Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ...
4
5
6
7
8
LastLast
  1. #101
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Flarelaine View Post
    Who is this Meszaros fellow you mentioned?
    Istvan Meszaros, there's normally accents in there but I can't be arsed to figure out the ASCII for them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istv%C..._(philosopher)

    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    What are you even discussing????????????????????????????

    You discussed employee-owned companies in terms of a simple pay structure where people are paid in proportion, to claim that since it is so little no-one would violate ethics for their small share.
    No, I did not. I talked about ownership and the dividends thereof, specifically, and did not say anything regarding the compensation they would earn for their work.

    Shareholder dividends and pay are two separate things. I'm not the one conflating capital gains with employment income here, you are, by claiming (incorrectly) that I ever spoke on the latter.

    In those companies the same incentives for unethical behavior exist - or do you really think Brett Kavanaugh was ethical when he worked for one of them?
    I've already stated once that there's a lot of different motives for unethical conduct, and that I only ever spoke regarding financial motives. That was not an argument that the only motives for unethical conduct are financial, and it's a baffling claim to make.

    The point was that it had already happened; and thus a smart person would try to guard against a future violent revolution leading to the same result - at least if you consider that result undesirable; whereas Marx and Engels didn't and many times the results were eerily similar - so the fact that it has nothing to do with socialist theory is just a failure on their part.
    I don't think violent revolution, in this case, is required. That is not an argument against violent revolution, in general[/i], however. Some violent revolutions are necessary and laudable, because the regime they topple was far worse than the revolutionaries.

    And again; the French Revolution wasn't even motivated by socialist principles. So you're intentionally derailing.

    The previous point was that Marx and Engels, as you should know, were violent communistic revolutionary "thinkers"; and should be blamed for the communistic revolutions and their results.
    Err, no, that's ridiculous. Especially if you want to look at the likes of Stalin and his interpretations of communist theory, which were hostile to and a refutation of Marx and Engels. Marx was proposing a stateless utopia, whereas Stalin created an autocratic dictatorship; these aren't following the same ideological path, dude.

    Note I was discussing "communism" - you tried to bait-and-switch with switching to socialism, which is not necessarily the same; as for the names I've read or listened to all except Russel (who I obviously know of) and Meszaros. Cannot say anything good about Gish-Gallop Chomsky. I've also listed to many other socialists, communists, and social democrats; both thinkers and more pragmatic persons - by looking outside the Anglo-American sphere.
    Then you don't have much excuse for the bullshit takes you've been presenting, if you're as well-read as you claim. Sure makes it seem like it's malicious, rather than honest misunderstanding.

    And no answer...
    Because you're playing stupid coy games rather than coming right out and asking an honest and open question. I'm not interested in bullshit games.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Fairly sure the point he was making was that the diffusion of potential personal gain from unethical business decisions translates to reduced incentive to engage in unethical business decisions, not talking about any specific pay structure.
    Yep. I really don't think it was hard to follow, and since you've got it right, I guess I wasn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Revolution only "worked" in countries that were fairly backward, autocratic and less industrialized (all of that is related) - and there was also the issue of foreign influence (for various reasons).
    The USA seems like a pretty glaring example otherwise.

    (That's btw contrary to Marx' theory. But I guess you will not see that as a problem.)
    1> Not particularly. Marx was making predictions about the future, not descriptions of the past.
    2> Why the hell would you think I put a lot of stock in what Marx said, in the first place? I don't see it as a problem because I'm a thinking human being and I don't hold up individuals as perfect incarnations whose words come straight from God's lips, like some kind of cultist. Marx being wrong about something isn't remotely a problem for me because I don't blindly worship Marx like an deity, and it's really fucking weird that you'd make that kind of accusation.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Yeah I here you, but if not can't that be said about everything?
    The problem is that there's a mix, and often trying to blame one ingredient (communism) for the outcome of the mixture is effectively propaganda used to deflect responsibility for the effects of the other ingredient(s).

    People point at Stalin's regime, which was abominable, and say "that was communist, and thus bad", and they never stop to question if it was the communism that led to it being bad, or maybe the harsh authoritarianism that Stalin implemented on top.

    Nearly all of the evils of Stalin's regime can be more-correctly ascribed to authoritarian dictatorships as a political system, rather than communism as an economic system. Not saying they weren't communist, but they were also atheist; does atheism make you act like Stalin, or is that a distraction from the truth?


  2. #102
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The problem is that there's a mix, and often trying to blame one ingredient (communism) for the outcome of the mixture is effectively propaganda used to deflect responsibility for the effects of the other ingredient(s).
    I agree Stalin was a fucking monster and in my opinion just as evil if not more than Hitler in many regards, however when I say monster I don't mean mythical or unreal cartoon villian.

    Just that his influence was exactly as you described, although not completely responsible for the failures of communism in my opinion, I chalks that up to the same as making him responsible for more deaths if you include everybody and anybody who died under his rule or leadership including people that died of say traffic accidents.

