If labor doesn’t create wealth then what does?

>uses 19th century concept of labour to back up his opinions for 21st century

...

Grug save one apple for later, while grog eat all apples now
thus wealthy is created

A system that facilitates the exchange of labor for a suitable reward and have the means to ensure entrepreneurs are able to acquire funding for their projects.

In other words - capitalism.

This comic is retarded
The guy making the product is welcome to open his own competitive business if he’d like, he just prefers the stable nature of working for someone else
The company is required by law to honor the pay of their employees whether or not if the company turns a profit

leftists use a limited number of easily refutable comics to illustrate their ideas in spite of the fact the said works are discredited over and over. It's like they lack the ability to learn from their mistakes.

Making good investments is labour. Making bad investments destroys wealth. Making good investments creates wealth.

Redistribution of course! We must steal from the rich so the poor can become rich!

Said no one with a three digit IQ ever.

>jackchick.jpg

...

>lol just become a ceo

Imagine being this retarded. That’s like saying “if you hate GM then go start your own company”. The average prole is in no condition to do so. By your retarded porkie logic all those people working minimum wage jobs secretly prefer it.

>just give me your money

'no'

>Protestantism
so proto-leftism?

Well, slave driving and Feudal Lordship is labour just as well. Ultimately unproductive, which amounts to alienating other people's work.

>it’s immoral to NOT let rich people fuck you over

Hmmmm

>just become a CEO dude, everyone has millions lying around to start a company

who has the worse infographs pol or leftypol

>it's moral not to let people live their own lives in peace
>it's moral to steal from others something of which you have had no part in creating because you are "entitled" to it

Very often companies are not started by someone with a few millions laying around, but rather by your average fellow man with his savings, and later investments depending on the business.

Do you think large corporatons started out as large corporations? Do you think they were created by already millionaires?

Get a grip.

If i own the tools he worked with then my fair share is all of it and he can go starve in a ditch.

>everyone can start a business if they want

Life is not a strategy game; grow up

>exploiting workers’ labor
>living in peace

Hmmm

Good luck finding any employees.

Yes, everyone can start a business if they want. That's one of many reasons why capitalism is by far the best economic system out there.

>mutually agreed on contracts is somehow exploitation

>work for me or starve to death
>implying no duress

Then kill yourself so you don't have to starve.

>any one can start a business

Sure, as long as you have the know how, connections, money, etc

Hey dude, if you don't have relatives willing to lend you a few hundred thou for your business, an address book full of people who can sell you raw materials and advertising for cheap, a lawyer who can make sure you bilk as much worth out of your workers as possible, and a few acres of real estate in the middle of the industrial part of town handy, then you really don't deserve to have money.

energy

How do you think companies are created? By people who are all-knowing?

By far the largest number of companies are small-mid businesses created by people who started out with nothing, but created a company and built it into something.

This incredibly stupid and retarded world view explains why you are a retarded commie.

Allocating workers smartly is a productive activity, yes. But voluntarism is the basis for mutually beneficial relationships. People need to be free to associate, trade, speak out, and move about, and these require active promotion (labour/trade unions, free press, transport, etc).

Not every person can run a business as well as any other person. And we can't tell who would be better at it by their lot at birth nor by who is more loyal to a given ideology. Rather than waste resources trying to pick winners and losers, you should just focus on keeping these market players from doing collateral damages. If they only waste their private resources, that is not society's problem. If they waste public, human and natural resources, that is society's problem.

>outsource the company to China

Wow, visionary leadership. Have another 5mil bonus

>give chinese people greater income than they would otherwise get
>can produce more at lower costs reducing scarcity for commodities on the global market
Thanks, but I think it is best if I take stock options instead, since then my gains are actually contigent on the how much I promote sustainable growth, rather than quarter-to-quarter growth. Executive pay shouldn't be tax-deductible, either.

>give chinese people greater income than they would otherwise get
Those suicide nets must be a sign of their gratefulness, I take it?

No CEO actually says the bottom part

I work for a multinational company and I can say without hesitation the commies were right to shoot people like them. Sociopaths who manipulate the entire company for their gain and get cheered on by useful idiots like you and your “if you can get away with it; it’s moral” philosophy

I have a IQ somewhere in the 130s-140s and am something of a socialist.

Any evidence the suicide rates at those factories are actually higher than the norm for China?

The nets are mostly for PR.

>IQ of 130-140
>still doesn't understand basic natural behavior
>still doesn't understand even wiki level of economics

top kek

>when capitalist ideology inadvertently supports socialism

...

>muh special one-of-a-kind objective 100% correct kind of economics and natural behavior

Capitalism supports freedom.

>he doesn't even understand high school tier economics

>2018
>Still posting this braindead comic
>Not expecting me to post this as a reply
Socialists confirmed for low IQ newfriends

Yes, Labor is one of the big things that creates wealth, or capital. Intelligence, luck, skill, et cetera also are part of it.
Capital is wealth derived from those things, it's saved wealth. One can work very hard for very long(Or get lucky) and make money, and there's nothing wrong with that. And there's also nothing wrong with using that money to make more money in a way that one doesn't have to work very hard. And there's also nothing wrong with giving that wealth to whomever one might want to, children and other relatives in particular. And there's nothing wrong with them using that wealth to make more wealth in a way that they don't have to work particularly hard, in a way that they simply have to work smart and be lucky.
Commies need to be eliminated.

