This is why we need to tax the wealthy

[pknopp]

So you’re quoting the New Testament to a Jewish woman? Get a clue.

Are you really going to play into this negative Jewish stereotype?

 

[Lisa558]

Are you really going to play into this negative Jewish stereotype?

What negative Jewish stereotype? That Jews don’t abide by the New Testament? That’s not a negative.

What‘s insensitive is your quoting what Jesus said to a Jew.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Frankly, your posts are entirely too long and convoluted to bother responding to every point.

You're just unable to refute my points, hence you ignore them.

I already have refuted them.

If anyone is "convoluted" and ignorant it's you.

1.) I didn't say YOU are convoluted, I said your posts are.

2.) I never said you were ignorant.

Rest assured I read all your points but was not compelled to comment on every one.

You're reading everything I write and yet find practically nothing that compels you to respond to it? Everything is "convoluted"? Only an idiot would continue reading everything I write yet considers my points not worth responding to or "convoluted".

You're trying like hell to make this unpleasant, aren't you?

Yes. That's how it works.

Unlike you, I do respond to all of your points, regardless of how imbecilic they are, but I do it for the sake of others, not you.

That remark was not about this.

My comment was in response to your remark: "Yes, they're purchasing your labor power, or essentially you, for a day or whatever."

I'm not sure what your point is here. It sounds like you're advocating for unions but we already have unions.

I advocate for the government's protection of labor unions, which is constantly being challenged by capitalists.

You do understand that unions are some of the richest and most powerful entities in this country, right?

You're the one who brought up automation, not me.

Right? Why did you assume I was against them?

Because you said this: "What is the working class and capitalism in general, going to do when advanced automation eliminates waged work?"

You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

Pot, meet kettle.

Stop making shit up about how I view things. I haven't tried to "worm" out of admitting anything.

All you do is worm in defense of capitalism.

And you worm in defense of socialism. So?

If you mean I sound like someone who supports capitalism as an economic system then, yes, I am a capitalist. I'm also an upper middle class worker. The two are not mutually exclusive you know.

You're not a capitalist unless you have a business,

From Merriam-Webster:
1: a person who has capital especially invested in business
industrial capitalists
broadly : a person of wealth : PLUTOCRAT
Charitable organizations often seek help from capitalists.
2: a person who favors capitalism

and the type of capitalists who I criticize the most are those who abusively exploit others. I already identified who you are. You're one of these working-class managers who thinks he's essentially superior to his co-workers, hence identifies himself with the capitalist class, rather than with his own socioeconomic class. You're a capitalist bootlicker.

I think my coworkers would disagree with you.

Did I or did I not say that if a group of people wanted to start and run a business together then have at it? When did I even imply that I'm against it?

You ignore the fact that the banks and SBA don't support worker-cooperative startups even though all of the data shows them to be even more likely to succeed and generate a profit than a normal business.

Irrelevant. I never said or implied I was against it.

This is getting tedious. You're not paying attention at all to what I say.

I definitely pay attention to the stupid shit that you say, but I do it for the sake of others because I realize you're brain-dead.

Do you always get this pissy when people merely disagree with you?

So you want to make something that is currently unconstitutional - in that it would involve the government usurping rights - and just let the government change the Constitution allowing them to usurp rights?

The community determines what is in our constitution. The Constitution was designed by the founding fathers to be amended or changed to meet the needs of the nation. Our rights and government policies are based on what the community or country decides.

The overall founding principle of the Constitution was to preserve the inherent rights of the people and protect these rights from the government. It would be unconstitutional to amend the Constitution in a way that allows the government to infringe on any right.

People suffer as much as they choose to.

Much suffering is caused by injustice. It's not always the person's fault.

Being unhappy with your job is hardly injustice.

Neither companies nor the government are obligated to compensate you for your life choices; where you work, how much pay you choose to accept, spending habits, where you choose to live, etc.

Depending on what the community decides, the government can indeed prevent powerful, wealthy employers from engaging in abusive, exploitative practices or violating the rights of workers. One of the ways that it does that is by protecting workers in their efforts to form unions, not allowing their employers to harrass or fire them for unionizing.

Irrelevant. The fact remains that neither companies nor the government are obligated to compensate you for your life choices.

For example, if you are unhappy with your pay, it may be that your spending habits are the real problem. And if you choose to remain with your current employer in spite of this, well, that's your choice.

You can cry all you want, but who cares.

What exactly am I crying about?