    I think this is why Stalin gets demonized in ways that aren't helpful.


    Meaning communism like many systems can't exist without enforcement and authoritarianism, again the same is true of Capitalisms. Which in and of themselves makes them failed in different ways, some worse than others.

    My entire point in this thread is that action without prudent oversight or systems left hands off to completely run for themselves with no accountability for those in charge and no responsibility of the citizenry is exactly how we get Too Big to Fail.

    People do NOT have to support Twitter, Google, Apple, or anywhere along the online landscape, there for to treat it like say Twitter or Facebook as though they were the public square in my view also is ignorant of the realities of actual totalitarianism and stupidity over how they get viewed.

    Too Big to fail where it concerns banks is not the same as too Big to Fail when it comes to Google AT ALL!


    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    People point at Stalin's regime, which was abominable, and say "that was communist, and thus bad", and they never stop to question if it was the communism that led to it being bad, or maybe the harsh authoritarianism that Stalin implemented on top.

    Nearly all of the evils of Stalin's regime can be more-correctly ascribed to authoritarian dictatorships as a political system, rather than communism as an economic system. Not saying they weren't communist, but they were also atheist; does atheism make you act like Stalin, or is that a distraction from the truth?
    I agree with the meat of this too, however here is the problem many could say nationalism and fascism can be viewed in the same context, same as ethnic states, or isolationism.

    All of the above that have failed, ALL of which have the same argument, NONE of which addresses the core issue.


    Nationalism doesn't work because while it's FINE to NOT be ashamed of where you were born it is ridiculous to have such a blind loyalty to a THING like GEOGRAPHY for which none has any control of being born in. Because LIKE ALL THINGS being devoted to any ONE THING including systems that can and do fail, leaves one to the kinds of stupidity that lead to the nightmares for which Nationalism is made, especially fascism where human beings for example for any reason are rounded up without trial and subjugated with no due process.

    Ethno States similar to the above but arriving because of generally color, which leads to things like abuse socially like what happened with many of the royals that believed in this nonsense purity, that lead to things like marrying cousins and inbreeding. Human beings like anything organic is NOT pure, we rely on diversity as much as we have to be aware of it when it goes unchecked. But in any event it's not a system that should be applied as a rule or law.

    Isolationism again same issues as the above, Compounded by the fact that outside of boarders everyone on this planet is effected by somewhere else or some other asshole whether they want to be or not, therefor everything that happens within a boarder can never be contained forever nor can thy ignore the external influences around. This is the vacuum I am talking about. Whether it be organic and biological or manufactured and manipulated. Pollution unchecked over there is going to effect what happens over here. Economic realities over here are going to effect what happens over there.

    Control or total control is an illusion even among dictators. Stalin like Hitler was hated towards the end of their lives, because of all the realities I stated, even though their ends came about in different ways.

    Germany before Hitler was a reality of the last swan song of The Holy Roman Empire, which was a result of the Roman Empire that failed that included states very much of what is made up of most of Europe today. The point is all the systems have been triad and failed, some for the same reasons some for completely news ones.

    Which is why I bring up the Soviet Union. Very similar for many different ways, and many similar.

    Germany was pretty fucking brutal before Hitler too, same as Russia before Stalin, but both men failed for the same reasons both Agents of Change for a society that cried for it but ultimately would reject what it cost.

    That is why Communism, Nationalism, Fascism failed.

    Communism like Capitalism is just a system which is a tool, for control and order over chaos. Oh and Anarchism doesn't fucking work either. Most if not ALL systems are a result of that, which was main core component of humanity itself.
    Last edited by Doctor Amadeus; 2022-08-10 at 01:55 PM.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  3. #103
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Meaning communism like many systems can't exist without enforcement and authoritarianism, again the same is true of Capitalisms. Which in and of themselves makes them failed in different ways, some worse than others.
    "Enforcement" and "authoritarianism" are not synonyms. You can't use them interchangeably like that.

    All of the above that have failed, ALL of which have the same argument, NONE of which addresses the core issue.
    This is a useless standard.

    On a long enough time scale, of course every nation fails, eventually. That's not about the nation, that's about time existing, and people changing, and nobody being perfect.

    It's like trying to claim there's no such thing as a healthy lifestyle, because eventually, everyone dies.

    Germany was pretty fucking brutal before Hitler too, same as Russia before Stalin, but both men failed for the same reasons both Agents of Change for a society that cried for it but ultimately would reject what it cost.

    That is why Communism, Nationalism, Fascism failed.
    You're again deflecting that the brutality of those regimes was the intent and focus of those who implemented it; it wasn't an accidental "cost", it was the motivating force of the whole thing.

    Communism like Capitalism is just a system which is a tool, for control and order over chaos. Oh and Anarchism doesn't fucking work either. Most if not ALL systems are a result of that, which was main core component of humanity itself.
    You clearly haven't read much communist theory, not even Marx. You're just being fatalistic and refusing to allow that there might be a decently workable system, that brutality is the only human constant. You don't have anything to back that up, to be frank.


