6 ms·

Labor and capital are on the same side, they are both producers of wealth. You are barking at the wrong tree.

rectang 9y ago
I look forward to capital peeing in a bottle in solidarity with labor. :) Naturally capital and labor collaborate and both produce wealth. That doesn't mean their interests are 100% aligned.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  > I look forward to capital peeing in a bottle in solidarity with labor. :) It does. Capital evaporates in risky endeavors all the time. It rusts by itself as well. Sure interests arent perfectly aligned, but fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance. Meanwhile, landowners see all that from afar, evict people into the streets, and those same people go pay taxes to get their food. Capital is not the opressive.
  - zasz 9y ago
    Ahahah, so that's why capital called in the cops to kill members of the first labor unions in America, out of brother hood?
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      The cops? Cops aren't capital. They are State.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - gonvaled 9y ago
        In this context, Cops are not State, but a tool, used by Capital.
        conanbatt 9y ago
        Really, the guys with batons and guns are not the problem, it is capital that entices them to do it? How seductive capital is, that even lawful violents follow they every will! We must surely give those lawful violents more and more power to resist the allure of capital!
  - lovich 9y ago
    Capital in the US currently seems more along the lines of private profits and socialized losses. You don't see labor getting handouts in the form of welfare and then pulling millions of dollars in bonuses the next year. Fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance when your brother won the lottery, you are on welfare cause of a disability, and your brother decides to sue you for the family heirlooms because they feel they deserve it more. Yea it'd be better if we all worked together but labor wasn't the one that kicked people off the clearances, sent pinkertons to shoot people instead of negotiate, destroyed the environment, or any other of the great many ills that are happening on a daily basis. Look at the article your even commenting on! The workers had to pee in bottles because they couldn't even take care of biology. What did the workers do to the capital owners in this case? Deprive them of a few more dollars in profit because they had the gall to not be perfectly efficient machines?
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      > You don't see labor getting handouts in the form of welfare and then pulling millions of dollars in bonuses the next year. Depends on what you consider social expenditures in the us like food stamps, social programs, medicaid , medicare and social security. > Fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance when your brother won the lottery, you are on welfare cause of a disability, and your brother decides to sue you for the family heirlooms because they feel they deserve it more Who is paying welfare in this analogy. And who is the court that makes the rules for sueing. > Look at the article your even commenting on! The workers had to pee in bottles because they couldn't even take care of biology. What did the workers do to the capital owners in this case? Deprive them of a few more dollars in profit because they had the gall to not be perfectly efficient machines? The workers, as bad as they have it, would have it worse without this option. The best guarantee to improve the conditions of workers is to get more competition going, not to put some rules that can be skirted or worse, will do damage if they are followed. While amazon treats its workers like this, Seattle has expanded is expenditures two-fold, raised taxes and increase the salaries of all its public officials. Why doesnt the washington state, in all its taxing glory help workers directly instead? Because they will make more money if people ask for regulation instead of relief.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Labor and capital are on the same side, they are both producers of wealth. Neither labor nor capital independently produce wealth, generally, it's produced by the application of labor to capital; the suppliers of labor and capital are on opposing sides of the fight to capture the wealth the two are used together to create. “Capitalism” was named for the side it specifically favors in that fight, by people who found that a fundamental problem.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  > the suppliers of labor and capital are on opposing sides of the fight to capture the wealth the two are used together to create. Opposing sides or collaborators? Like the sun and the soil working together.. Think of those that provide no labor and no capital yet capture great value. Those are the truly destructive.
  - your-nanny 9y ago
    And in virtue of what does the capitalist provide capital?
    - your-nanny 9y ago
      In virtue of the fact that a system of law has established and enforces property rights, even at the expense of others labor.
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      In the virtue of saving from consumption. When a man does not consume his produce and stores some to build a tool, he has created capital. What a monster he is! His tool should be destroyed for the betterment of humanity and equality!
saas_co_de 9y ago
If that is true then it would also be true that a slave and their master are on the same side.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  Slaves are held against their will. Workers submit voluntarily.
  - your-nanny 9y ago
    The world admits to degrees.
  - 0x262d 9y ago
    I love to voluntarily choose between working for a capitalist and starving, personally
    - saas_co_de 9y ago
      Yes, there is no coercion involved whatsoever when your choices are working for pennies or being homeless, hungry, in prison, or on the streets. The only difference is that the modern slave owners are smarter and so they use a form of coercion that is more efficient. That is the only advance they have made past the plantation.
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      We are all bound by nature, so is the capitalist. What is important is to be free from men. You also do NOT need to work for a capitalist to survive. You need to work for the state or you will starve, thats our modern world.