Cry, the workers will unionize and collectively bargain and advance their interests despite of you.

So unionize, I don't give a shit. That, too, is your choice and has no bearing on me.

If I didn't trust my employer I would look for another job. I don't know how such a simple concept escapes your understanding.

Whenever your employer abuses you, you leave the job and find another employer. That's dumb because, with your stupid attitude, every employer will be emboldened to abuse their employees, knowing that all that will happen is that the worker will leave, without any negative consequences for the wealthy, powerful employer.

Wrong. Most companies abhor a high employee turnover rate because the hiring process can be costly. Many companies look for and hire HR people with an eye towards reducing that very thing.

Workers have the right to unionize and protect their rights against employers who mistreat them, including the right to bargain their terms of employment collectively as a group. If you don't like that, who cares? You can remain the idiot who refuses to join the union. It's a fact that non-union workers earn less and have fewer benefits than union members. Continue being a dummy if you wish.

Where did I say anything against unions?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I expect the government to meet its obligations, which are to protect our rights and yes, provide services. Unlike you, I work and pay my taxes and the government uses its resources to develop infrastructure and resources for its citizens, that's why we created the government in the first place. Duh.

"Unlike you"? Where did you get the idea I don't pay taxes?

 

[TruthNotBS]

hahaha…your “argument” is ‘give me free shit’. Nobody legitimate sees such a thing as a valid request…we all know ONLY unAmerican bottom feeding degenerate beggars make such requests. Your argument is sad.

You're just being silly and pathetic with your criticism. If you're going to critique my position, don't resort to infantile strawman accusations and arguments. I never once suggested that people receive "Free Handouts".

I as a socialist, aren't even against the government helping companies that are in trouble, especially when they create jobs and are offering the community an important product or service.

I don't rely on the so-called "invisible hand of the free market", because I don't believe that exists. The so-called "invisible hand" is what I identify as the "chaos of the market", which, unlike the Austrian economists, I see as a source of instability, undermining important social institutions like the family and hence national security. You can't just allow an important industry in your country to collapse, because the "invisible hand" has judged that a new disruptive technology must take over, and "barabing", the market is supposed to instantly adjust lockstep with this invisible hand. It doesn't instantly adjust, it collapses, hence you need the government to assist with the transition.

These Austrian, Libertarian economists, like Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, "The Chicago Boys" - Sergio de Castro, they'll watch the economy collapse and the country go into a serious crisis before they allow a government to intervene.

The billionaires are now talking about a so-called "Universal Basic Income" i.e. UBI. Why? Billionaire capitalists are trying to convince the government to hand everyone a free-check, due to advanced technology replacing jobs. They see the writing on the wall.

​

Billionaires, the crème de la crème of the capitalist class, see the writing on the wall if something isn't done to address the unemployment problem which is inevitably going to hit the economy. The only way to create paying customers now is through wages, pensions, and welfare. If a person is on a pension or on welfare, they're likely not producing or earning a wage.

Those who earn wages are producing something, and if intelligent robots begin to produce everything that the paying consumer buys, that's the end of the capitalist, market economy. The billionaires don't want this to happen, so they're now "compassionate capitalists", advancing the idea of a government UBI, which is essentially a monthly government bailout for the wealthy ruling elites. The creation of an artificial market, sustained by a monthly government check, to people who aren't producing anything, because they're out of a job, that pays a wage. Once production becomes advanced enough, there's no more need for wages, customers or markets.

So what do we do, as a society? How do we "fix" this? Here are the options:

1. Techno Feudalism

The capitalists of today (i.e. the owner, employer class) the wealthy ruling elites, possess the capital to own the expensive, intelligent robots, AI super-computers, financial institutions, mines, processing plants, factories, fleets of cargo trucks, warehouses, storefronts/retail outlets..etc. They own most, if not all of the infrastructure of production or as we socialists say the "means of production".

The working class, which I and most of you are part of, owns its labor power. That's what we really own as workers and that's what we sell to the aforementioned socioeconomic class (the capitalist-employer class). We sell ourselves, our skills, time, presence, our energy, for eight, ten, and twelve hours daily, to the capitalists. That's how products and services are produced for, and delivered to, the marketplace. Human wage-labor produces everything that we purchase with our wages and consume.

If advanced, intelligent automation, replaces most of us, let's say the capitalists only need at best to hire one or two of us to do a job, rather than ten or twenty of us as they did before. What happens to the market that relies mostly on wages, for customers to purchase the products and services that are produced through wage-labor? The market collapses. This is why billionaires are now trying to reform capitalism or restructure it, by advancing the idea that we need a perpetual, massive government intervention in the form of a UBI.

What will this new "compassionate" capitalism create? Modern feudalism. What I call techno-feudalism. The tech-lords, the owners of all of the aforementioned assets of production, will continue to produce their goods and services and people will be gradually consigned to the compost heap, through poverty, crime, drugs, war, and pandemics. etc. Watch the movie Elysium, it will be something akin to that:

ELYSIUM - Official Trailer (HD)

Release Date: 9 August 2013 (United States)In the year 2154, two classes of people exist: the very wealthy, who live on a pristine man-made space station cal...

www.youtube.com

​

The current wealthy, employer class will live in beautiful, well-provisioned, high-tech and secured gated communities, with all of the amenities. They will have their intelligent robots and a few serfs of the former "working-class" (who used to live on wages), serving them. You can only imagine the different tasks that the new serf or slave class will do for them. Everything from being a butler and a landscaper working alongside intelligent robots, to sex work.

Most of the people who were of the working class, who used to work for a wage under capitalism, will be poor and struggling to survive, with their government "UBIs", and only a small lucky few (If we can call them "lucky") will have the privilege of living and working for the new ruling class, in their gated communities. While that is happening in the open, behind closed doors the wealthy ruling elites will be planning how to reduce the world's population because they are the "chosen ones", the fittest, in the human struggle for survival. People live, survive, and thrive and others die. Indifferent, highly selective, compassionate-free, cold Darwinian natural selection.

You and your progeny (including myself and my family) will probably be on the wrong side of the gate, or at best they will end up as serf-slaves of the wealthy elites. The great irony of all of this is that the rich capitalist employer class of today, who hate socialism, abhor communism, will become the communists of the future. Their gated communities are essentially communes or oases full of resources and advanced technology. They don't need markets anymore, or to produce anything for a profit (capitalism is no longer relevant, it's obsolete and the old way of producing things). Their technology produces everything that they consume and they live in a high-tech commune, with an administration or government, that is democratic, for them. A democracy for them.

2. Democratic Socialism/High-Communism.

The alternative to techno-feudalism is democratic socialism. Socialism is the earliest stage of high-communism, or the process that leads production to high-communism. Socialism can have capitalist markets and capitalists profiting from their products and services, but, the economy moves gradually, through central government planning, towards the working class owning the means of production. The means of production, are the intelligent robots, the super-computers running artificial intelligence, the financial institutions, the mines, processing plants, cargo trucks, regional product distribution centers/warehouses, local branch store-outlets..etc.

It's all in the hands of the working class (It's in everyone's hands, owned collectively), managed through a democratic government that is accountable to the people, through an electoral process. We all own the intelligent robots and artificial intelligence, all of the aforementioned productive assets together. You and I, our loves ones and friends, we all own it together. We're not serfs or slaves, under the heel of a ruling, wealthy elite.

High-Communism according to Karl Marx is a society without a state (or with a small state), no socioeconomic classes, or the need for money. Human beings were once tribalistic, living in small hunter-gatherer tribes, that organized their labor in a primitive communist mode of production. Marx calls it "primitive communism":

​

That was the mode of production for tens of thousands of years, until the advent of agriculture in the Neolithic age.

​

With the arrival of advanced automation and artificial intelligence, we will by necessity return to a more advanced, more democratic, form of communism. Marx called it "High-Communism", which relies on advanced technology. The state becomes small, and there aren't any more socioeconomic classes or the need for money (a medium of market exchange). How is this possible? Isn't this pie-in-the-sky bullshit? No, let me show you how it works.

Technology will eventually in the future, become so advanced, that the individual consumer will practically have complete control over the means of production. That means that you and I the individual consumer, will be able to draw water from the air (Some machines do that now). We will create food by manipulating matter using nanotechnology. We will produce clothing and electronics, everything that we use and consume, with atomic precision manufacturing machines. We will have safe, clean micronuclear plants at home or on our RVs, sea vessels, and spacecraft.etc, generating electricity through nuclear fission or fusion.