  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The capitalist profit motive is not the same as a worker-driven profit motive, because the individual benefits are much-reduced; unethical choices made don't lead to the same scale of windfall when it's split 20,000+ ways, and no one's getting a lion's share.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    No, I did not. I talked about ownership and the dividends thereof, specifically, and did not say anything regarding the compensation they would earn for their work.
    And if the employee-owned company (as some do) gives the lion's share to the lion bringing in the "kill", it makes that alleged benefit non-existent. Despite your gaslighting attempts.

    This entire discussion about employee-owned is and has always been a distraction from the real issues with mega-corporations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And again; the French Revolution wasn't even motivated by socialist principles. So you're intentionally derailing.
    Nope, it had happened; and someone proposing a revolution afterwards and desiring to avoid another Reign of Terror should explain how they intend to avoid it - especially if they make a 10-point plan; but early communist thinkers didn't spend much time on that and the result was somewhat repeated. That's a failure to learn from history written by a million corpses.

    The derailing is to not realize that the practice-minded reformist largely won, and thus instead of continue with what has worked, continue with unrealistic solutions and revolutions that have an abysmally bad track record, and additionally it is bad to focus on employment for these companies, as if were living in the 19th century, and ignoring the reality of the 21st century.

    When people complain about Apple, Microsoft, Google people are normally not discussing their treatment of employees.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Marx was proposing a stateless utopia, whereas Stalin created an autocratic dictatorship; these aren't following the same ideological path, dude.
    You are unfairly comparing Marx' end-goal with Stalin's intermediate step - thus Stalin could sell himself as being on a path that would lead to the same end-goal; especially as USSR had fairly well followed Marx and Engel's 10-point plan - where equal suffrage was missing.

    Obviously there were multiple proposes paths to the end-goal (none realistic), but Marx wasn't in the "abolish the state first"-faction; and thus there weren't a major disagreement between them in that respect - just that Marx was a bloody fool for not seeing that when some faction violently takes control of the state to control the means of production it isn't odd that it tries to keep it afterwards.

  5. #105
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    When people complain about Apple, Microsoft, Google people are normally not discussing their treatment of employees.
    Well if you ignore that these companies underpay their employees like all the others, then sure, no one is complaining, funny that you didn't mention companies like amazon though.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  6. #106
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    When people complain about Apple, Microsoft, Google people are normally not discussing their treatment of employees.
    Like Mayhem said, there's a lot of that in the mix. But I'll repeat something I said earlier; I don't have any ethical objections to massive companies existing, especially when the main reasons for their dominance are customer preference. People don't use Windows because it's the only game in town, they use it because it's the best game in town. And it isn't really a particularly close race. If you could give me an OS with comparable compatibility and flexibility, I wouldn't have any specific preference for Windows in particular. But MacOS lacks the compatibility I need, especially for gaming, and isn't nearly as customizable. I've tried Linux and it's fun but it's such a colossal PITA to deal with driver issues, let alone software availability. There are alternatives to Windows, but the alternatives largely suck for my purposes. So I choose Windows. As do the majority of others, for similar reasons.

    People's complaints about these companies largely fall flat. If they're behaving unethically, we already have laws in place to protect against that. If your complaint is their existence, just for being that big, I don't see the argument.

    You are unfairly comparing Marx' end-goal with Stalin's intermediate step - thus Stalin could sell himself as being on a path that would lead to the same end-goal; especially as USSR had fairly well followed Marx and Engel's 10-point plan - where equal suffrage was missing.
    Marx proposed a revolution for two reasons; the first was that he was writing in an era that was fundamentally revolutionary, in the violent sense; he'd seen the American and French Revolutions and their successes at overthrowing the prior regime (other issues we'll skip for now), and presumed that capitalists would resist slow socialist reformation, and that revolution was potentially the only path forward. Second, he proposed it as a necessary evil that would only last as long as was necessary to tear down the capitalist structures, and then would shift towards communism. It's pretty fuckin' critical to note that this intermediary point was not "communism" as Marx described it. Nor was this intermediary point inherently authoritarian; it would enforce its laws and systems, like any government, but there wasn't any requirement that it be any stricter than the status quo. Stalin's "intermediate step" was his final step, refusing to ever push forward into actual economic communism, and the authoritarianism was a violation of Marx' principles.

    that Marx was a bloody fool for not seeing that when some faction violently takes control of the state to control the means of production it isn't odd that it tries to keep it afterwards.
    Again, not a Marxist, and that he was as blind to human nature as Adam Smith was is one of my biggest critiques of his writing.

    But it's weird as fuck that accusation gets leveled at Marx and is expected to justify dismissing his entire body of work (it doesn't), when the same principle isn't applied to Adam Smith and thus all of capitalist theory that derives therefrom. It's a blatant double standard, and Adam Smith was arguably way more deluded as to how abuse of self-interest can be exploited.


