Beware the Marxist world of Kamalla Harris: "There’s a big difference between equality and equity."

[IM2]

Or perhaps keep people comfortable and in poverty…

No, they don't keep people comfortable in poverty. That's a silly opinion.

 

[dblack]

No, they don't keep people comfortable in poverty. That's a silly opinion.

Why?

 

[Tyrion234]

No moron. You get paid based on what you can leverage not your value.

What is it that you “leverage”? Would that be the VALUE you PROVIDE? Like wholly crap you just proved that you get paid based on your value. In this great country you can decide you’re not getting paid your value and find a different employee that agrees to your self value assessment.

 

[Tyrion234]

The populists are for working-class rights and interests, whereas Trump and Vance aren't. The smart rich know that in the age of advanced automation and artificial intelligence, the working class need all of the help they can get from the government. Republicans just provide assistance to the rich, not their employees:

RANK	PARENT	SUBSIDY VALUE	NUMBER OF AWARDS
1	Boeing	$15,496,865,703	958
2	Intel	$8,421,707,656	135
3	Ford Motor	$7,742,056,086	703
4	General Motors	$7,524,714,800	792
5	Micron Technology	$6,790,131,915	21
6	Amazon.com	$5,823,705,434	460
7	Alcoa	$5,727,691,764	134
8	Cheniere Energy	$5,617,152,523	43
9	Foxconn Technology Group (Hon Hai Precision Industry Company)	$4,820,110,112	74
10	Venture Global LNG	$4,338,702,441	8
11	Texas Instruments	$4,286,328,869	69
12	Volkswagen	$3,977,630,513	217
13	Sempra Energy	$3,828,022,782	51
14	NRG Energy	$3,415,751,518	266
15	NextEra Energy	$3,008,691,129	116
16	Sasol	$2,836,049,845	72
17	Tesla Inc.	$2,829,855,494	114
18	Stellantis	$2,795,436,436	213
19	Walt Disney	$2,543,219,673	265
20	Nucor	$2,538,761,123	176
21	Iberdrola	$2,380,558,984	110
22	Rivian Automotive Inc.	$2,364,054,012	7
23	Hyundai Motor	$2,349,743,470	18
24	Oracle	$2,272,418,288	96
25	Shell PLC	$2,211,676,001	132
26	Mubadala Investment Company	$2,124,035,097	62
27	Nike	$2,104,917,829	153
28	Meta Platforms Inc.	$2,098,261,272	82
29	Toyota	$2,071,010,689	239
30	Alphabet Inc.	$2,054,325,527	125
31	Brookfield Corporation	$1,979,408,388	288
32	Paramount Global	$1,974,249,897	342
33	Comcast	$1,927,402,844	405
34	Exxon Mobil	$1,917,119,478	241
35	Samsung Electronics	$1,891,136,597	41
36	Apple Inc.	$1,845,004,670	63
37	Nissan	$1,842,814,165	98
38	Berkshire Hathaway	$1,830,986,253	1,200
39	Summit Power	$1,783,593,414	6
40	JPMorgan Chase	$1,740,972,699	1,151
41	Energy Transfer	$1,736,836,843	175
42	Cleveland-Cliffs	$1,705,497,604	129
43	Southern Company	$1,694,958,172	45
44	General Electric	$1,645,135,367	958
45	Vornado Realty Trust	$1,623,857,336	33
46	Duke Energy	$1,580,421,869	86
47	Wolfspeed Inc.	$1,563,595,610	64
48	General Atomics	$1,510,875,891	112
49	IBM Corp.	$1,497,901,697	368
50	Lockheed Martin	$1,462,674,082	325
51	OGE Energy	$1,427,570,182	15
52	SCS Energy	$1,419,011,796	5
53	Corning Inc.	$1,391,603,359	401
54	Panasonic	$1,384,147,584	61
55	Microsoft	$1,366,243,159	113
56	Sagamore Development	$1,320,000,000	2
57	Northrop Grumman	$1,284,014,883	285
58	Vingroup	$1,254,000,000	1
59	Continental AG	$1,244,875,478	111
60	RTX Corporation	$1,193,950,954	797
61	CF Industries	$1,134,394,215	131
62	Valero Energy	$1,053,812,692	207
63	Dow Inc.	$1,049,354,213	640
64	AES Corp.	$1,039,510,135	136
65	Air Products & Chemicals	$1,025,557,482	88
66	Exelon	$986,892,877	98
67	Pyramid Companies	$973,565,278	93
68	SK Holdings	$960,550,283	8
69	SkyWest	$944,296,654	339
70	Centene	$916,607,054	60
71	Mazda Toyota Manufacturing, U.S.A., Inc.	$900,000,000	1
72	Apollo Global Management	$897,750,089	594
73	Delta Air Lines	$871,485,833	13
74	Jefferies Financial Group	$871,137,335	16
75	SK Hynix	$866,700,000	2
76	Bayer	$852,475,226	217
77	Honda	$849,832,301	93
78	Shin-Etsu Chemical	$828,683,936	106
79	Enterprise Products Partners	$826,988,371	89
80	SunEdison	$817,425,725	115
81	Goldman Sachs	$800,873,386	253
82	Bank of America	$798,426,128	956
83	E.ON	$786,865,473	40
84	Warner Bros. Discovery Inc.	$786,835,708	219
85	EDF-Electricite de France	$774,590,441	36
86	Triple Five Worldwide	$748,000,000	4
87	EDP-Energias de Portugal	$733,674,868	14
88	Related Companies	$714,675,504	8
89	Koch Industries	$683,066,388	510
90	Caithness Energy	$672,688,888	30
91	Dell Technologies	$658,417,951	185
92	Wells Fargo	$657,333,216	542
93	FedEx	$647,035,546	633
94	Entergy	$638,533,387	235
95	OCI N.V.	$627,879,406	5
96	Eli Lilly	$623,326,368	79
97	Chevron Phillips Chemical	$619,839,444	20
98	Bedrock Detroit	$618,000,000	1
99	Dominion Energy	$615,436,089	79

