[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


File: 1778712162310.png (583.07 KB, 1050x550, ClipboardImage.png)

 

>elon musk was born jun 28 1971 and has been alive roughly 1.73 billion seconds
>elon musk as of may 2026 has a net worth of 788 billion dollars
>elon musk has roughly $455 for every second he has been alive

classcucks will say he "earned" that. lmfao. that every second of his life, his genius brain innovates 455 dollars into his pocket.

can a person really "earn" that much or can they only get lucky and maybe also position themselves properly in a fundamentally exploitative system? some of you will no doubt answer that he "earned" it for the sake of provocative contrarianism

I want to make fun of burgers but honestly the majority of his fan boys are barely English literate third world boomers who believe he is an example of meritocracy working.

Like one of my older relatives unironically told me Musk spent his childhood as blue collar construction worker

File: 1778713749307.png (705.02 KB, 800x861, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2811616
nah there's plenty of burgers who lick porky boots and will say they "created jobs" or "took on risk" or "innovated" as if that entitles them to more money than the GDP of Yemen

This misses the real argument for capitalism which is that it creates incentives to do something. He got rich despite not being that impressive a guy because he positioned himself in the right place, doing the right thing when it came to PayPal. He wasn't even on the A team, but the thing is all the evil guys who got rich setting up e-commerce stuff built a platform for something much more valuable. His wealth is just a fraction of the wealth created in his vicinity. A fundamentally unimpressive man worked on sorta the right thing and someone working on a better version of the same idea bought him out. This seems intuitively unjust but the net result for society is that someone set up a useful service.

"How do you get people to do things, especially when it's not always obvious in advance what things people want, and most people don't know their own real preferences" is what the market solves for, not virtue, not moral entitlement to wealth.

>tfw gf has Muskoid autobio
I am going to throw it away when we move snd act dumb

>>2811651
That pussy can't be worth it bruh

>>2811659
She is great she just doesn't like anal play, I want to eat her ass after the gym but she refuses to

>>2811669
Why do you want a brown nose?

>>2811671
(No offense to people with one)


A lot of class cucks are basically just secular calvinists(randians) that genuinely think they're in the elect.

File: 1778717290011.png (604.23 KB, 627x826, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2811649
you say capitalism creates the "incentive" to "do the right thing" yet only capitalism results in overproduction of necessities which are then destroyed instead of given away in order to stabilize prices.

>overproduce milk

>now it's too cheap to sell profitably
>should we give it away?
>no that will decrease demand
>what should we do instead
>destroy supply until prices stabilize

>uh oh the grocery store can't sell all its food

>should we give it to the homeless?
>no that would be a handout
>what do we do instead
>throw it in the dumpster and pour bleach on it so not even the stray animals can safely eat it

ONLY UNDER CAPITALISM DOES THIS HAPPEN

HOW IS THIS A RATIONAL SYSTEM

Its called a JOB

>>2811686
>you say capitalism creates the "incentive" to "do the right thing" yet only capitalism results in overproduction of necessities which are then destroyed instead of given away in order to stabilize prices.
Okay and? What does that have to do with anything?

>>2811692
because capitalism doesn't "create" the "incentive" to do anything. NEEDS and WANTS do. capitalists don't "create" jobs either. NEEDS and WANTS do. people NEED food and WANT entertainment. So that is the incentive to grow food and produce entertainment. Not "capitalism". Capitalism is only a mode of production that arose with a few unique historical conditions:

<industrialization

<end of serfdom
<enclosure of the commons
<proletarianization
<generalized wage labor
<urbanization

commodities, markets, wage labor, and capital all existed before capitalism, as did the incentive to fulfill needs. It is only in the capitalist era that wage labor became the most common form of labor, outstripping subsistence farming and serfdom.

>>2811651
why don't you confront her class cuckery like you do for everyone on here

>>2811694
The problem with communism is nobody has any incentive to produce anything more than subsistence lever or do simply do anything they dont need to do.
Lets say if you want to make an animated film but dont know how to animate how would you get others to work for you if nobody wants to animate?
Or an old man needs wheelchair and cant make one himself where is he supposed to get a wheelchair? Why would anyone help him when theres no incentive to do so?

>>2811715
Society relies on people doing things they dont want to do for the benefit of everyone in order to survive under communism who will clean the streets toilets take care of the roads or do anything that doesnt directly benefit you? Communism ironically will create a mindset identical to capitalism the only difference is capitalism provides incentives for people to actually do these things.

