Workers Create Value

Force the meme, force it, force it.... FORCE IT, DAMMIT

Lemmy.ml enters the chat

So you're saying you'd rather have Corporations and Billionaires continue to rob the working class?
- I'd rather my worker's rights didn't come with a side of authoritarianism, but maybe that's just me.

TURN LEFT MF'ERS!

If anyone wants to read Marx and understand what people mean exactly when they say workers create value, but are intimidated by Capital, I recommend starting with Wage Labor and Capital It's a short, concise work by Marx specifically made for people without any background knowledge, unlike the Communist Manifesto.

Very few workers want to own their means of production. They just want a paycheck for their labor.

Because very few workers possess class conciousness due to decades of capitalist propaganda.
- It's more that investing in the place you work sucks because you know how shit of an investment it is. Most people would rather own shares in the s&p500 than their place of work.

remember that a company can do fine without a CEO. they can't earn shit without workers.

Raise hell. Praise Dale.

Remember: When you make fun of rednecks, you make fun of Dale.

I prefer hillbillies to rednecks. Rednecks have "back the blue" stickers while hillbillies take pot shots at any car with federal plates. Rednecks have lifted mall crawlers while hillbillies have an old busted Tacoma or Geo Metro. Rednecks have pets, hillbillies have raccoon and possum neighbors who hang out on their porch together.
- You're only a hillbilly if you're from the Appalachia region of the US, otherwise you're just a sparkling redneck.
- Originally rednecks were the hillbillies that wore red neckerchiefs at the battle of Blair mountain. They fought against Pinkertons who were hired by the coal mines to break up the rednecks who had taken over the company property.
  That may have changed since the blue collar comedy tour, but originally rednecks were the works seizing the means of production.
And Dolly!
- Dolly's a hick. Rebecca's the Redneck.

I'd rather have the workers own their own mean of living (house).

Yes, they're not mutually exclusive. In fact owning the means of production would give the workers more financial stability and might lead to better home ownership.
Look around the status quo, how many people do you think can afford owning a home in the current situation?

No, it is an accurate thing to say. The fact that they didn't find larger buildings in a settlement 10 thousand years old != Communism.

Communism is a decent "theory", but that's it. There hasn't been a single attempt that wasn't a wanna be dictator using it to seize power.

What are you actually rambling about?
Yeah, you tell em!
Regardless of whoever is voted in in my country (Canada) no politicians will be capable of facilitating a system where in the average working citizen can comfortably afford food and shelter.
No one can do this because there is overwhelming sentiment that any attempt to socialize necessities necessarily devolves into some kind of dictatorship.
If you want to suggest I should align myself with those people you're going to have to do a little better than fear mongering because the writing is on the wall for how the country is going to end up if we keep following this route.
Being able to vote for one of three people who are either unwilling or unable to ensure some basic standard of living for me is pretty damn low on my hierarchy of needs.
- I have no problem with socializing necessities, I find it amusing you went off on that unrelated tangent. Or that because I don't think communism is a workable solution in the real world, that I think our current solutions are good.

Hehe, I'm now only targeting jobs in the public sector, only way I can tell myself I'll be happy getting out of bed in the morning