  7. #107
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    35,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    The error is deeper than that, the very question shows the lack of understanding.

    Here are some trick questions:
    Is Uber treating its employees badly - no those ones are "independent contractors".
    If someone I work with is on temporary leave, how is the replacement contract written for the replacement - there isn't one - it's arranged through a staffing agency (nothing bad there)
    Is McDonalds treating its employees badly - which McDonalds? they are mostly different companies with different owners in a franchising system.
    When discussing average salary for these companies, does that include janitors? no, as they are normally subcontracted; in many cases that is ok and for small sites it makes more sense as it isn't necessarily a full time job, but e.g., at Microsoft campus there seems to be an issue
    Are Apple employees killing themselves making iPhones - no that's Foxconn employees.
    Are Google employees dissatisfied with the Youtube-algorithm - Youtube creators are paid by - but not employed by Google.
    See a trend?
    You literally just explained why there is a problem with contract work, subcontracting, and independent contracting, and how large companies are abusing it to pay as little as possible. The companies, run by small numbers of people, are abusing contracting to treat people like shit. There's nothing in here that would explain why employee ownership is bad, and only further illustrates why giant megacorporations owned by a small number of people are bad.

    You've just argued against your own case.

    Universities run by a greedy board of directors are hiring less and less full time professors, and are leaning heavily on associate professors. Why? Because you don't have to give associate professors the full time benefits of a full time employee. Less money goes to the men on the floor, and more money to the board.

    Hospitals are relying more and more on nurse practitioners and physicians assistants and less on doctors. Why? Because you have to pay doctors more and give them more benefits. PAs and NPs also don't need as much schooling as doctors.

    Companies that used to hire full time employees for life are now abusing part time work and subcontracting and outsourcing to reduce costs. Meaning less money goes into the hands of the people and more money goes to the hands of the shareholders and the board.

    All of these problems about falling wages and lower quality of life for workers are a direct result of companies trying to skim as much money off the top and the bottom as possible.

    It is not necessarily capitalism that is the problem here either. But wealth and power accumulating into the hands of a few people is the end result of unchecked, unregulated capitalism.

    Conservatives keep arguing for trickle down economics, continuing to insist that if we throw millions of dollars at a few people, we'll get paid in return, when we all know the reality is they just take the money and put it back into their own portfolios. You give money to company owners, and they take a shit on you. We literally gave companies tax breaks under Trump, claiming that the saved money would go to the workers. What actually ended up happening is the companies used the extra money for stock buybacks, snatching up as much of their own stocks as they could for more control and more dividends.

    Your continued usage of strawmen is also ridiculous, though not unfathomable. As you continue to fail to make your point properly, you're misrepresenting other's arguments by making them sound almost sinister evil, when they've not said a single thing you've claimed they said, nor have they made the claims you've claimed they made. Because you KNOW that their points are correct, and trying to argue against the points they have made is impossible. So you're making up fake claims to fight back and be "right". Rather than arguing with anyone in this thread, you've constructed boogeymen made out of straw and you're knocking them over, because you don't care about the topic nor about the integrity of your arguments or even addressing the arguments others make. All you care about is being "right".
    Last edited by Cthulhu 2020; 2022-08-11 at 02:27 AM.
    Plenty of people have been holding their breath waiting for me to fail. I think they all suffocated years ago.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zython View Post
    Just came here to remind people that the right has no moral conscious. If they ever try to morally scold you, it's not because they think what you're doing is wrong. Is because it's effective, and want to discourage you from doing it.

  8. #108
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    "Enforcement" and "authoritarianism" are not synonyms. You can't use them interchangeably like that.
    I agree, but they both look the same, even though they aren't the same. Like Socialism and Communism.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    This is a useless standard.

    On a long enough time scale, of course every nation fails, eventually. That's not about the nation, that's about time existing, and people changing, and nobody being perfect.

    It's like trying to claim there's no such thing as a healthy lifestyle, because eventually, everyone dies.
    LOL Sounds like a Challenge.

    But as I said there is no perfect situation for anything, where life holds off all else to see, the point is all have been tested and for one condition or another here we are.

    However in the end something more close too Communism or Socialism is likely going to be the ONLY solution sooner or later, because Capitalism is failing and is fast becoming a luxury we can't afford.

    Too many Eloi not enough Morlocks.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You're again deflecting that the brutality of those regimes was the intent and focus of those who implemented it; it wasn't an accidental "cost", it was the motivating force of the whole thing.
    I am responding to this is quotes to acknowledge this and agree disagree. Agree with your over all point, disagree with me deflecting. I am simply pointing out historic realities.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You clearly haven't read much communist theory, not even Marx. You're just being fatalistic and refusing to allow that there might be a decently workable system, that brutality is the only human constant. You don't have anything to back that up, to be frank.
    I admit I have not read Marx. I am not fatalistic, I am just practical, I long for solutions, long term workable and satisfying solutions to any problems. Even if it means I am not the one to have that conversation.