>>2811686
  1. overproduction of necessities is a good thing. the traditional problem of humanity has been scarcity of necessities
  2. most supermarkets, at least in the UK, do give their food to homeless charities. more importantly, they usually sharply discount it on its use-by date.
  3. the actual operation of milk markets is substantially more complicated than this. supplies are not generally destroyed to increase prices, but because it's the cheapest and easiest way of getting rid of an oversupply. if milk prices are low for a sustained period, what happens is that the least efficient milk producers go bust. (which is good.)
  4. the waste from such destruction is a fraction of the waste that can arise from bad planning. e.g. the late USSR funneled large amounts of grain into poorly managed cattle herds and lost huge amounts of crops to bad transportation and storage.

you are however right: capitalism is not a rational system. it is an evolutionary one. the point about low milk prices killing off inefficient milk producers, or about pond-scum like elon musk striking it rich because they were prospecting in an area of social necessity is precisely the point. you can always point to the gigantic pile of dead animals to highlight the irrationality of evolution, but evolution is also why we're having this conversation right now.

>>2811694
nobody could accurately predict that we neither particularly needed nor wanted virtual reality despite constantly saying that we do. how do you decide how much resources society should allocate to VR development versus other forms of entertainment? (seriously: i want you to answer that.)

>>2811715
it would be unfair to say that under communism nobody has any incentives, it would be more fair to say that communists do not think seriously enough about what those incentives will look like.

the easy answer is that people will do all of these things out of their good nature, with an abundance of non-scarce goods. that's the fantasy most have. we may even say it'll be more true than untrue: but that would still require engaging with how the current system actually works, why it evolved and why it's proven so hard to kill off, rather than just sitting up in a forest going "yeah, well if evolution is so great why did the dodo die out? what rational system designs that, eh?"

>>2811715
The incentive is you don't go to jail if you work. Jail is where if you don't work you are beaten, but this is an old fashioned way of doing things. The idea is to automate production to the point of providing a regular life without needing work.

>>2811734
>The incentive is you don't go to jail if you work. Jail is where if you don't work you are beaten,
So slavery.

>>2811715
you're a fucking bot dude. he already explained to you that needs and wants are the real incentive

>>2811731
>overproduction of necessities is a good thing
wasn't complaining about overproduction in and of itself but how the capitalist will destroy the overproduced commodity to stabilize the prices. it doesn't matter if you produce more than everyone needs if people still don't get what they need because there is a failure of distribution rather than production.
> most supermarkets, at least in the UK, do give their food to homeless charities.
in the USA over half of food is thrown out. the reforms on your tiny island notwithstanding the USA is a lot bigger and probably more representative of how the capitalist world handles things
>the actual operation of milk markets is substantially more complicated than this. supplies are not generally destroyed to increase prices, but because it's the cheapest and easiest way of getting rid of an oversupply.
maybe that was a bad example but you have to notice that they were willing to squeeze labor to overproduce milk, but not willing to squeeze labor to distribute the overproduced milk. Why? the former is profit the latter is not. they destroy the commodity to stabilize the price.
>the waste from such destruction is a fraction of the waste that can arise from bad planning. e.g. the late USSR funneled large amounts of grain into poorly managed cattle herds and lost huge amounts of crops to bad transportation and storage.
maybe there are more options than deliberate waste and accidental waste. we should learn from the USSR not repeat everything it did.
> you can always point to the gigantic pile of dead animals to highlight the irrationality of evolution, but evolution is also why we're having this conversation right now.
You wanna talk about evolution? Slavery evolved into serfdom. Serfdom evolved into wage labor. What does wage labor evolve into?

>>2811744
needs and wants are an incentive, but they're a weak incentive to making shit you don't want that society nevertheless needs. there are not 6 million people on the planet who would make steel as a hobby, given a totally free choice.

>>2811726
>nobody will want to do art without the profit motive
literally that's what humans spent most of their time doing when they were hunter gatherers. having sex on mushrooms and painting each others bodies and cave walls.

>>2811756
damn you've convinced me. capitalism will continue forever. i'm going to become a porky now.

>>2811758
not what i said

>>2811755
my understanding is that most food waste takes place in the home, reflecting that many people get more than they need. that others go hungry is due to failures (plus class conflict etc) in the labour market specifically. moreover, transport workers are generally squeezed. there still comes a time when you're going to have to cut your losses.
(in the US this is possibly more severe than the UK because geographical distances are greater.)

it is my belief that we'll evolve into something better than capitalism which, for most practical purposes, we can call communism. in explaining what works about the status quo, or how apparently irrational (evolutionary) processes can have better outcomes than more rationally planned ones, i'm mainly seeking to discourage communists from lazy thinking.