I was waiting for somebody to post this.

Thank you.

>Capitalism supports freedom.
So does grassroots socialism.
>high school economics
I know people who are actual economists and have worked in banks, and they don't suck capitalism's dick. The private sector (especially the financial sector) has a lot of issues.

>when you tell someone with a job to get a real job

>The nets are mostly for PR.
The absolute state of capitalist cocksucking.

>literally Rick Harrison “I’ve got overhead”

Gg proving businessmen are just a bunch of greedy kikes

>socialism
>freedom
'no'

>actual economists
>working at banks

oh no no no no

>he thinks that US style cancer capitalism is the only alternative to socialism

The thing about capitalism is that there are variants of it that actually work.

I recommend Rhine Capitalism or the Nordic variety if you're looking for top shelf shit.

Great so he pays people to do all of those other things, including children if this comic is pre 1920s. Chances are he probably inherited the money he used to start this operation in the first place. He deserves a one time compensation for the state to buy and own his business, operating it under more egalitarian rules.

And chances are that someone in his ancestry worked for that money, and gifted it to his children, who kept it up and, in fact, increased it, and gave it to their children.
What's wrong with that?

What's wrong with children working? Fucking retard.

404 argument not found

The Nordic model is social democracy.

...

Socialism inherently is anti-freedom.

Economists do not work at banks, the banking sector has problems because it is crony capitalism aka state socialism.

Which still has private property, currency, markets, and private corporations.

It's capitalism, it's just a model of capitalism that efficiently manages externalities and political economy.

>There are no start up businesses that started with nothing except an idea
Get a load of this guy.
What is Apple? Microsoft? Coca-Cola?

It's tragic, but those chinese workers (slave labourers aside) chose to work in those factories instead of working somewhere else. Could the chinese government protect them better by having tight laws concerning safety, labour time and wages? Yes! And the labour would probably be cheap enough for a time that it would still make sense to give those jobs to those people. But we can't run other people's governments for them, and not giving them the choice to do those jobs won't make the choices that they already have better.

Must be nice for you to know all of them; the commies that would've shot them are sure to be upstanding people and the ones we want in charge. When labour unions and the vanguards of communism take over and their leaders start purging each other and curbing worker's liberties, we can take confort that despite their brutality they are probably sitll not be profiting as much as capitalists would in their positions (because prizing loyalty and ideological purity over competence makes for lousy managing).

Corporate sociopaths are a real threat, I agree, it is up to us we regulate the market in such a way that there is greater accountability and bad behavior is punished more strongly. It is a shame what happened in 2008, with the people in charge getting away with murder. Besides the measures I meantioned above, something else that must happen is to prohibit sector regulators from moving to the sectors they are supposed to regulate. Right now public servants have incentives not to go hard on the private sectors, where they might expect cushy jobs.

I'm sure you consider yourself a very moral person, and your zeal may indeed be a force for good, sometimes, but these angry, power fantasies don't tend to produce desirable realities (at least, not for most people). Remember to be politically active and informed, engage in your community and, if you are employed, organize with your colleagues to increase your bargaining power.

The vast majority of children work their homes in agriculture.

Laissez-faire economics inevitably degenerates into crony capitalism.

>if capitalism fails, its because its actually socialism!
fucking kek, you're just like the communists crying "it's not REAL communism!" every time a communist country flops
you're fucking pathetic

This

>It's capitalism, it's just a model of capitalism that efficiently manages externalities and political economy.
It's incredibly costly and ineffective. The noridc model is garbage.

False. Authoritarian politics do.

The large amount of black people and the smaller amount of white people would result in the South becoming a space age civilization, they're making a show about it. I know you crackers think niggers are stupid but you try making it in a world where a bunch of racist psychopaths keep killing you.

>all capitalism is laissez-faire capitalism

Doing it wrong.

>Socialist command economics inevitably degenerates into a famine
Guess what's worse?

>if capitalism fails
It never failed.

Read up on crony capitalism, it's embarassing that you are in a thread like this without even the most basic knowledge of what you are trying to discuss.

At a certain point continually profiting off other peoples labor is detrimental to the well being of society. It's a cycle that is useful to a certain point, as opposed to having a feudal society, but the wealth disparity in the world is worse than ever before in history. If humans want to really colonize space, outdated systems need to be thrown away and newer ones accepted. If oil companies couldn't buy political power, Einsteins ideas would have been implemented and we would have free, endless nuclear power across the planet. That is but one example of the limitations of capitalism.

Wealth disparity is the rule, not the exception.

