annatar1914 wrote:I believe that you believe that, but as a Christian I cannot of course.
Weak people can not be Christians. One day, you might become a true Christian.
annatar1914 wrote:I'm not a Communist, despite the fact that I do NOT see their ideas as ''flawed''. simply for the fact that no matter how true they are about Capitalism I do not believe that Communism/Socialism can survive the greed and selfishness of fallen human nature. I therefore examine people as they are.
You don't see it, because you never used your eyes.
If you were examining people as they are, you and I wouldn't be having this discussion.
annatar1914 wrote:That's right, and I'd link to anything that happens to be true no matter the actual source. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
But, a broken clock is not a good clock.
The content of that video is not true.
annatar1914 wrote:No, it isn't Power. It's an understanding that to God alone belongs all Power and Sovereignty over His Creation, and trust in His Goodness.
God is all-powerful, is the creator of all things and is the source of good. God is power. Those who are closer to God are those who do like their Father does. Those who seek God's power, are the Children of God.
annatar1914 wrote:Sure, theft or the desire to steal what is not earned by one's own labor is a sin all around, and such have no share in eternal life.
Then you should attack the workers, since they steal as much as the owners do. You should attack both parties equally. But you don't. And you just confessed that here. And let's not fool ourselves here, you're the envious one. Maybe even the poor one.
annatar1914 wrote:Ah, the old ''trickle down'' theory, or rather con job, in which the Poor are to rely on the alleged good will of the Rich for scraps from the Rich man's table, which ''good will'' can be proven to be in reality non-existent.
Ah yes. The evil rich man. Watch out people, the evil rich man is gonna steal all your surplus labor. But we marxists wont. We love you.
The poor are poor because they rely on others to provide them with necessary things. The poor should rely only upon themselves.
annatar1914 wrote:I think our definitions of ''good'' and ''just'' differ somewhat. I do believe ''Hyper-Capitalism'' or ''Anarcho-Capitalism'' will be the next inevitable step though.
My definition is right, yours is not.
Hyper-capitalism will probably be the next great system, but it might take a very long time until that happens. There's going to be at least a few major commie "revolutions" until that happens. Until people realize the truth.
Anarcho-x is never going to happen, i.e. to sustain itself.
annatar1914 wrote:Measures like looking after the working man and not screwing them over, got it.
lmao, I approve workers standing up for themselves and making better deals in their favor.
I do not, however, approve sneaky marxists corrupting and taking over worker's unions. Oh, just how they love to claim that they are "the protectors of workers". HAH!
There is a video where constructions workers gathered to yell and chant against some marxists who's holding speech about how they protect workers. Irony at its finest.
Here's the video, I found it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWH-lIRSUPY
annatar1914 wrote:Prices fall too much and you still have goods on the shelf that people can't or won't buy at any price, your business is still shutting it's doors.
If people don't want to buy goods at any price, even at the lowest possible like for free
or even with benefits, then there's no problem. That business will suffer the loses for their failed business actions.
annatar1914 wrote:Remains to be proven. While not a Communist, the critique of Capitalism is still shown as valid.
I already proved it.
Here's the major breaking points:
1) The market price of a good is determined by the contract between a buyer and a seller.
2) The value of that good is NEVER determined by the amount of work put into production of that good. The value is determined by the subjective calculations of the members of that deal (between the buyer and a seller). That calculation is based upon the survival power that item would bring.
3) The surplus value as defined by marxists is a myth. By their logic, there must exist the deficit value, which is the amount the worker steals from the employer.
4) The labor of an employer is the most important work done in any business. They are the one who produce most of final value, and thus reap the benefits of their work.
5) Just because worker is paid to work, does not mean they produce value. If the final product is useless and if no one wants to buy it, then all the work (including the employer's work) and all the materials used are just lost.
6) The idea that the market is somehow flawed.
7) Calling capitalists thieves, while at the same time calling for theft and mass murders of (dozens of) millions of people.
And so on, and so on...
annatar1914 wrote:''What gains a man to win the whole world and lose his very soul?''
''Thou fool, tonight thy life is required of thee!''
“Jesus replied, “Your mistake is that you don’t know the Scriptures, and you don’t know the power of God.”
annatar1914 wrote:The thief gets bested at the market by other thieves, and feels the answer is screwing over the workers who made the goods, that's rich. Or rather, that's the Rich...
No, the employer gets punished by the market for producing something which people do not want to buy, for the amount he planned that they would.
The reason why workers still get paid is because it's not their fault. They did their job as agreed, and got payed as agreed. The market results of their work lay upon the shoulders of the employer. He will either get rewarded with more profits, or will get punished.
This is beyond obvious to anyone who has every run, or tried to run a business.
But, of course, Marx was not a businessman, nor are any of the marxists.
annatar1914 wrote:What value there is, is still stolen from the worker, the producer, regardless of the market price of a good, despite whatever efforts the Capitalists involved have made to sell a finished product. This speaks to the inefficiency and waste of Capitalism, by the way.
What are you talking about?
The guy painted a fucking painting with materials worth of few bucks and managed to sold that shit for $ 40 millions. How many hours does a coal miner has to work until they earn $ 40 million? Around 3650 years, if my calculations are correct.
annatar1914 wrote:Collectively speaking, and under management and administration of skilled, well, managers and administrators, I dare say that a business would be run much better by them than some guy flogging his staff to work harder this week because he wants to buy a 48,000 USD automobile, cash, next week.
I can assure you that this does not work. I live in a post-communist country and know for a fact that those business sucked major balls. In fact, in any free market those businesses would fail. They can only barely work if everyone else is screwed up. It's like retards sprint running. You as a retard have a greater chance of winning if you're competing with other retards.
annatar1914 wrote:Money robbed from the Surplus is what is at risk. If you take money out of a person's wallet and gamble with it at the casino and lose, it's pretty much the same principle.
If you take money from someone's pocket without them allowing you to do it, that's theft.
If you and that person agree that you can do it, then it's not a theft but an agreement.
The worker and an employer in a capitalist system create a contract. Both of those parties are allowed to reject the terms of the contract if they don't like it.
This is not the case with communists, where everyone is designed to work certain amounts of time. Our brotherly labor.
annatar1914 wrote:As the only producer of value, it's their just due.
As the partial producers of surplus value, as much as deficit value, their due is justly paid by the agreement they made with an employer.