    I Also long for times when the GROWN UPS are leading these kinds of conversations, with logic, reason and experience (Perspective)


    Too Big to Fail in and of itself is a problem.

    Socially Humans being so lazy and brain dead they can't problem solve, work or even sacrifice for even a single exchange for progress.

    That's how I see this conversation about Tech Companies, Free speech Private Servers and or Privacy on Facebook, TikTok or Instagram.

    If half the people bitching about the source of the problem stop participating in those institutions and enjoy alternatives.
    Last edited by Doctor Amadeus; 2022-08-11 at 04:23 AM.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  9. #109
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    I agree, but they both look the same, even though they aren't the same. Like Socialism and Communism.
    Neither of those comparisons are between things that "look the same" to anyone who isn't pushing dishonest propaganda.

    Your entire position is based on not knowing anything about any of these subjects, and pretending your lack of basic comprehension is the same as a real argument. And it's not.

    I admit I have not read Marx. I am not fatalistic, I am just practical, I long for solutions, long term workable and satisfying solutions to any problems. Even if it means I am not the one to have that conversation.
    When you're arguing against possible solutions because you blindly don't believe they can work, that's fatalism, it is not "being practical".

    Socially Humans being so lazy and brain dead they can't problem solve, work or even sacrifice for even a single exchange for progress.
    Literally all of human civilization disproves this baseless fucking nonsense. If you were right about any of this, we'd still be wandering the savannah throwing sharp sticks at prey animals.


  10. #110
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Neither of those comparisons are between things that "look the same" to anyone who isn't pushing dishonest propaganda.
    It’s not dishonest propaganda. The way most of the world works is by using models as inspiration for the way things could be.

    You’re problem is that you’re arguing from a place I’d advocating yourself yet. You haven’t the problem integrity your self to.

    1. Explain a perfect model where communism works

    2. Give a perfect example of any system as a solution to capitalism

    So right now you’re just pontificating bullshit.


    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Your entire position is based on not knowing anything about any of these subjects, and pretending your lack of basic comprehension is the same as a real argument. And it's not.
    You really want to talk to me about comprehension when you completely try to misinterpret what I said and spin your own narratives.

    Me acknowledging my limitations isn’t the same as you exposing them or revealing your own lack of knowledge.

    You demonstrated so far you have a firm grasp of rhetoric.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    When you're arguing against possible solutions because you blindly don't believe they can work, that's fatalism, it is not "being practical".
    Wrong arguing against a a solution and proposing my ideas in specifics isn’t fatalism.

    Being practical requires neither, Too Big Fail bank bailouts were bullshit in the first place for why they happened. However I didn’t argue against the bailouts. I simply wasn’t satisfied with them.

    As for communism I’m flat out against it because it doesn’t fucking work proof by every example of it being tried and the misery that followed.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Literally all of human civilization disproves this baseless fucking nonsense. If you were right about any of this, we'd still be wandering the savannah throwing sharp sticks at prey animals.

    There are still humans wandering the fucking Savannah. Throwing sticks at animals.
    Last edited by Doctor Amadeus; 2022-08-11 at 05:38 AM.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  11. #111
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    It’s not dishonest propaganda. The way most of the world works is by using models as inspiration for the way things could be.
    You made a claim that two pretty widely divergent things "looked the same".

    They don't.

    Law enforcement is not "authoritarianism", and misusing terminology like that is not defensible. Especially when you were already corrected. Once is a mistake, doubling down is intentional dishonesty.

    I'd like to actually discuss details and such, but you've got to stick to facts and truth, first. There's no conversation to be had when you're acting maliciously like this.

    You’re problem is that you’re arguing from a place I’d advocating yourself yet. You haven’t the problem integrity your self to.

    1. Explain a perfect model where communism works

    2. Give a perfect example of any system as a solution to capitalism

    So right now you’re just pontificating bullshit.
    These aren't honest questions. This is "when did you stop beating your wife" levels of intentional dishonesty.

    No system is "perfect", because no person is "perfect". You don't need to argue a system is "perfect" to justify adopting it. Just that it's "better".

    As for communism I’m flat out against it because it doesn’t fucking work proof by every example of it being tried and the misery that followed.
    You can't even properly define "communism", and we know this, because you tried, and you got it completely wrong.
    Last edited by Endus; 2022-08-11 at 06:06 AM.


  12. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    You literally just explained why there is a problem with contract work, subcontracting, and independent contracting, and how large companies are abusing it to pay as little as possible. The companies, run by small numbers of people, are abusing contracting to treat people like shit. There's nothing in here that would explain why employee ownership is bad, and only further illustrates why giant megacorporations owned by a small number of people are bad.
    It explains why "employee" isn't clear anymore, as we think it was 19th century. And most megacorporations are publicly listed with thousand (or more) owners - the CEO of Amazon owns 0.02% of the company.