>>2811761
not the point. you are being lazy and trying to get out of thinking about the practicalities of incentives in a non-capitalist economy by discarding all analysis of what does and doesn't work as advocating for the status quo.

i will ask you as well: what is the appropriate way to decide how much of society's resources should be invested in VR?

>>2811744
class cucks are so brainbroken they genuinely can't wrap their head around the concept that capitalism isn't just an eternal state of affairs and actually came about fairly recently because of specific historical circumstances. It's why some ppl get crazy butthurt when anthropologists explain that full barter economies are a myth.

>>2811789
>my understanding is that most food waste takes place in the home, reflecting that many people get more than they need.
well that's just your understanding. in the USA 50% of the food is thrown out BEFORE it reaches the consumer

>>2811616
>Like one of my older relatives unironically told me Musk spent his childhood as blue collar construction worker
back in 2012 I had a job at a grocery store and there was a really dumb guy that said Donald Trump was a self made man. This was before he became president mind you. He was dickriding Trump because he liked shows like The Apprentice and Shark Tank. He really bought the sleazy business bullshit. I had to break it to him that he inherited money from his dad. Then he counter-argued that Trump "lost it all and made it all back" arguing that the bankruptcies proved he was talented, otherwise he would have been "working at Mcdonalds." Like… What? Bro literally thought bankruptcy for rich people means he got all his Trump towers repo'd, that he lost all his billionaire connections, friends, powerul allies, etc. He didn't realize that wealth is more than just money, it's the social connections that allow you to keep exploiting and benefiting from the system in ways ordinary people cannot. His concept of privilege was so limited but I was not articulate enough at the time (and also could not articulate due to the constraints on communication inherent in a workplace) why he was stupid.

>>2811870
it's even worse because burgers throw out like 50% of the food both before it reaches the consoomer and after it reaches the consoomer. so burgers only eat 25% of the food circulating in their economy and they STILL have an obesity epidemic they're fixing with drugs instead of diet and exericise. absolutely unsustainable society.

File: 1778733613020.png (398.89 KB, 678x452, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2811601
>some of you will no doubt answer that he "earned" it for the sake of provocative contrarianism
The same /pol/yps calling you "goycattle" and "raped Epsteiniteslave" because they imagine you support Israel if you're not a nazoid will turn around dickride any fucking goypitalist in the most sycophantic manner

>>2811899
>Epsteiniteslave
new wordfilter lol

>>2811789
>>2811731
>>2811649

https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Library:Fascism_and_Social_Revolution
https://www.marxists.org/archive/dutt/1935/fascism-social-revolution-3.pdf

The most direct, elementary and typical expression of the present stage of capitalist policy is the organised collective destruction of wealth and of the productive forces.

The purposeful destruction of commodities for economic reasons is in itself nothing new in capitalism, but an integral part of its daily working from the beginning. It was in 1799 that Fourier first became convinced of the necessity of a new form of social organisation when he found himself entrusted with the task at Marseilles to superintend the destruction of a quantity of rice held for higher prices during a scarcity of food till it had become unfit for use. Nevertheless, this rice had at any rate been held back in the hope of sale, and was only destroyed because it had become unfit for use. This was not yet the modern principle of the wholesale destruction of good rice, good wheat, good cotton, good coffee and good meat.

In the same way the endeavour by combination to limit stocks, restrict production, and maintain or raise prices is inherent, not merely in capitalism, but in commodity economy from the beginning. As Adam Smith wrote in his Wealth of Nations:


People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public or in some contrivance to raise prices.

(Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter 10, Part ii.)

But such a policy appeared to Adam Smith, the original voice of classic capitalism, as an offence against the principles of capitalist production, as “a conspiracy against the public.” It has remained for our day that all the capitalist governments of the world should meet together in the World Economic Con- ference to proclaim, with the combined voice of all the most enlightened, progressive statesmen and all the economists, the supreme aim to restrict production and to raise prices. Thisisa measure of the extreme stage of decay of capitalism.

The distinctive modern stage of capitalist policy for the destruction of wealth and of the productive forces is marked by three outstanding characteristics.

The first is the gigantic scale of destruction, conducted over entire principal world areas of production, and calculated in relation to world stocks.

The second is the direct government organisation and sub- siding of such destruction and restriction of production by all the leading imperialist governments.

The third is the extension of destruction, not only to the destruction of existing stocks of commodities, but to the destruc- tion of the productive forces, the ploughing up of crops and sown areas, the artificial limitation of production, the dismantling of machinery, as well as holding unused the labour power of millions of workers.