High-Communism is when the state or government becomes superfluous. Most crime is committed due to the scarcity of material goods, and lack of access to resources. When everyone is living in extreme abundance, due to advanced technology, crime almost disappears. There will still be crime, but it will be much less than it is now. Committing a crime will seem stupid, to people living in such abundance and liberty. Marx calls this "High-Communism":

" Communism (from Latin communis, 'common, universal')[1][2] is a left-wing to far-left sociopolitical, philosophical, and economic ideology within the socialist movement,[1] whose goal is the creation of a communist society, a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in the society based on need.[3][4][5] A communist society would entail the absence of private property and social classes,[1] and ultimately money[6] and the state (or nation state).[7][8][9] "

Communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Private property isn't personal property, it's specifically property that is used to profit monetarily, usually through the exploitation of other human beings. It's a property that can be used to exploit others. Your house, car, computer, gun collection, toothbrush, Fruit Of The Looms, all of that is your personal property. It's not private property. Whoever told you that in socialism or communism, there is no such thing as personal property, was misleading you. He or she was probably ignorant and didn't know any better

Advanced technology empowers the individual consumer to the point that they don't need a state or big government micromanaging anything of their lives and all human adult interactions and relationships become practically always voluntary.

You can live as a high-tech nomad or on an asteroid by yourself or with your family and friends, drawing resources from the asteroids, and manufacturing everything with your high-tech, smart robots and nanotechnology. If a government is overbearing, trying to violate your rights and freedoms, you pack up and go. How do we get to that arrangement, where the individual consumer has that much power?

The means to get there is called "democratic socialism". If we go the techno-feudalism route, only a few people who are now wealthy, and of the capitalist, employer class will become the high-tech communists of the future and you and I, our children will be consigned to the compost heap. The world will be depopulated and only the rich and powerful, those who are of the current, capitalist ruling elites will own everything and become eventually the high-tech communists, in their gated communities. etc. Do you now understand the predicament that we are in as working-class people in the 21st century?

As working-class people, we need to move now towards democratic socialism, a mixed economy, with some capitalism and socialism, working together, until technology warrants further movement towards a marketless economy and high communism. It might take 50 years, maybe even 100 years or more before we reach high communism, but we need to begin moving in that direction because to do otherwise is techno-feudalism and extinction for most people. Do you get it now? Did the lightbulb flash?

 

[TruthNotBS]

I already have refuted them.


1.) I didn't say YOU are convoluted, I said your posts are.

2.) I never said you were ignorant.


You're trying like hell to make this unpleasant, aren't you?


That remark was not about this.

My comment was in response to your remark: "Yes, they're purchasing your labor power, or essentially you, for a day or whatever."


You do understand that unions are some of the richest and most powerful entities in this country, right?


Because you said this: "What is the working class and capitalism in general, going to do when advanced automation eliminates waged work?"


Pot, meet kettle.


And you worm in defense of socialism. So?


From Merriam-Webster:
1: a person who has capital especially invested in business
industrial capitalists
broadly : a person of wealth : PLUTOCRAT
Charitable organizations often seek help from capitalists.
2: a person who favors capitalism


I think my coworkers would disagree with you.


Irrelevant. I never said or implied I was against it.


Do you always get this pissy when people merely disagree with you?


The overall founding principle of the Constitution was to preserve the inherent rights of the people and protect these rights from the government. It would be unconstitutional to amend the Constitution in a way that allows the government to infringe on any right.




Being unhappy with your job is hardly injustice.


Irrelevant. The fact remains that neither companies nor the government are obligated to compensate you for your life choices.

For example, if you are unhappy with your pay, it may be that your spending habits are the real problem. And if you choose to remain with your current employer in spite of this, well, that's your choice.


What exactly am I crying about?


So unionize, I don't give a shit. That, too, is your choice and has no bearing on me.


Wrong. Most companies abhor a high employee turnover rate because the hiring process can be costly. Many companies look for and hire HR people with an eye towards reducing that very thing.

Where did I say anything against unions?

I already have refuted them.

Only in your dreams.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Thats exactly how it worked before FDR screwed it up. North American designed the Mustang and the B-25 on its own dime. Lockheed designed the P-38 on its own dime. Boeing designed the B-15 and B-17 on its own dime. Consolidated designed both the PBY Catalina and the B-24 on its own dime. Grumman designed the Wildcat, Hellcat, Bearcat and Avenger on its own dime.

After the billion-dollar reaming Northrop got on the F-20 Tigershark, no company will EVER take that kind of risk again.

lol right Trump bears no responsibility whatsoever because of course

The main things he did wrong were believing a word anyone in Beijing said, and not shit-canning Fauci on day one.