    And the things employees consider important may not be what you care about; combined that's why employee-owned is an unclear concept that will not solve these issues.

    Remember that Google employee stopped Google from doing some work? Not about anything discussed in this thread, but just because they were peace-loving "hippies" and didn't want to work on military projects. (I know some people with similar concerns, and others without it.)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Well if you ignore that these companies underpay their employees like all the others,
    Except they don't really; obviously everyone thinks they should be paid more, but it's somewhat hard to argue that they are underpaid with an average yearly salary above 100,000$. The point is that the problem isn't their impact on employees, but on others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    then sure, no one is complaining, funny that you didn't mention companies like amazon though.
    Because Amazon still has lots of humans employed by Amazon in their fulfilment centers, do you think Amazon will cease to be a problem when the successors of Proteus and Cardinal start doing the work?

  13. #113
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Except they don't really; obviously everyone thinks they should be paid more, but it's somewhat hard to argue that they are underpaid with an average yearly salary above 100,000$. The point is that the problem isn't their impact on employees, but on others.
    Except they do. With the money they make their employees should be paid significantly more. Also, stop ignoring the cost of living, which can eat up your paycheck pretty fast.

    While Apple, Google, and Microsoft might pay on average 100k+ a year Alphabet on average pays 60k, and Amazon is even below that starting at a measly 28k averaging at 57k.

    Quote Originally Posted by Forogil View Post
    Because Amazon still has lots of humans employed by Amazon in their fulfilment centers, do you think Amazon will cease to be a problem when the successors of Proteus and Cardinal start doing the work?
    Exactly, while their owner starts a fucking rocket ship company on the side his employees have to pee in bottles.
    Last edited by Mayhem; 2022-08-11 at 11:46 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  14. #114
    Void Lord Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    41,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You made a claim that two pretty widely divergent things "looked the same".

    They don't.
    This isn't a debate this is your opinion, mine is also that they do look the same based on what people see myself included, not this image you have stuck in your mind about the ideas. In a perfect world

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Law enforcement is not "authoritarianism", and misusing terminology like that is not defensible. Especially when you were already corrected. Once is a mistake, doubling down is intentional dishonesty.
    Yes they are, both are forms of telling other people what they are going to do, based on the ideas of others.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I'd like to actually discuss details and such, but you've got to stick to facts and truth, first. There's no conversation to be had when you're acting maliciously like this.
    What you really need to do is stop with the accusations, when I demonstrated whether it makes me look one way or another I will and have explained myself when you directly asked me.

    You Suggesting that I am covering some shit up or have some ulterior motive is beneath me and used to be you. You are not also going to hold hostage any conversation or anything else over me.

    You want to set up ground rules fine, but we both will have terms, my terms are you are not going to dictate my opinion, you aren't going to mitigate my opinion and you aren't going to accuse me of shit, before I've had a chance to respond to it. If I refuse to answer or my actions are proven to the contrary all bets are off.


    I'll be the first to always admit I am wrong when I am, Pride is not a big thing for, I am also willing to read and entertain your perspective along with new information so long as you articulate it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    These aren't honest questions. This is "when did you stop beating your wife" levels of intentional dishonesty.
    No it's fucking Not because I can give you examples of where Capitalism WORKS and continues to, You can't even give me one where Communism WORKS. It's me calling you out for proof, because you are suggesting well as I said Well the U.S.S.R. for example wasn't really communism and that communism gets a lot of shit from those that wish to demonize it because of a lot of terrible shit a handful did.

    Ok Fine, but the U.S has equally done a lot of horrible shit too, But Capitalisms works even by your own definition, obviously with flaws and not for in my opinion 99% of the world. So if going by my definition truly we don't have Capitalism not because it isn't perfect but because 99% of it doesn't work.

    As opposed to Communism Your definition 100% of it doesn't work, because guess what it doesn't fucking even exist anymore

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    No system is "perfect", because no person is "perfect". You don't need to argue a system is "perfect" to justify adopting it. Just that it's "better".
    Yes but there are fucking thresholds we can use as markers to determine the data though regardless to any specific environment externally. COMMUNISM in whatever fucking form that has actually been APPLIED, Doesn't fucking work, and even in those instances, today it STILL fucking 100% DEAD if it ever existed at all IF that's your argument.



    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You can't even properly define "communism", and we know this, because you tried, and you got it completely wrong.
    No I've not capitulated to your stupid narrative that I already mentioned about the BLANK works but...

    I've referred specifically to life and experiences of real fucking people who are not only witnesses to one failed economic and state system of Communism, some of them have as ashes in the ground or coffins.

    You wanting to read the statement nothing is perfect doesn't really mean much when those live the way you say by any other name are experiencing and living a shit show.


    But but wait what about Capitalism, yeah Capitalism is exactly the fucking same, except it works evident by the fact it still exist today, as a beacon of the only light people run to, not from.

