How much validity does pic related have?

Like I said in my original post, it all depends on if you get into a good union or not, average blue collar job is bad but sometimes you can luck into a ridiculously easy one if you have the right connections.

Not really. Marxism is good as long as it only applies to economic privilege. Everyone should be born with equal economic power, to ensure equality of opportunity.

The problem is that women and racial minorities stole the movement and instead of it being about economics, it is now about race and gender and "sexuality" and other gay shit.

because of the "fuck college, trades are where it's at" meme that so many retards actually fall for and then cry about it on Veeky Forums or something.

Well, I'm a medical student and I want to kill myself

That is not really interesting because a lot of people from many fields want to kill themselves.

Give us something juicy. Something unique to med.

>Marxism is good
Didn't seem that way in the USSR or China or everywhere else it was implemented.
Brainwashed twat.

>inb4 thats not my kind of marxism!!

>Didn't seem that way in the USSR or China or everywhere else it was implemented.

That is because in all those regimes, the leaders of the party simply decided to give themselves 99% of the wealth and then give the people an equally distributed portion of 1% of the wealth.

In Cuba people have to live with 25$ a month while Castro was a fucking multi millionaire. That is not communism. You know what that is? You want to know what that is. I will give you some tips

>1% of the population keeps 99% of the wealth
>They give small chunks of the remaining 1% of the wealth to the 99% of the people

Is it ringing already? It starts with C and ends with apitalism. That's right. All those regimes were capitalism but without raises. Imagine everyone in the US earning minimum wage, while the leaders keep everything else. That is what it was. Cuba is the US with a global minimum wage.

>Cuba is the US with a global minimum wage

Really gets the noggin jogging.

>engineering
>jobs

Choose one(in Canada anyways)

Nobody in the USSR became wildly rich. Party members had their furniture serialized in their slightly nicer apartments to ensure they weren't selling it for a nice markup. Don't group them with the rest of the trash.

Lol. You are being delusional. In paper the leaders of the USSR would have been completely poor but in reality they were filthy rich. Stalin is listed in various places as one of the 10 richest persons in world history.

Why? Because even though he technically did not keep any money, he would use the state for whatever he wanted.

A good example was when he wanted to travel from his government to his home town and with government funds he built a road all the way there... only for him.

How wealthy do you have to be for that? Not even a millionaire would not be able to pay a construction company privately to do this. A billionaire maybe but in reality Stalin may have been the world's first and only trillionaire.

Stalin died with nothing but an overcoat, I don't know who told you he could be considered the first trillionaire in history but you probably shouldn't listen to them.

Even the grandchildren of the stalinist era politburo are all wealthy lawyers, doctors, and businessmen now, according to this book anyways

time.com/money/3977798/the-10-richest-people-of-all-time/

He is number 5.

Also, did you not even read my argument? I gave you a clear example of how his country's wealth was literally his wealth.

Lets think about that example in the modern world. Lets suppose that you wanted to do this in a capitalist society. How much would it cost?

Well, first you would have to buy the terrain from the state (something he didn't have to do as he owned the state). This could run in the millions of dollars but lets say 1 million.

Then he would have to hire a private company to build the road (something he didn't have to do because he owned all the workers). Lets say this is another 2 million dollars.

Lets ignore the money he would need to put in security and maintenance. He "spent" 3 million dollars.

Now, he did not do it for business or out of necessity. It was a mere "I want it!" for him. In our modern capitalist world, most people would only spend 10% of their annual wealth in something they merely want. For example, someone who earns 1 million dollars a year is not going to buy a 1 million dollar car. He would waste all his wealth. He would buy a 100 ,000$ car.

So, this would relatively put Stalin annual gains at 30 million dollars... at least. That is a lower bound of his wealth, if you were to translate it to a capitalist society.

Stalin didn't "own" the state, Stalin didn't open up bank accounts in foreign countries to stash away his supposed wealth, upon Stalin's death his descendants or family did not inherit his power or his supposed wealth.

Ironically under the capitalist system that arose in Russia after the USSR collapsed a person can be truly said to own the country the way you are describing and his name is Putin.

Even in the article I shared the economists agree that even though Stalin was filthy rich, his wealth was different.

But the argument is solid. There is a real correspondence between wealth and power. Having power is as good as being wealthy. Plus, as shared, all of the descendants of the leaders are now rich.

Now, if you know anything about economics is you should know that 99.9% of the time. a child has the same wealth as his parents, and the parents have the same wealth as his children end up having.

Very few people become outliers. That means, very few people go from poor to rich or from rich to poor. 99.9% of the people stay in the wealth level they are born in. So Stalin's children being rich now pretty much imply that Stalin was also filthy rich.

Also, violent regimes like Stalin's are not the kind of communism I want. Violence against political opposition is not really justified as violence against rich people is.

You're shifting the goal posts and conflating power and wealth, stalins grandchildren going on to become well to do lawyers in the Russian federation have very little to do with Stalin himself especially after he got denounced by Krushev honestly you're all over the place I don't even know what you're getting at any more, the idea that the Soviet nomenklatura were all living high on the hog with Swiss bank accounts is ridiculous.

>the idea that the Soviet nomenklatura were all living high on the hog with Swiss bank accounts is ridiculous.

Who said anything about Swiss bank accounts?

But were they living the high life? Yes they fucking were.