Would you please stop with posts that go on and on and on! It's annoying as hell. Nobody else on this board needs to spam the nonsense that you do. Do you not recognize that?

He certainly can't dazzle with brilliance...so he baffles with bullshit by filibabbling.

You can always ignore me, just click on my profile image and "click" ignore. That's the way to not see your arguments torn to pieces, making you feel better.

You're a legend in your own mind. Having nothing intelligent to add, you instead filibuster.

 

[TruthNotBS]

After the billion-dollar reaming Northrop got on the F-20 Tigershark, no company will EVER take that kind of risk again.



The main things he did wrong were believing a word anyone in Beijing said, and not shit-canning Fauci on day one.



He certainly can't dazzle with brilliance...so he baffles with bullshit by filibabbling.



You're a legend in your own mind. Having nothing intelligent to add, you instead filibuster.

Just ignore me then. Just click on my profile picture and click "ignore", otherwise you're an idiot for allowing me to waste another pixel on your monitor or a second of your time. I don't write for you anyways, I never did. Remain in your ignorance.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Just ignore me then. Just click on my profile picture and click "ignore", otherwise you're an idiot for allowing me to waste another pixel on your monitor or a second of your time. I don't write for you anyways, I never did. Remain in your ignorance.

I accept your concession.

 

[TruthNotBS]

I accept your concession.

Only in your dreams.

 

[francoHFW]

Maybe you should voice your complaints to the leftist leaders of colleges to start running a tight ship and stop paying their tenured professors 800k/yr, in the case of Gay at Harvard.

She was president of the university duhh and was ambushed by philistine scumbags...

 

[Jarlaxle]

She was president of the university duhh and was ambushed by philistine scumbags...

She is a plagiarist, you drooling idiot!

 

[francoHFW]

She is a plagiarist, you drooling idiot!

Not your point before. Mine stands.

 

[Mac-7]

She was president of the university duhh and was ambushed by philistine scumbags...

She got canned by the same liberal academics that appointed her in the first place

So blaming outsiders does not add up

 

[BrokeLoser]

You're just being silly and pathetic with your criticism. If you're going to critique my position, don't resort to infantile strawman accusations and arguments. I never once suggested that people receive "Free Handouts".

I as a socialist, aren't even against the government helping companies that are in trouble, especially when they create jobs and are offering the community an important product or service.

I don't rely on the so-called "invisible hand of the free market", because I don't believe that exists. The so-called "invisible hand" is what I identify as the "chaos of the market", which, unlike the Austrian economists, I see as a source of instability, undermining important social institutions like the family and hence national security. You can't just allow an important industry in your country to collapse, because the "invisible hand" has judged that a new disruptive technology must take over, and "barabing", the market is supposed to instantly adjust lockstep with this invisible hand. It doesn't instantly adjust, it collapses, hence you need the government to assist with the transition.

These Austrian, Libertarian economists, like Milton Friedman, Ludwig Von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, "The Chicago Boys" - Sergio de Castro, they'll watch the economy collapse and the country go into a serious crisis before they allow a government to intervene.

The billionaires are now talking about a so-called "Universal Basic Income" i.e. UBI. Why? Billionaire capitalists are trying to convince the government to hand everyone a free-check, due to advanced technology replacing jobs. They see the writing on the wall.

​

Billionaires, the crème de la crème of the capitalist class, see the writing on the wall if something isn't done to address the unemployment problem which is inevitably going to hit the economy. The only way to create paying customers now is through wages, pensions, and welfare. If a person is on a pension or on welfare, they're likely not producing or earning a wage.

Those who earn wages are producing something, and if intelligent robots begin to produce everything that the paying consumer buys, that's the end of the capitalist, market economy. The billionaires don't want this to happen, so they're now "compassionate capitalists", advancing the idea of a government UBI, which is essentially a monthly government bailout for the wealthy ruling elites. The creation of an artificial market, sustained by a monthly government check, to people who aren't producing anything, because they're out of a job, that pays a wage. Once production becomes advanced enough, there's no more need for wages, customers or markets.

So what do we do, as a society? How do we "fix" this? Here are the options:

1. Techno Feudalism

The capitalists of today (i.e. the owner, employer class) the wealthy ruling elites, possess the capital to own the expensive, intelligent robots, AI super-computers, financial institutions, mines, processing plants, factories, fleets of cargo trucks, warehouses, storefronts/retail outlets..etc. They own most, if not all of the infrastructure of production or as we socialists say the "means of production".

The working class, which I and most of you are part of, owns its labor power. That's what we really own as workers and that's what we sell to the aforementioned socioeconomic class (the capitalist-employer class). We sell ourselves, our skills, time, presence, our energy, for eight, ten, and twelve hours daily, to the capitalists. That's how products and services are produced for, and delivered to, the marketplace. Human wage-labor produces everything that we purchase with our wages and consume.

If advanced, intelligent automation, replaces most of us, let's say the capitalists only need at best to hire one or two of us to do a job, rather than ten or twenty of us as they did before. What happens to the market that relies mostly on wages, for customers to purchase the products and services that are produced through wage-labor? The market collapses. This is why billionaires are now trying to reform capitalism or restructure it, by advancing the idea that we need a perpetual, massive government intervention in the form of a UBI.

What will this new "compassionate" capitalism create? Modern feudalism. What I call techno-feudalism. The tech-lords, the owners of all of the aforementioned assets of production, will continue to produce their goods and services and people will be gradually consigned to the compost heap, through poverty, crime, drugs, war, and pandemics. etc. Watch the movie Elysium, it will be something akin to that:

ELYSIUM - Official Trailer (HD)

Release Date: 9 August 2013 (United States)In the year 2154, two classes of people exist: the very wealthy, who live on a pristine man-made space station cal...

www.youtube.com

​

The current wealthy, employer class will live in beautiful, well-provisioned, high-tech and secured gated communities, with all of the amenities. They will have their intelligent robots and a few serfs of the former "working-class" (who used to live on wages), serving them. You can only imagine the different tasks that the new serf or slave class will do for them. Everything from being a butler and a landscaper working alongside intelligent robots, to sex work.

Most of the people who were of the working class, who used to work for a wage under capitalism, will be poor and struggling to survive, with their government "UBIs", and only a small lucky few (If we can call them "lucky") will have the privilege of living and working for the new ruling class, in their gated communities. While that is happening in the open, behind closed doors the wealthy ruling elites will be planning how to reduce the world's population because they are the "chosen ones", the fittest, in the human struggle for survival. People live, survive, and thrive and others die. Indifferent, highly selective, compassionate-free, cold Darwinian natural selection.

You and your progeny (including myself and my family) will probably be on the wrong side of the gate, or at best they will end up as serf-slaves of the wealthy elites. The great irony of all of this is that the rich capitalist employer class of today, who hate socialism, abhor communism, will become the communists of the future. Their gated communities are essentially communes or oases full of resources and advanced technology. They don't need markets anymore, or to produce anything for a profit (capitalism is no longer relevant, it's obsolete and the old way of producing things). Their technology produces everything that they consume and they live in a high-tech commune, with an administration or government, that is democratic, for them. A democracy for them.

2. Democratic Socialism/High-Communism.

The alternative to techno-feudalism is democratic socialism. Socialism is the earliest stage of high-communism, or the process that leads production to high-communism. Socialism can have capitalist markets and capitalists profiting from their products and services, but, the economy moves gradually, through central government planning, towards the working class owning the means of production. The means of production, are the intelligent robots, the super-computers running artificial intelligence, the financial institutions, the mines, processing plants, cargo trucks, regional product distribution centers/warehouses, local branch store-outlets..etc.

It's all in the hands of the working class (It's in everyone's hands, owned collectively), managed through a democratic government that is accountable to the people, through an electoral process. We all own the intelligent robots and artificial intelligence, all of the aforementioned productive assets together. You and I, our loves ones and friends, we all own it together. We're not serfs or slaves, under the heel of a ruling, wealthy elite.

High-Communism according to Karl Marx is a society without a state (or with a small state), no socioeconomic classes, or the need for money. Human beings were once tribalistic, living in small hunter-gatherer tribes, that organized their labor in a primitive communist mode of production. Marx calls it "primitive communism":

View attachment 889149

View attachment 889159

View attachment 889150

View attachment 889152

View attachment 889155​

That was the mode of production for tens of thousands of years, until the advent of agriculture in the Neolithic age.

View attachment 889160​

With the arrival of advanced automation and artificial intelligence, we will by necessity return to a more advanced, more democratic, form of communism. Marx called it "High-Communism", which relies on advanced technology. The state becomes small, and there aren't any more socioeconomic classes or the need for money (a medium of market exchange). How is this possible? Isn't this pie-in-the-sky bullshit? No, let me show you how it works.

Technology will eventually in the future, become so advanced, that the individual consumer will practically have complete control over the means of production. That means that you and I the individual consumer, will be able to draw water from the air (Some machines do that now). We will create food by manipulating matter using nanotechnology. We will produce clothing and electronics, everything that we use and consume, with atomic precision manufacturing machines. We will have safe, clean micronuclear plants at home or on our RVs, sea vessels, and spacecraft.etc, generating electricity through nuclear fission or fusion.

High-Communism is when the state or government becomes superfluous. Most crime is committed due to the scarcity of material goods, and lack of access to resources. When everyone is living in extreme abundance, due to advanced technology, crime almost disappears. There will still be crime, but it will be much less than it is now. Committing a crime will seem stupid, to people living in such abundance and liberty. Marx calls this "High-Communism":

" Communism (from Latin communis, 'common, universal')[1][2] is a left-wing to far-left sociopolitical, philosophical, and economic ideology within the socialist movement,[1] whose goal is the creation of a communist society, a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in the society based on need.[3][4][5] A communist society would entail the absence of private property and social classes,[1] and ultimately money[6] and the state (or nation state).[7][8][9] "

Communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Private property isn't personal property, it's specifically property that is used to profit monetarily, usually through the exploitation of other human beings. It's a property that can be used to exploit others. Your house, car, computer, gun collection, toothbrush, Fruit Of The Looms, all of that is your personal property. It's not private property. Whoever told you that in socialism or communism, there is no such thing as personal property, was misleading you. He or she was probably ignorant and didn't know any better

Advanced technology empowers the individual consumer to the point that they don't need a state or big government micromanaging anything of their lives and all human adult interactions and relationships become practically always voluntary.

View attachment 889172

View attachment 889174​

You can live as a high-tech nomad or on an asteroid by yourself or with your family and friends, drawing resources from the asteroids, and manufacturing everything with your high-tech, smart robots and nanotechnology. If a government is overbearing, trying to violate your rights and freedoms, you pack up and go. How do we get to that arrangement, where the individual consumer has that much power?

The means to get there is called "democratic socialism". If we go the techno-feudalism route, only a few people who are now wealthy, and of the capitalist, employer class will become the high-tech communists of the future and you and I, our children will be consigned to the compost heap. The world will be depopulated and only the rich and powerful, those who are of the current, capitalist ruling elites will own everything and become eventually the high-tech communists, in their gated communities. etc. Do you now understand the predicament that we are in as working-class people in the 21st century?

As working-class people, we need to move now towards democratic socialism, a mixed economy, with some capitalism and socialism, working together, until technology warrants further movement towards a marketless economy and high communism. It might take 50 years, maybe even 100 years or more before we reach high communism, but we need to begin moving in that direction because to do otherwise is techno-feudalism and extinction for most people. Do you get it now? Did the lightbulb flash?

View attachment 889176

View attachment 889177


View attachment 889179

View attachment 889180

View attachment 889181​

Dude, you have lost all your shit. Could you imagine if early settlers were socialist beggars like you? Could you imagine them standing there asking who was going to catch fish for them and feed them?
Holy hell…thank God our early people were nothing like you.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Dude, you have lost all your shit. Could you imagine if early settlers were socialist beggars like you? Could you imagine them standing there asking who was going to catch fish for them and feed them?
Holy hell…thank God our early people were nothing like you.

Grow up "dude".

 

[BrokeLoser]

The billionaires are now talking about a so-called "Universal Basic Income" i.e. UBI. Why? Billionaire capitalists are trying to convince the government to hand everyone a free-check, due to advanced technology replacing jobs. They see the writing on the wall.

Of course they want UBi….Billionaires know that through welfare Father Government is their best customer…Billionaires doubled their net worth since 2020…since Father Government began the mass flow of free shit to the people like never before in history.

 

[Flash]

 

[francoHFW]

She got canned by the same liberal academics that appointed her in the first place

So blaming outsiders does not add up

What you philistines and stepaniak the cretin started with, and your first post, was bs. Lol.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Of course they want UBi….Billionaires know that through welfare Father Government is their best customer…Billionaires doubled their net worth since 2020…since Father Government began the mass flow of free shit to the people like never before in history.

The government isn't a "customer" in this case, but a savior, because they want the government to create artificial paying customers or an artificial market. A UBI is essentially capitalism on life support.