You're only 44, hence you're going to have to deal with automation and AI, even more so than me. I'm in my early 50s. By the time you're my age in about 7 or 8 years, about 40% of jobs are going to go the way of the dodo.

​

That’s amazing here I was thinking as a working class individual that 2016-2020 sure was a heck of a lot better off than from 2020-2024……..but yeah Biden Harris care about the working people and Trump doesn’t, got it thanks for clearing that up

 

[Hum Dinger]

Only in the mind of the mindless
What utter victim rhetoric
Poor babies just have all their chances at life snatched away by industrious types who apply themselves . Pearl clutching horror that is for the children

As you fascists say:

"Nobody ever got rich working for a living".

You statement is pure BULLSHIT - and everyone know it.

The hardest working and most productive people are held at the lowest level in business - because they are the ones doing the actual productive work.

Incompetent sycophants are promoted to get them into less harmful managerial positions.

But for the most part business owners and executives are from privileged classes or are members of the many 'Fraternal Orders'.

When business owners or executives actually have to work, they hire administrative assistants to do the real work.

 

[Curried Goats]

What is it that you “leverage”? Would that be the VALUE you PROVIDE? Like wholly crap you just proved that you get paid based on your value. In this great country you can decide you’re not getting paid your value and find a different employee that agrees to your self value assessment.

You morons forget leverage has two sides. Laborers aren't the ones with the majority of it.

 

[Hum Dinger]

And your attitude disgusts me. Why should anyone have the fruits of their labor taken from them to support someone else who refuses to produce. It's the old parable of the ant and grasshopper. Also, humans NEVER produce up to their capacity when the fruits of their labor are seized and given to others.

Yes, you've explained why many workers do not do their best at work - they know that they will not get rewarded by their employers.

