Agent Steel wrote:Because that would not be in the interest of FAIRNESS.
Yes, of course it would: those GETTING the value PAY THE PROVIDERS of the value FOR the value they are getting. What on earth could be unfair about that?
Compensation for PAIN.
So, if I hit my thumb with a hammer, someone, somewhere, owes me money??
How would you feel if you worked your ass off for no pay at all? Pretty pissed I'd assume.
Well, I have done that, more than once, and it's no fun; but I never assumed anyone owed me anything for it unless I either provided them with something they valued enough to pay for or they took something from me.
Which again, is why we NEED socialism.
No, we do not. We need socialists to SMARTEN THE F*CK UP and defend the property rights of the owners of producer goods who provide workers with opportunity they would not otherwise have, and LEARN TO TELL THE F*CKING DIFFERENCE between that and the owner of land, who only DEPRIVES the workers of opportunity they WOULD otherwise have.
Socialism gives people an INCENTIVE to work, because in return they are guaranteed to get paid.
Wrong. If they are guaranteed to get paid, that is only an incentive to PRETEND to work.
"We pretend to work; they pretend to pay us." -- Soviet era joke
Capitalism on the other hand is hopeless, because you can work really hard and get nothing.
Again with the false dichotomy. I'm not defending capitalism. But it does work better than socialism, because when capitalists steal land, it doesn't reduce the amount of land available for production; when socialists steal capital, it DOES reduce the amount of capital available for production.