>It never failed.
except for all the global depressions and recessions that destroyed the livelihoods of hundreds of millions, or the supreme wastefulness and utter disregard for natural resources, or the permanent underclass it creates... yep, capitalism has never failed!
>it's embarassing that you are in a thread like this without even the most basic knowledge of what you are trying to discuss.
i think it's more embarrassing you're actually fucking retarded enough to think that corporations ensuring their continued easy existence through political manipulation is socialism and not the end goal of capitalism. but i mean, i should have expected as much from you and your obviously double digit IQ.

Define ineffective.

Because every available metric I can find shows that the Nordic model produces lower poverty, better education, better health care, and better overall quality of life.

>False. Authoritarian politics do.

This is an assertion. When you make an assertion, you should provide evidence. Here's an example of an assertion with evidence.

Assertion: Denmark has a better version of capitalism than the United States does. The United States should try to be more like Denmark.

Evidence: Danish people report having more satisfying lives, have better health outcomes than Americans despite spending less money on health care, are less likely to commit violent crime, are less likely to experience hunger, are less likely to be homeless, and live longer.

N O T R E A L C A P I T A L I S M
O.
T.
R.
E.
A.
L.
C.
A.
P.
I.
T.
A.
L.
I.
S..
M.

Even Marxist-Leninist countries don't always degenerate into famine. Cuba isn't starving. Neither was East Germany.

How uneducated can you possibly be?

Actually embarrassing to witness this in 2018.

Oh yeah that's why unregulated capitalism has always produced large class disparity...

>At a certain point continually profiting off other peoples labor is detrimental to the well being of society.
Scandinavian socialdemocratic capitalist societies are the most equal on Earth.

>It's a cycle that is useful to a certain point, as opposed to having a feudal society, but the wealth disparity in the world is worse than ever before in history.
Yet the number of people in extreme poverty is the lowest it has ever been thanks to the emergence of capitalism.

>If humans want to really colonize space, outdated systems need to be thrown away
Like communism.

>If oil companies couldn't buy political power, Einsteins ideas would have been implemented and we would have free, endless nuclear power across the planet. That is but one example of the limitations of capitalism.
>Muh science will solve everything
>I fucking love science! XD
>I mean Einstein is the guy who invented nuclear plants right?
Fuck off back to re.dd.it.

>False. Authoritarian politics do.
Wrong. Natural monopolies, oligopolies and trusts reduce the ability of other market agents to compete, breaking down the advantages of market economies themselves.

>nordic model is costly and ineffective
Privatized healthcare is more costly (the web of private insurers, pharmaceuticals and private practicioners makes it so there are more bureaucrats in healthcare than doctors in the USA) and less effective (in terms of infant mortality rates, maternal health rates, deaths that could be prevented by early screening, etc). This is just one instance.

literally not an argument
fuck off and go back to sucking schlomo's cock if you're going to that lazily try to serve your corporate masters

>Laissez-Faire capitalism and socialist command economics are the only two choices

Neither do capitalist countries degenerate in crony capitalism but if we are making hyperbolic statements then communism still loses.

>crony capitalism

my fucking sides

Nordic edcuation is garbage, continually losing places in the PISA rankings. Nordic healthcare is equally garbage, fast becoming third world tier.

Quality of life is high because of liberal capitalism during the 20th century which gave made Nordic countries prosper, now we're heading swiftly towards third world tier in all regards because we've moved from what works, liberal democratic capitalism to socialism.

Denmark has the highest, I repeat, the highest tax rate in the world. They pay far more for healthcare than one does in the U.S. and receives worse heatlh care at that.

As for a small country of less than 10 millions not having the same scale on their problems as one of the largest countries on earth where more than 320 million people live, well, that speaks for itself.

>receives worse health care at that.
lol

This post is retarded.

Capitalism or not, wealth disparity has always been the rule, not the exception. Under no other economic system have so many people been able to prosper than under capitalism.

>natural monopolies
Can you name some natural monopolies? All monopolies so far have been ones possible only through government and authoritarianism.

The reason U.S. healthcare is expensive is because of government. Obamacare is a disaster, for instance. So are the retarded regulations.

At least read up on wiki before you enter the next thread. Cheers.

Same goes for you, back to wiki.

In western nations, the wealthiest people are the coordenators of tech innovation, the finnanciers of goods and services that people are willing to pay for. In socialists countries, the wealthiest people are the heads of state, their families and friends, and what people are willing to pay for is of no concern to them - they simply take and what they do give is what you can't get from anywhere else, and this gives them the greatest power over you.

Lincoln was literally a nationalist lmao

U.S. heatlh care is some of the best in the world. The best hospitals, doctors and clinics are in the U.S. The best med schools are in the U.S.

>Nordic edcuation is garbage, continually losing places in the PISA rankings

pic related

>They pay far more for healthcare than one does in the U.S. and receives worse heatlh care at that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita

Denmark: 5,205

US: 9,892

>As for a small country of less than 10 millions not having the same scale on their problems as one of the largest countries on earth where more than 320 million people live, well, that speaks for itself.

So the Nordic countries are better than the US because they're smaller, but they're not better than the US.

Which one is it?