The examples of this process throughout the capitalist world are too familiar to require repetition. The burning of millions of bags of coffee or tons of grain, in the midst of mass starvation and poverty, have horrified the world. But all this has been no accidental or exceptional happening through the action of individuals, but on the contrary directly organised by all the capitalist governments of the world, and in the forefront by the most “progressive” governments, by the Roosevelt Government in the United States, by Social Democratic governments, etc.


It is a tragic irony that men and women in New York should be suffering the tortures of hunger while tens of thousands of pigs in farrow are being slaughtered in Iowa by the command of the Gov- ernment, and farmers in Kansas or Nebraska are burning their grain. (News-Chronicle, October 17, 1933.)


The expenditures account recently published of the Agricul- tural Adjustment Administration under the Roosevelt regime affords a pretty picture of modern capitalism (Economist, December 30, 1933):


[table of statistics and citations to be found in the pdf]

This inspiring combination of Mammon and Juggernaut, let it be remembered, is the worshipped idol of the Labour Party and of the Trades Union Congress, as proclaimed at their meetings at Hastings and Brighton in 1933.

From Denmark it was reported in November 1933 that cattle were being slaughtered in the Government abattoirs at the rate of 5,000 a week, for the carcasses to be burnt in the incinerators. The Government established a special destruction fund; but so great was the cost of destruction that Parliament had to be approached for further credits for the construction of new slaughter houses. This was under a Social Democratic Government (!!!).

In the same way the British Labour Government had already carried the Coal Mines Act for the limitation of the output of coal——with such success that in the beginning of 1934 a London firm actually ordered a consignment of coal from abroad, on the grounds, as they stated, that owing to the limitation schemes it was impossible to secure a delivery from British sources with sufficient speed.

In Britain in 1930 the company “National Shipbuilders Security, Limited” was formed, with power to borrow up to three million pounds, for the purpose (according to the Memorandum of Association) “to assist the shipbuilding industry by the purchase of redundant and/or obsolete ship- yards, the dismantling and disposal of their contents, and the re-sale of their sites under restrictions against further use for shipbuilding.” Within a few months its successful activities were reported in the Press:

National Shipbuilders Security, Limited, has purchased Dalmuir Shipbuilding Yard, owned by William Beardmore and Co., and in consequence it is to be closed down by the end of the year. This shipyard was one of the largest on the Clyde, employing six thousand men during the war. Negotiations for the purchase and closing down of other shipyards are in progress.

Up to the end of 1933 this new type of capitalist company had bought up and closed down one hundred shipbuilding berths. In the twelve months to June 1933, the world tonnage of merchant shipping showed a net decrease of 1,814,000 tons, more than half this decrease being in tonnage owned by Britain.

Similarly, in the woollen textile industry the Woolcombers Mutual Association, Limited, was formed early in 1933 “to assist the woolcombing industry by the purchase and dis- mantling of redundant and obsolete mills, plant and machinery for re-sale under restrictive covenants against their further use for woolcombing.”

The principal copper producers of the world entered into an agreement at Brussels in December 1931, to limit production during 1932 to 26 per cent. of the capacity of their mines.

The National Coffee Council of Brazil, from which country comes two-thirds of the world’s coffee, decided in December 1931 to destroy twelve million bags of coffee. During 1932-3 9,600,000 quintals (equivalent to 1,248 million pounds weight) were destroyed, an emergency tax being imposed on coffee exports to finance the purchase and destruction of surplus coffee (League of Nations World Production and Prices 1925-32, p. 28). Up to the end of 1933 no less than 22,000,000 bags of coffee had been disposed of by burning or dumping in the sea.

The Governors of Texas and Oklahoma called out the National Guard to take possession of the oil-wells and prevent production.

The United States Department of Agriculture in the summer of 1933 announced bounties of seven to twenty dollars per acre to farmers for the destruction of the cotton crop. This was successful in securing the ploughing in or mowing down of 11 million acres out of a total of 40 millions:


The Government hoped to take ten million acres out of production by paying growers $7 to $20 per acre (according to the yield of their land) for ploughing under or mowing down cotton already growing. . . . The scheme was immediately successful in restricting acreage, over 11 million acres being ploughed in or mown down, reducing the estimated acreage from 40.8 to 29.7 million acres. (World Economic Survey 1932-3, pp. 313-4.)*


To the modern bourgeois mind and outlook this process of wholesale destruction and restricting of production, in the midst of poverty, appears as a natural and self-evident necessity. Without sense of contradiction they proclaim it in the same breath that they proclaim the necessity of “economy” and “cuts” to the masses; and correctly they feel no contradiction, since both are indispensable to the maintenance of capitalism at the present stage. They preach to-day the policy of restric- tion of production with the same sense of obvious correctness and common sense with which they preached after the war the policy of “increased production” as the path to prosperity. Thus in the summer of 1933 we find the British Chancellor of the Exchequer answering the “theorists” who imagine restric- tion of production to be “a bad thing”:


To allow production to go on unchecked and unregulated in these modern conditions when it could almost at a moment’s notice be increased to an almost indefinite extent was absolute folly.

(Neville Chamberlain in the House of Commons, June 2,


1933: Times, June 3, 1933.) In the same way the Economist was able to report with satis- faction:


While there was an enormous over-expansion of productive capacity before 1929, investment in capital equipment has been severely curtailed since then, and a substantial proportion of existing plant and machinery has become obsolete or has been scrapped. There can be little doubt that substantial progress has already been made in the re-adjustment of productive capacity to the lower level of demand for consumers’ goods.—( Economist, May 13, 1933.)


“Productive capacity” must be “re-adjusted” to the “lower level” of consumption of the impoverished masses. Such is the bed of Procrustes (who was also a bandit, but a less skilled and large-scale bandit) to which modern capitalism in its extreme stage of decay seeks to fit the tortured body of humanity. The more obvious and glaring expressions of this process, the burning of foodstuffs, the dismantling of machinery that is still in good condition, strike the imagination of all. But all do not yet see the full significance of these symptoms: first, the expres- sion through these symptoms of the extreme stage of decay of the whole capitalist order; second, the inseparable connection of this process of decay with the social and political pheno- mena of decay which find their complete expression in Fascism; and third, the necessary completion and final working out of this process in war. For war is only the complete and most systematic working out of the process of destruction. To-day they are burning wheat and grain, the means of human life. To-morrow they will be burning living human bodies.

>>2811735
it's all slavery… the idea is to reduce the amount of time you're a slave.

>>2811601
Is Elon just a petit bourg and not a full one because he takes a part in production as a CEO?

>>2811914
>it's all slavery… the idea is to reduce the amount of time you're a slave.
but if the capitalist owns the means of production, then automation doesn't translate into less work time for you. instead automation translates into technological unemployment, a swelling reserve army of labor, a crisis of oveproduction, a destruction of oversupply to stabilize prices, a rise in crime and other desparate measures to stay alive without a wage, etc.

So automation does not reduce slavery, it just leaves the slaves to die when they are no longer needed.

What reduces hours and increases wage? Class struggle. But class struggle must not merely reduce hours and increase wages, since those concessions demilitarize the working class, allowing the capitalist class to slowly roll back the concessions or intensify exploitation in other ways. Instead you have to abolish class society itself.

>>2811649
>This misses the real argument for capitalism which is that it creates incentives to do something.
how did the soviet union go from a semi-feudal backwater to a spacefaring nuclear superpower in 40 years flat while also winning multiple wars of extermination against capitalists who tried to strangle them in the crib? Where did the incentives to do all that come from?

>>2811649
>This misses the real argument for capitalism
>"How do you get people to do things, especially when it's not always obvious in advance what things people want, and most people don't know their own real preferences" is what the market solves for

Do you think Capitalism is when Markets?
Markets pre-date capitalism

<Only through the undervaluation or overvaluation of products is it forcibly brought home to the individual commodity producers what society requires or does not require and in what amounts. But it is precisely this sole regulator that the utopia advocated by Rodbertus among others wishes to abolish. And if we then ask what guarantee we have that necessary quantity and not more of each product will be produced, that we shall not go hungry in regard to corn and meat while we are choked in beet sugar and drowned in potato spirit, that we shall not lack trousers to cover our nakedness while trouser buttons flood us by the million – Rodbertus triumphantly shows us his splendid calculation, according to which the correct certificate has been handed out for every superfluous pound of sugar, for every unsold barrel of spirit, for every unusable trouser button, a calculation which “works out” exactly, and according to which “all claims will be satisfied and the liquidation correctly brought about. […] And now consider the naiveté with which Rodbertus would abolish industrial and commercial crises by means of his utopia. As soon as the production of commodities has assumed world market dimensions, the evening-out between the individual producers who produce for private account and the market for which they produce, which in respect of quantity and quality of demand is more or less unknown to them, is established by means of a storm on the world market, by a commercial crisis. If now competition is to be forbidden to make the individual producers aware, by a rise or fall in prices, how the world market stands, then they are completely blindfolded. To institute the production of commodities in such a fashion that the producers can no longer learn anything about the state of the market for which they are producing – that indeed is a cure for the crisis disease which could make Dr. Eisenbart envious of Rodbertus.


  • Friedrich Engels, Preface to Poverty of Philosophy, First German Edition, 1885



Unique IPs: 15

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]