I look forward to capital peeing in a bottle in solidarity with labor. :) Naturally capital and labor collaborate and both produce wealth. That doesn't mean their interests are 100% aligned.

conanbatt 9y ago
> I look forward to capital peeing in a bottle in solidarity with labor. :) It does. Capital evaporates in risky endeavors all the time. It rusts by itself as well. Sure interests arent perfectly aligned, but fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance. Meanwhile, landowners see all that from afar, evict people into the streets, and those same people go pay taxes to get their food. Capital is not the opressive.
- zasz 9y ago
  Ahahah, so that's why capital called in the cops to kill members of the first labor unions in America, out of brother hood?
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    The cops? Cops aren't capital. They are State.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - gonvaled 9y ago
      In this context, Cops are not State, but a tool, used by Capital.
      - conanbatt 9y ago
        Really, the guys with batons and guns are not the problem, it is capital that entices them to do it? How seductive capital is, that even lawful violents follow they every will! We must surely give those lawful violents more and more power to resist the allure of capital!
- lovich 9y ago
  Capital in the US currently seems more along the lines of private profits and socialized losses. You don't see labor getting handouts in the form of welfare and then pulling millions of dollars in bonuses the next year. Fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance when your brother won the lottery, you are on welfare cause of a disability, and your brother decides to sue you for the family heirlooms because they feel they deserve it more. Yea it'd be better if we all worked together but labor wasn't the one that kicked people off the clearances, sent pinkertons to shoot people instead of negotiate, destroyed the environment, or any other of the great many ills that are happening on a daily basis. Look at the article your even commenting on! The workers had to pee in bottles because they couldn't even take care of biology. What did the workers do to the capital owners in this case? Deprive them of a few more dollars in profit because they had the gall to not be perfectly efficient machines?
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > You don't see labor getting handouts in the form of welfare and then pulling millions of dollars in bonuses the next year. Depends on what you consider social expenditures in the us like food stamps, social programs, medicaid , medicare and social security. > Fighting capital is like fighting your brother for inheritance when your brother won the lottery, you are on welfare cause of a disability, and your brother decides to sue you for the family heirlooms because they feel they deserve it more Who is paying welfare in this analogy. And who is the court that makes the rules for sueing. > Look at the article your even commenting on! The workers had to pee in bottles because they couldn't even take care of biology. What did the workers do to the capital owners in this case? Deprive them of a few more dollars in profit because they had the gall to not be perfectly efficient machines? The workers, as bad as they have it, would have it worse without this option. The best guarantee to improve the conditions of workers is to get more competition going, not to put some rules that can be skirted or worse, will do damage if they are followed. While amazon treats its workers like this, Seattle has expanded is expenditures two-fold, raised taxes and increase the salaries of all its public officials. Why doesnt the washington state, in all its taxing glory help workers directly instead? Because they will make more money if people ask for regulation instead of relief.

dragonwriter 9y ago

> Labor and capital are on the same side, they are both producers of wealth. Neither labor nor capital independently produce wealth, generally, it's produced by the application of labor to capital; the suppliers of labor and capital are on opposing sides of the fight to capture the wealth the two are used together to create. “Capitalism” was named for the side it specifically favors in that fight, by people who found that a fundamental problem.

conanbatt 9y ago
> the suppliers of labor and capital are on opposing sides of the fight to capture the wealth the two are used together to create. Opposing sides or collaborators? Like the sun and the soil working together.. Think of those that provide no labor and no capital yet capture great value. Those are the truly destructive.
- your-nanny 9y ago
  And in virtue of what does the capitalist provide capital?
  - your-nanny 9y ago
    In virtue of the fact that a system of law has established and enforces property rights, even at the expense of others labor.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    In the virtue of saving from consumption. When a man does not consume his produce and stores some to build a tool, he has created capital. What a monster he is! His tool should be destroyed for the betterment of humanity and equality!

saas_co_de 9y ago

If that is true then it would also be true that a slave and their master are on the same side.

conanbatt 9y ago
Slaves are held against their will. Workers submit voluntarily.
- your-nanny 9y ago
  The world admits to degrees.
- 0x262d 9y ago
  I love to voluntarily choose between working for a capitalist and starving, personally
  - saas_co_de 9y ago
    Yes, there is no coercion involved whatsoever when your choices are working for pennies or being homeless, hungry, in prison, or on the streets. The only difference is that the modern slave owners are smarter and so they use a form of coercion that is more efficient. That is the only advance they have made past the plantation.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    We are all bound by nature, so is the capitalist. What is important is to be free from men. You also do NOT need to work for a capitalist to survive. You need to work for the state or you will starve, thats our modern world.