4 ms·

Those are also capitalist.

by db48x 5y ago

sp332 5y ago
There are no capitalists, so how is it capitalist? Workers "owning the means of production" is famously compatible with non-capitalist business models.
- db48x 5y ago
  Anyone who puts their own capital into some enterprise is a capitalist. It doesn’t require a particular job title or upbringing. Whether it’s two people working out of a garage and feeding themselves from their own savings in order to build a new business, or employees of a business who buy the business from its former owner, it’s all capitalism. Socialism and Communism were all about turning over all forms of ownership over to the government, and then allowing the government to decide who gets what and who is allowed to work where. In the end that puts all of the wealth and decision–making power into the hands of a single autocratic leader, no matter what the propaganda might claim.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - sp332 5y ago
    This is incorrect. A capitalist is someone who puts money into the business and expects profit out of it without doing the work. Profit is the difference between the net value generated by the workers and the amount paid out to the workers.
    - db48x 5y ago
      Lol. Your definition of capitalism is worse than useless. For one thing, profit is your revenue minus _all_ of your expenses, not merely what you pay your workers. Material, utilities, rent/mortgage or other interest, training, bookkeeping. overhead, taxes, everything. Different business owners will decide to spend that profit in different ways. Some will use it to expand the business (Amazon, for example), others will pay dividends to shareholders (Google, Microsoft, and most other big companies), others will simply save it for a rainy day (Apple, it would seem). Usually it’s some mix of all of these and others. Capitalism is simply about ownership. If you can start your own business, then you are a capitalist. If the government prohibits it, then you do not live in a free market. An owner can also be a worker, or else how could a new business get started? Here’s a practical example: I get my hair cut at Dimaggio’s down the street from me, and the owner cuts hair right alongside his employees every day. He opened that shop decades ago, pays the bills, does the bookkeeping, opens the doors every morning, closes them at night. He is a capitalist, and he is a worker. Obviously I’ve never looked at his books, but I imagine that he pays himself a salary and that the business has been saving most of what was left over after that, since it’s been a hard year and he hasn’t gone out of business. I think he might own the little building he’s in, and that he rents out the other half of it, but aside from that he hasn’t expanded the business.
      - sp332 5y ago
        At least I recognize that there's a difference between a business model and a system of government. In the context of this thread, owners are less likely to burn out workers and pursue profit at all (human) cost if the workers are the owners.
        shunmugarajb 5y ago
        I think that will be true only if all the workers (Owners) are content with the rate of growth & profit and even ready to accept losses in certain situations to avoid burnout.

Those are also capitalist.

by db48x 5y ago

Those are also capitalist.

There are no capitalists, so how is it capitalist? Workers "owning the means of production" is famously compatible with non-capitalist business models.

db48x 5y ago
Anyone who puts their own capital into some enterprise is a capitalist. It doesn’t require a particular job title or upbringing. Whether it’s two people working out of a garage and feeding themselves from their own savings in order to build a new business, or employees of a business who buy the business from its former owner, it’s all capitalism. Socialism and Communism were all about turning over all forms of ownership over to the government, and then allowing the government to decide who gets what and who is allowed to work where. In the end that puts all of the wealth and decision–making power into the hands of a single autocratic leader, no matter what the propaganda might claim.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- sp332 5y ago
  This is incorrect. A capitalist is someone who puts money into the business and expects profit out of it without doing the work. Profit is the difference between the net value generated by the workers and the amount paid out to the workers.
  - db48x 5y ago
    Lol. Your definition of capitalism is worse than useless. For one thing, profit is your revenue minus _all_ of your expenses, not merely what you pay your workers. Material, utilities, rent/mortgage or other interest, training, bookkeeping. overhead, taxes, everything. Different business owners will decide to spend that profit in different ways. Some will use it to expand the business (Amazon, for example), others will pay dividends to shareholders (Google, Microsoft, and most other big companies), others will simply save it for a rainy day (Apple, it would seem). Usually it’s some mix of all of these and others. Capitalism is simply about ownership. If you can start your own business, then you are a capitalist. If the government prohibits it, then you do not live in a free market. An owner can also be a worker, or else how could a new business get started? Here’s a practical example: I get my hair cut at Dimaggio’s down the street from me, and the owner cuts hair right alongside his employees every day. He opened that shop decades ago, pays the bills, does the bookkeeping, opens the doors every morning, closes them at night. He is a capitalist, and he is a worker. Obviously I’ve never looked at his books, but I imagine that he pays himself a salary and that the business has been saving most of what was left over after that, since it’s been a hard year and he hasn’t gone out of business. I think he might own the little building he’s in, and that he rents out the other half of it, but aside from that he hasn’t expanded the business.
    - sp332 5y ago
      At least I recognize that there's a difference between a business model and a system of government. In the context of this thread, owners are less likely to burn out workers and pursue profit at all (human) cost if the workers are the owners.
      - shunmugarajb 5y ago
        I think that will be true only if all the workers (Owners) are content with the rate of growth & profit and even ready to accept losses in certain situations to avoid burnout.