    And I know that last sentence is trite because it's a common point for morons who fear monger Communism over Capitalism. But I am using it here because it is YOUR contention it's working.


    Bottom line ALL of this on a Thread about Too Big to Fail, a reference to the 2008 Sub prime mortgage financial disaster as the author relates it to Tech Company's as big business.



    MY OPINION is that "Too Big to Fail" was a Shinning example in the end of Capitalism NOT FUCKING WORKING to begin with, or whatever the fuck you want to call the Government setting up Stupid Greedy Banks and Home owners to take out fucking loans for homes they could never fucking afford.

    I also find that it's STUPID to compare that to Twitter, or Facebook, or Google or any of this other shit, BECAUSE people aren't financially fucking ruined because of the companies I have mention, people are STILL stupid the same masses some suggest ought to be RUNNING these company's and have a say. I fucking Don'T.


    Jumping from the pan into the fucking fire is STUPID, especially when there is no reason to be standing in the skillet in the first fucking place. Don't like APPLE, But a LANDLINE half motherfuckers don't want to talk on them anyways. Don't like Google or Instagram, then Fucking GO OUTSIDE and make some actual friends as opposed to posting bullshit meme's, or inspirational nonsense. Don't like Twitter censoring your speech Again makes some friends and go out and say whatever is on your mind in your home or a camping trip. Nobody in their right mind gives a shit what is really on fucking twitter.

    No Tech Companies are Not too big to fail, they shouldn't be broken up, they aren't the PHONE company, or Oil, or Railroads, people have choices.
    #ANTIFA "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  15. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Except they do. With the money they make their employees should be paid significantly more. Also, stop ignoring the cost of living, which can eat up your paycheck pretty fast.
    That the company makes more money depends on the business decisions the company makes - and does not indicate that they should be paid in proportion. The flip-side of paying more in successful companies is that people in failing companies should be paid considerably less - and that's a bad idea - they should change or go bankrupt.
    (There's likely some bonus in those companies, as in many others; see below.)

    And for the flip-side of cost of living non-salary benefits have increased in recent years in the US (better from a tax point of view).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    While Apple, Google, and Microsoft might pay on average 100k+ a year Alphabet on average pays 60k,
    I also saw those figures and the figures for Alphabet do not make sense; and trying to compare it with the "competitor" Google indicates that something is very wrong. (Originally Alphabet was a owned by Google, and now it is reversed - but in no way are they competitors, and comparing them doesn't make sense.)

    Others claim the median pay at Alphabet was nearly 200k in 2018
    https://www.investopedia.com/news/go...ay-close-200k/

    And total compensation was even higher in 2021 - https://www.spglobal.com/marketintel...rinks-67215930
    Those figures are not consistent with the alleged average, and normally I would expect that the average is above the median.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    and Amazon is even below that starting at a measly 28k averaging at 57k.

    Exactly, while their owner starts a fucking rocket ship company on the side his employees have to pee in bottles.
    Amazon isn't primarily a tech-company as the others so it makes sense that the salaries differ, and Proteus and Cardinal will do the work of those employees (well, according to the press-release they will just supplement the workers and reduce the dangerous parts, but wait a few years - and possible successors - and the number of employees in fulfilment centers will likely start to decline).

    And, as in most cases, it wasn't the case of starting a company to build those robots, but buying an existing one (or two).
    Last edited by Forogil; 2022-08-11 at 05:30 PM. Reason: "Average above median", ofc

  16. #116
    The Insane Kathandira's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ziltoidia 9
    Posts
    18,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Narwhalosh Whalescream View Post
    Disney, Amazon, Microsoft, Blackrock, Google and of course many others. What can be done about them? How do you realistically break them apart? Won't any such efforts get lobbied?
    Somehow convince people that convenience at the cost of humanity is not the best path forward?
    RIP Genn Greymane, Permabanned on 8.22.18

    Your name will carry on through generations, and will never be forgotten.

  17. #117
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    74,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    This isn't a debate this is your opinion, mine is also that they do look the same based on what people see myself included, not this image you have stuck in your mind about the ideas. In a perfect world
    That's not a legitimate opinion. You're just wrong about what those things are. That's the point. It's like claiming that a manatee looks the same as a killer whale.

    Yes they are, both are forms of telling other people what they are going to do, based on the ideas of others.
    So is parenting. So is being a conductor in an orchestra. This is an utterly useless definition that does not describe either idea adequately on in any useful manner.

    What you really need to do is stop with the accusations, when I demonstrated whether it makes me look one way or another I will and have explained myself when you directly asked me.
    When I tell you you're wrong about something, and are using a word incorrectly, and you say you don't care and you'll use it however you like, that's an admission that you don't care what the word means and you're going to misuse it on purpose.

    Me pointing that out isn't some accusation out of nowhere.

    No it's fucking Not because I can give you examples of where Capitalism WORKS and continues to, You can't even give me one where Communism WORKS.
    Even though it's a shitty example of communism; the USSR. Absolutely pasting the West in terms of economic growth for decades, and so wildly successful it turned a backwards nation into a global superpower. This is simple historical fact.

