Comments by "Debany Doombringer" (@debanydoombringer1385) on "Richard Wolff Is A Fringe Lunatic" video.

@jvanleeuwenCdn I can see what he is from the first clip and just knowing he's a Marxist. He's saying that the owner of said company/product shouldn't benefit from said product. That the employees should get all or most of the profits. It ignores that the creator is taking all the financial risk and is also a laborer within said company or business. It also ignores all the financial loss it took for the boss to reach the point they generate enough profit or demand to need to hire employees. Sometimes the employee takes more of the profits because demand is down, but they still must be paid the agreed upon per hour amount. I know lots of smaller businesses that the owner makes less than the employees fairly often. The hope is that later that loss can be made up with future profits. Take that commie simp. Edit: It's also ignoring that it's the profits that allows them to employee anyone to begin with. So the employee is directly benefiting from the profits by being employed. As to personal property, that depends on how you define it. The product is the owner's private property. Socialism believes it belongs to the employees. That's destruction of private property rights. There's intellectual property as well.
3
@oshitomaha So since he's self taught in Marxism, how is he an expert? There's no way to gage his understanding because he never took a test or anything else to prove his knowledge. He markets himself as a Marxist Economist, which you say doesn't exist. So this expert doesn't even understand that what he's calling himself isn't a thing and he's supposed to be held up as genius? There's flawed reasoning everywhere and you choose to ignore it because it sounds good and justifies your preconceived notions. Basically what he's saying in that first clip is that the person that took all the economic risk, lost money on their product for a long time, labored to create and perfect said product, shouldn't get reimbursed by profits from said product. That they should get nothing for all for their labor, that continues after said product is successful. It ignores the fact that the owner is a laborer as well. Either he doesn't understand what profit is or he's a grifter that preys on the ignorant. Edit to add: I produce a product. Once this pandemic ends and I'm able to more efficiently get said product to customers, I'll most likely need to hire a person to help me meet demand. According to him, that person should get everything and I shouldn't be reimbursed for my labor and supplies.
1
@oshitomaha First off I'm not a "bro" and how dare you assume my gender. I just looked him up. First sentence "an American Marxian economist". That's his publicity information so yes, he calls himself that. Socialism is the economic side to Communism. It's based on workers owning the means of production. The only way that is possible is to do away with personal property rights. The reason is the owners name is on the lease for the building, they buy the equipment needed to make product, etc. Thus the workers can not own the means of production as long as that is recognized as the property of the person that purchased it. Unless the workers invest equal amount into creating the business, they should not be treated as equal because they aren't equally at risk. If the business fails, it's not the workers that the banks will come after or suppliers. It's also my name and reputation associated with the product which is another level of risk that's added that a worker doesn't face. I guarantee you can't find thousands willing to take on the risks the creator does in order to have a decision in what's done with the profits. Democracy isn't something that's just handed out like candy. It's something that's always required sacrifice. To push that workers should have that decision making ability without taking any of the risk isn't remotely reasonable. We have Unions that negotiate contracts with employees. If employees really wanted some say, they would form one, yet Unions are down across the board. You can try to blame right to work states, but Unions are still alive and well in them. I know because I live in one and my family have all been Union members. That says the majority don't really want a say. I don't know why you threw in healthcare when that's totally off topic as we're discussing Marxism and how the economy works and why his vision of the economy wouldn't. I love how you throw out "you capitalist" like it's some type of insult only to admit you are one and don't agree with him. Capitalism has existed since civilization was created. Even bartering is a form of capitalism. It's worked for thousands of years and socialism has failed everytime it's been tried. I also am aware of something you and him appear not to be. We don't have a capitalist economy, it's a mixed economy. So all his bashing of capitalism isn't even applicable. Edit to add: A living wage is a very subjective term. What's a liveable wage where I am, is not a liveable wage in NYC. That's why it shouldn't be determined by the federal government. It's too large of a range. My son makes $14 an hour which is almost as much as a dual income family averages with his overtime and our cost of living reflects that. Businesses here should not be forced to pay what a living wage in New York or California would be. Currently our minimum wage is $11. We voted that in a few years ago. If we want it to be higher, we'll make a petition and have it added to the ballot. If people in other states want theirs to be higher, I suggest you do the work and do the same instead of waiting on someone to do it for you.
1