskilled labor. That's the worst case scenario for earnings, you can easily save a lot more than that by developing skills and a work history.

Capitalists are parasitic leeches that hold back industry. All that is needed is capital, labor, and good management that has no conflicts of interests and interested in maximizing the success of the economy, not just his own coffers.

>$4200/yr to meet every other expense
>this is supposed to be a lot of money
So what's the master plan? When it's time to retire you'll have less than $200,000 in the bank?

>this is supposed to be a lot of money

It's a lot of money for someone making the bare minimum people are legally allowed to pay you.

>When it's time to retire you'll have less than $200,000 in the bank?

Which is pretty great considering this is premised on you making no more than the federal minimum wage your entire life, which is basically impossible unless you get fired and pick up a new fast food job every two months. Just by existing and not getting fired you get raises at most jobs.

>They'd pursue their collective interests, rather than the interests of profit.
Oh, really? And you know this based off what?

>That's a good thing.

The hell it is. You clearly have no idea how a business is ran. The reason they pursue profits so vigorously is because they HAVE to in order to stay afloat; downsizing your force is not staying afloat, breaking even is not staying afloat either. Only aggressive expansion is staying afloat The world of business is ruthless, cutthroat and competitive. That is how they sweep out the losers from the winners. It is not for people who are complacent, easily distracted, or only without commitment. If you are not interested in pursing profit, they you should not be in such a seat of power

>What's needed for lots of good paying jobs is a skilled workforce that can justify high wages
>This is what Marxiboos actually believe

>marxiboos
>wages

Which is why industrialization took off primarily in countries that promoted capitalism. Okay. Communists will literally believe or say anything that lets them keep their edgy meme ideology cause thinking rationally to develop real insight is hard.

In nature, rape and cannibalism are normal.

Do you really want that?

>Implying Marx was a Marxist

Capitalism isn't a cure all ills. It can't create perfect equality or perfect equal opportunity.

It reduces the barriers to entry to a degree.

Most of the economic development and reduction in poverty in the world has occurred in countries that economically liberalized. India was a democracy that kept electing socialist governments until the early 90s yet had dismal growth compared to China that underwent Deng's reforms in the late 70s.

As far as immiseration is concerned, when you free people they look after themselves which means less strain on welfare for those who can't, it also means average people have more political influence, more education and can more effectively manage their government. The government is not a benevolent entity, it is a beast that has to be reined in by voters and then driven properly. India's democracy is great but it can only do so much. Capitalism, individualism and liberty will always be important components of what you are trying to achieve.