    And no, that it collapsed is not an argument that "communism doesn't work". Everything collapses, on a long enough time scale.

    If you want another, China. Same kind of deal, minus any actual collapse, yet.

    This is real fuckin' easy, dude, and that's why it's difficult to take your position as one that's actually honestly held.

    As opposed to Communism Your definition 100% of it doesn't work, because guess what it doesn't fucking even exist anymore
    I'm curious as to why you've forgotten that China exists.

    Yes but there are fucking thresholds we can use as markers to determine the data though regardless to any specific environment externally. COMMUNISM in whatever fucking form that has actually been APPLIED, Doesn't fucking work, and even in those instances, today it STILL fucking 100% DEAD if it ever existed at all IF that's your argument.
    And by any standard that isn't "it eventually comes to an end", which applies to literally everything, communism did "work". Claiming otherwise is false on its face. It created a global superpower.

    But but wait what about Capitalism, yeah Capitalism is exactly the fucking same, except it works evident by the fact it still exist today, as a beacon of the only light people run to, not from.
    Again, forgetting that China exists, not to mention Cuba (poor, although that's far more to do with American embargo and hostility than their economic system).


  18. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Yes but there are fucking thresholds we can use as markers to determine the data though regardless to any specific environment externally. COMMUNISM in whatever fucking form that has actually been APPLIED, Doesn't fucking work, and even in those instances, today it STILL fucking 100% DEAD if it ever existed at all IF that's your argument.





    No I've not capitulated to your stupid narrative that I already mentioned about the BLANK works but...

    I've referred specifically to life and experiences of real fucking people who are not only witnesses to one failed economic and state system of Communism, some of them have as ashes in the ground or coffins.

    You wanting to read the statement nothing is perfect doesn't really mean much when those live the way you say by any other name are experiencing and living a shit show.


    But but wait what about Capitalism, yeah Capitalism is exactly the fucking same, except it works evident by the fact it still exist today, as a beacon of the only light people run to, not from.

    And I know that last sentence is trite because it's a common point for morons who fear monger Communism over Capitalism. But I am using it here because it is YOUR contention it's working.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    Bottom line ALL of this on a Thread about Too Big to Fail, a reference to the 2008 Sub prime mortgage financial disaster as the author relates it to Tech Company's as big business.



    MY OPINION is that "Too Big to Fail" was a Shinning example in the end of Capitalism NOT FUCKING WORKING to begin with, or whatever the fuck you want to call the Government setting up Stupid Greedy Banks and Home owners to take out fucking loans for homes they could never fucking afford.
    It's also ironic as 2008 started when Lehman Brothers (one of the big banks) was allowed to fail as an example to others.

    Additionally some claim that the governments actually made money on the crisis from "too big to fail", in a similar way as some old robber barons. Basically one strategy when the entire economy is tanking is to buy companies at huge discount; which is exactly what the government did (as it can just print more money if needed). And some of them have been sold with profit afterwards. Obviously that doesn't take into account the cost associated more directly with the crisis, and it depends on the government (most of the discussion is focused on the US - but e.g., Iceland was a pretty large player in the crisis and did poorly).

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Amadeus View Post
    I also find that it's STUPID to compare that to Twitter, or Facebook, or Google or any of this other shit, BECAUSE people aren't financially fucking ruined because of the companies I have mention, people are STILL stupid the same masses some suggest ought to be RUNNING these company's and have a say. I fucking Don'T.


    Jumping from the pan into the fucking fire is STUPID, especially when there is no reason to be standing in the skillet in the first fucking place. Don't like APPLE, But a LANDLINE half motherfuckers don't want to talk on them anyways. Don't like Google or Instagram, then Fucking GO OUTSIDE and make some actual friends as opposed to posting bullshit meme's, or inspirational nonsense. Don't like Twitter censoring your speech Again makes some friends and go out and say whatever is on your mind in your home or a camping trip. Nobody in their right mind gives a shit what is really on fucking twitter.
    And don't forget that this isn't just for pure tech: if you don't like how Uber Eat etc treat their employees; go to a real restaurant (do some similar sanity checks there as well), or cook yourself.

  19. #119
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I'm curious as to why you've forgotten that China exists.
    Not that I agree with Amadeus (lol how could I) but I hope you're talking about past China, not current China. I mean, what part of current China would be considered communistic by any stretch of the definition?

    Fun fact, the current problems in China are because of capitalism, how funny is that?
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  20. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Fun fact, the current problems in China are because of capitalism, how funny is that?
    China has several problems - some are due to the government: lockdown after lockdown due to nationalism/Xi's reputation combined with a failure to get the elderly to vaccinate with good vaccines (in part due to the previous point), and confrontation with Taiwan (and the US) due to nationalism spinning out of control.

    But some issues are due to capitalism.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •