▲ 478 ▼ Propaganda machine go brrrrr (thelemmy.club) submitted 3 weeks ago by K1nsey6@lemmy.world [M] to c/latestagecapitalism@lemmy.world 341 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) cool, so if an individual owns a factory for personal use thats fine, right? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) That's means of production and should be owned by everyone working in it. Marx said it. Does anyone read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) and if you are the sole owner and worker? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* @Ookami38 already gave you a better answer than i did. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children) Then it's your personal property. You, as the solitary laborer, own 100% of the means of production. Effectively, no different from what would happen today in capitalism for a private owner using a private property to do whatever with. It's not that hard, and none of this leads to some amazing gotcha moment for you. The differences come when you have other workers. They aren't just employees, paid a set wage, with all of the power still in the hands of the owner. They are stakeholders, with a real, meaningful share of the profits and the decision making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois and petty bourgeois production is to be gradually eliminated. It isn't an issue of direct exploitation, but instead that production should be socialized and advanced. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago this seems like it would highly incentivize making contracts with independent contractors permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) Yes? Once they start employing other individuals, it goes from personal goods to private goods, and those other individuals who use the factory (the means of production) should have a percentage of ownership in said factory. That's.... That's how this works, yes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois. The goal of socialism is not mass individual production, but collectivized production. Marxism is not a moral system based on eliminating exploitation due to it being a sin, but due to the fact that it becomes an impedement to continued development. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) That's means of production and should be owned by everyone working in it. Marx said it. Does anyone read? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) and if you are the sole owner and worker? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* @Ookami38 already gave you a better answer than i did. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children) Then it's your personal property. You, as the solitary laborer, own 100% of the means of production. Effectively, no different from what would happen today in capitalism for a private owner using a private property to do whatever with. It's not that hard, and none of this leads to some amazing gotcha moment for you. The differences come when you have other workers. They aren't just employees, paid a set wage, with all of the power still in the hands of the owner. They are stakeholders, with a real, meaningful share of the profits and the decision making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois and petty bourgeois production is to be gradually eliminated. It isn't an issue of direct exploitation, but instead that production should be socialized and advanced. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago this seems like it would highly incentivize making contracts with independent contractors permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) and if you are the sole owner and worker? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* @Ookami38 already gave you a better answer than i did. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children) Then it's your personal property. You, as the solitary laborer, own 100% of the means of production. Effectively, no different from what would happen today in capitalism for a private owner using a private property to do whatever with. It's not that hard, and none of this leads to some amazing gotcha moment for you. The differences come when you have other workers. They aren't just employees, paid a set wage, with all of the power still in the hands of the owner. They are stakeholders, with a real, meaningful share of the profits and the decision making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois and petty bourgeois production is to be gradually eliminated. It isn't an issue of direct exploitation, but instead that production should be socialized and advanced. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago this seems like it would highly incentivize making contracts with independent contractors permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* @Ookami38 already gave you a better answer than i did. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children) Then it's your personal property. You, as the solitary laborer, own 100% of the means of production. Effectively, no different from what would happen today in capitalism for a private owner using a private property to do whatever with. It's not that hard, and none of this leads to some amazing gotcha moment for you. The differences come when you have other workers. They aren't just employees, paid a set wage, with all of the power still in the hands of the owner. They are stakeholders, with a real, meaningful share of the profits and the decision making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois and petty bourgeois production is to be gradually eliminated. It isn't an issue of direct exploitation, but instead that production should be socialized and advanced. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago this seems like it would highly incentivize making contracts with independent contractors permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois and petty bourgeois production is to be gradually eliminated. It isn't an issue of direct exploitation, but instead that production should be socialized and advanced. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -2 points 3 weeks ago this seems like it would highly incentivize making contracts with independent contractors permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Ookami38@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) Yes? Once they start employing other individuals, it goes from personal goods to private goods, and those other individuals who use the factory (the means of production) should have a percentage of ownership in said factory. That's.... That's how this works, yes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois. The goal of socialism is not mass individual production, but collectivized production. Marxism is not a moral system based on eliminating exploitation due to it being a sin, but due to the fact that it becomes an impedement to continued development. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 weeks ago Sole proprietors are petty bourgeois. The goal of socialism is not mass individual production, but collectivized production. Marxism is not a moral system based on eliminating exploitation due to it being a sin, but due to the fact that it becomes an impedement to continued development. permalink fedilink source parent
