Full circle

Under capitalism the people are a natural resource to be exploited for wealth, just like minerals, wood, and arable land.

The clue is in the term "Human Resources". I can't believe people just accept the existence of this phrase.
- Yeah. And "human capital" is another one that just makes my skin crawl.
  FWIW, there are a bunch of folks trying to shift the practice over to "People Ops", while refering to employees as actual people, which is way better. As a bonus, this gives the formerly called HR people a more meaningful scope for their work.
  That said, the name or the idea does't keep some from whitewashing or running with PeopleOps as a kind of virtue signal. Consider this article that minces all of this together while making it sound normal: https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/articles/rise-of-people-ops/
- Agreed, but please remember that this is the same under fascism and communism.
The final conclusion of capitalism is one solitary person holding all money. Like some crazy real life form of monopoly.
- That's because the game was specifically meant to show people what capitalism does.
Communism proved that in death camps you are guranteed work until the day you die.
- I'm sorry I must have missed the part of Karl Marx's writings where he said all peasants must be herded into death camps?
  But that's even besides the point. Communism is a complete paradigm change and very few people are asking for that. Universal Education, Healthcare, and Income are compatible with well regulated market systems. Yeah there's tankies that want a centrally planned economy run by an authoritarian figure, and there's anarchists who want everyone to slot into a commune with no higher level of governance, (thus, Communism). But calling social reforms Communism is a bad faith argument and disinformation. Don't be that guy.

Show what they know. I've been highly inefficient at it.

Serfdom reinvented

Circle of ~~life~~ wageslavery

Hope I’m not thinking too abstractly here:

If you’re an individual with only their bare hands in a society that doesn’t need manual labor, not even necessarily a capitalist society, then that society would have to give you something (education) in order for you to give back to society. Once they do, you’d owe them. Maybe not dollars, maybe a moral obligation, but they’d only give you something expecting a return

“The rich get richer” through things like stock buybacks are their own issue. I just don’t get the implication this is a genuine multi-layer representation of an issue.

Once they do, you’d owe them. Maybe not dollars, maybe a moral obligation, but they’d only give you something expecting a return
I disagree that all relationships between humans must be transactional, which is what you're implying here.
- That’s the thing, I don’t mean between two humans. I mean between a human, and all the rest of society, which is why I phrased it that way.
  Society gives a person an education, and expects that person to do something meaningful in return. It might not be the same two people in that transaction, which is similar to how we pay taxes for benefits we might not personally see.
Do you also believe you have a debt to your parents that needs to be repaid?
- Legally, no. Morally? Probably. I try to take care of my parents, and make their lives easier where I can, when I can, to try to at least somewhat alleviate how I've made their lives harder at earlier stages in life.
- My parents will never make up for forcing me to exist on earth. I pay a terrible price each day so they could have their precious dopamine hit.
  Next time smoke, inject, injest, or boof methamphetamines and leave me the fuck out of it.
- Like exasperation said, I feel I owe it to them to make considerate Christmas gifts, call often to socialize with them even if some days I'd rather be playing video games, etc.
  And, some people probably don't feel that obligation because their parents didn't respect them or help them grow up well.
A good, free education is to the benefit of society.
You do not incur a debt for the 12 years of school you're already mandated to receive, because that education makes society better. You become a better, more productive adult as a result of it.
But now we find that that education is not enough. Most people are not graduating high school with the necessary skills and knowledge to become that fully functioning adult. So, it is too society's benefit to extend that education.
This should not be transactional. We the people provide the education, and we the people benefit.
Once they do, you’d owe them. Maybe not dollars, maybe a moral obligation, but they’d only give you something expecting a return
Most advanced countries will give you all of your formal education for free or with a heavily subsidized cost.
It usually don't create an obligation, or some kind of moral one. Managers have this joke (that for some reason they never think about) where they are deciding of they'll train their employees, and one asks "what if we train them and they leave?", so the other respond "what if we don't train them and they don't?". State payed education is just that, but at a society level, and for everything the society expects from people instead of just work.
Otoh, there's always work digging ditches or nursing. Most people would prefer nursing in that scenario. Extend this metaphor to whatever job we're short of and make that education free until we're not short of it anymore.
- I mean that's the problem, whichever country you want to do this in, the world has started automating its hole-digging. Not sure why you're using nursing as an example, since that's a very specialized field that needs a lot of student loans to get into. Traveling nurses are in high demand.
expecting a return
It's called taxes. In many normal places, some people qualify (based on secondary education grades or other things like military service) to receive free higher education (basically sponsored by the government) that is paid off later over the years by taxes or contributions to the GDP.
Fuck that, I never asked to be born. Send the bill to my parents.
Ah no, educated citizens is to the advantage of the society. Not in working power but in not falling back to a totalist system with low living standards.

Slavery by any other name

Unless you live in a country with free education. Or borrow from a credit union. Or work as a contractor. Other that that, very Spot On.

If you're living in country with free education you borrow money from poor people to get education to make rich people richer and make poor people poorer. Taxes are regresive.
- Civilized countries offer the poor far more in benefits than they would take in taxes such as the obvious health care and higher education, but housing, food allowances, and even preschool are available without the BS you have to put up with in the US to access such social safety net benefits if they’re even available at all. There’s a huge difference between the poor paying a little into a system that they can access without undue burden vs the US where they pay taxes and get nowhere near the benefits civilized countries offer.
- Who are you making rich if you are self-employed? And how is you working making poor people poorer?
  Where I'm from taxes are progressive...
- You borrow money from the country who takes it from every taxable entity in it so that everybody can get educated, become less of a burden for the social system, improve the lives of everyone on the country and not make dumb posts on the internet.