The harder they work, the wealthier their employers become.

The fruits of labor are horded by the economically advantaged, not distributed to the people doing the work.

The wealth of generations of Americans trickled up to the wealthiest 1% who shutdown American factories and used the money to create hundreds of years of economic evolution in China in the past 25 years.

They screwed American workers.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

So what are you saying? Clearer this time so that I can understand the point you're trying to make.

That the value of a person is not the same as the value of the work they provide.

 

[Hum Dinger]

I cant speak for conservatives. But in fact Ihave never heard them say any such thing. Maybe you have so be it.

But in fact both parts of that phrase are evil and horrific. Taken together they are a description of universal slavery which isn fact the heart and soul of marxism.

it does not matter which society or era of history you pick. Slavery exists for one reason and one reason only which is to force others to work for the slave owner or owners.

Every human is limited in how much labor they can perform. Therefore slaves are force to labor for others within the limits of their ability " from each according to his ability " .

Then of course every slave is provided with the basic necessities to live. " to each according to his need."


This is how slavery ALWAYS works and not coincidentally how communism would work. It does not matter whether it is one man with a whip extracting your labor or the collective extracting it through government coercion. This is also why people are correcct in saying marxism goes against human nature.

When you extract peoples labor by force they produce as LITTLE as possible. which means you never get greater abundance as you claimed. You get less for every one. This is why every communist nation exists in poverty while capitalist nations thrive

It is still slavery and the worst form of evil

Convincing the American People that 'Freedom' means being a slave to your boss or being homeless was the greatest scam in human history.

The punishment for refusing to be obedient isn't being whipped, it's being homeless.

It's the business owners, executives and trust fund babies that do no productive work and are just parasites on the working class.

 

[Tyrion234]

You do sound like a loser. Does it keep you up at night worrying about losing. Equity does not keep the best down because it is not about being the best. Best is just a word. It is about understanding that all men and women are created equal.

But you believe your better than everyone else that why you will do anything to win even cheat.

Hmmmm when I go the doctor I sure as hell want the best one…….I’m not going to knock on my neighbors door and ask them for a liver transplant that would just be stupid, kinda like you

 

[Hum Dinger]

LOL - that's not force. You can tell your employer to piss off whenever you want. You might be broke, but you won't get arrested and go to jail.

What we're talking about is the "from each according to his ability" portion of your slogan. When the state decides that your "ability" is cleaning sewers, but you don't want to do that - should they force you to be "productive" anyway? Is that really how you want things to work?

In the U.S., homelessness and starvation are the punishments for non-conformity.

Unless mammy and daddy will take you in.

 

[Curried Goats]

That the value of a person is not the same as the value of the work they provide.

You mean like the value they provide to their loved ones or something?

 

[Hum Dinger]

Most wealthy in the USA are NOT born wealthy. The average millionaire drives a Ford F-150 and wear work shirts.

Millionaires are middle-class in the U.S. nowadays. This isn't 1960 anymore.

The very wealthy MEGA-Millionaires and Billionaires either start with inheritance or make their money through the financial industry or like your orange god - real estate.

 

[Tyrion234]

Your argument fundamentally misunderstands the dynamics of capitalism and labor exploitation. Let's break down why the exploitation of workers by capitalist employers is inherently different from any perceived exploitation by workers.

In a capitalist system, the employer owns the means of production—factories, machinery, technology, and capital. The workers, lacking these resources, are compelled to sell their labor power to survive. This labor power is rented by the employer at the lowest possible wage to maximize profit. The products of the worker's labor—created using their time, energy, and skills—belong to the employer, who then sells these products for profit. This is the essence of exploitation: the surplus value generated by the workers' labor is appropriated by the employer.

On the other hand, workers are not exploiting the employer; they are simply trading their labor for compensation. This is often done under conditions that are heavily skewed in favor of the employer, who holds more power and resources. The notion that workers exploit employers is a distortion of reality, as workers do not gain wealth or capital from this arrangement—they more often than not, merely earn a subsistence wage to cover their basic needs. Today millions of Americans are working two full-time jobs just to stay afloat, and pay their bills.

Your claim that capitalism is based on free trade ignores the inherent power imbalances. The so-called "free trade" is only free for those who own capital; for workers, it is a forced trade born out of necessity (WORK OR DIE! - Wealthy employers rely on other people's labor to live, while they amass capital without lifting a finger). When workers don't earn sufficient wages, they can't participate as consumers in the marketplace, which is why wage labor is central to the functioning of capitalism. Without wage-labor capitalists cease to exist, along with capitalism.

As for automation and AI, your argument fails to account for the transformative impact these technologies will have on labor and production. Advanced automation and AI will render many traditional jobs obsolete, significantly reducing the need for human labor in production processes. When wage labor diminishes, the market for consumers shrinks because people no longer have incomes to spend. This results in economic contraction and increased social unrest as masses of unemployed workers face poverty and hardship.

Never in capitalism's history or even human history, have we had the advanced automation and autonomous, intelligent machinery that we have today. So saying that in the past technology advanced and jobs still remained intact, fails to account for the unique level of autonomy that technology has today, no longer needing a human being to operate it, as always was the case before.

The argument that automation will create new jobs and replace the millions of jobs lost is also false. Yes, advanced automation, robotics, and AI may indeed create new jobs and industries, but they won't replace all or even most of the jobs lost. This will leave tens of millions of people unemployed. Most people will be rendered jobless, without wages or income. This is why socialism is needed.

The idea that socialism will become obsolete with automation is paradoxical. In fact, the opposite is true. As production becomes increasingly automated, the traditional capitalist model, which relies on wage labor, becomes unsustainable. Without wages, there are no consumers to drive demand, leading to market collapse. This necessitates a shift towards a system where the means of production—and the wealth generated by automation—are collectively owned and managed to ensure equitable distribution of resources.

Universal Basic Income (UBI) is being considered by some capitalists as a stopgap measure to address the inevitable fallout from mass unemployment due to automation. However, UBI alone does not address the fundamental issues of power and resource distribution inherent in capitalism. It is merely a band-aid on a system that is failing to adapt to technological advancements.

Your false dichotomy of "capitalism or poverty" ignores the historical progression of economic systems. Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, socialism can and will replace capitalism when it becomes necessary to address the shortcomings of the latter. Socialism, with its focus on collective ownership and democratic control of the means of production, offers a viable alternative that can ensure everyone benefits from the advancements in technology.

Regarding the pictures and sci-fi images of space colonies and sea colonies, they are meant to illustrate the different options people will have in the future when automation replaces wage labor and produces all the consumer goods we rely on. We will live in cities that are cybernetically connected and automated.

In summary, your argument overlooks the inherent exploitation in capitalism, the impending crisis due to automation, and the necessity of transitioning to a more equitable economic system. Socialism is not just a theoretical alternative; it is an inevitable progression as we face the limitations and failings of capitalism in the age of automation. No wages mean no capitalism. When human labor is no longer needed for production, we must adopt a system that ensures the welfare of all, not just the wealthy elite.

That’s a very long winded way of saying “give me stuff for doing nothing cause if I do nothing I won’t have stuff” lmao

 

[Tyrion234]

The key to understanding the MAGA cult, is that they are Mussolini fascists.

Mussolini was anti-Liberal, Anti-Progressive & Anti-Socialist. His goal was to preserve the Feudal Socio-economic order that had been left after the King of Italy abdicated.

The majority of the people elected to the new Italian Parliament were liberals, progressives and Socialists who had started making major changes to the existing feudal socio-economic order.

Mussolini convinced Italian WWI vets that changing the feudal socio-economic order was Anti-Italian and used them to overthrow the Democratically elected government.

The same thing happened in Spain with Franco - Franco succeeded. Spain remained an economic & cultural shit hole until Franco died 40 years later.

Now the MAGA movement is trying to permanently instantiate a rigid socio-economic order whereby everyone's status is determined by their birth right instead of by personal achievement.

The wealthy are born wealthy, and they deserve to be wealthy for that reason. The poor are born poor, and they deserve to be poor for the same.

We are a very, very long way from being a country where either equality or equity are a reality. But those are goals that every American should believe in. The goals of the fascist MAGA movement are antithetical to American values.

The MAGA cult is trying to stop personal achievement from determining people's status in life- they've mostly been born into a privileged class - they desperately want to keep the socio-economic status the way it is or return things to the way they were.

I bolted the part that proves against the point you’re trying to make. Someone’s born so they should be just as wealthy as someone else born? Not at all. My kids have me for a father, they did not choose me I chose them, should my kids be given the same exact things in life as bill Gates children? In theory sure why not but no that doesn’t and wouldn’t work, we already have millions on social programs pumping out kids that can’t afford to have kids because don’t worry Uncle Sam will take care of them and no no no don’t get a job or be a productive member of society you have too many children for that. That makes sense to you?

 

[Hum Dinger]

Wrong.

You and only you ensured you live pay check to pay check.

You produced less than you were being paid bvy definition,

You don't know what you talking about. The real productive value of work that I've done was worth many millions of dollars while I was being paid a whopping $24k.

Employers always asked how much money I was making at my previous job, and what my circumstances were so that they could calculate my financial status and only offer me the lowest salary they thought I'd be willing to accept - based on my financial desperation.

There was no relation between the value of the work that they demanded of me and what they were paying me.

Fortunately, in Connecticut it is illegal for employers to ask potential employees what their current salary is.

 

[0311]

Politicians don't actually believe in equal outcomes. Lip service for the rubes.

More like watch for Marxist Mouth Pieces like Steve Bannon, he is an admitted Marxist.

 

[dblack]

In the U.S., homelessness and starvation are the punishments for non-conformity.

Unless mammy and daddy will take you in.

Yep. If you go your own way, you have to figure how to feed yourself. That's the "down" side of freedom I guess. But it beats the gulags.

 

[Tyrion234]

I have been forced to be productive since 1975. I need a place to live, food to eat, to support a family and make sure that my children have opportunity.

However, my ability to have any capitalist initiative was destroyed by the extremely low pay when I was young. My employers made sure that I lived paycheck to paycheck - despite the fact that I produced far more than I was being paid. They got wealthy from my hard work, intelligence and naive good will.

That's what capitalism has become - the economically advantaged taking advantage of the economically disadvantaged.

This sounds more like frivolous spending and remorse for such when you were young. If I had been better with every dollar I earned and didn’t spend wastefully when I was younger I would be much better off today as would my children. Don’t blame employers for not paying you enough when you were younger blame YOURSELF for not being more intelligent with your income when you were younger

 

[Hum Dinger]

I bolted the part that proves against the point you’re trying to make. Someone’s born so they should be just as wealthy as someone else born? Not at all. My kids have me for a father, they did not choose me I chose them, should my kids be given the same exact things in life as bill Gates children? In theory sure why not but no that doesn’t and wouldn’t work, we already have millions on social programs pumping out kids that can’t afford to have kids because don’t worry Uncle Sam will take care of them and no no no don’t get a job or be a productive member of society you have too many children for that. That makes sense to you?

I don't think anything you say makes sense to anybody.

There is no valid reason why some children should have greater opportunity than others. If they deserve to be wealthy let them earn it.

I live in the U.S., so I conform to that reality. I have made sure that my sons are advantaged in every way - but I also demanded that they earn it academically, and that they chose professions that contribute to society.

People who do not have dedicated parents deserve everything my sons received as long as they also earn it.

And those who can not achieve academically deserve to make a living wage and have economic opportunity as long as they are willing to be productive - according to their abilities.