Comments by "Michael Mappin" (@michaelmappin1830) on "David Lin " channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. ​ @limitisillusion7 , workers can never get the true value of their labor when they work at a capitalist company. It's not possible. Profits are unpaid wages. If workers were able to get the full value of their labor, then there wouldn't be any profit for the capitalist owner. The only way workers can get the full value of their labor is when they're free. When they own their own tools. When they own the product of their labor. If you don't own the product of your labor, then you're basically nothing more than human livestock. Let's say you shovel driveways for a living. Each driveway allows you to earn $100. You notice that there's a lot of poor desperate people out there that can't afford their own shovel. The shovel is a means of production that cost millions of dollars. So, you decide to take advantage of the situation. You decide to become a capitalist. You hire workers to actually shovel those driveways for you. You can't pay each worker $100 for every driveway because if you did there wouldn't be any money in it for you. Therefore you have to pay them less than 100.00. The less you pay them, the more profit there is for you. Why do you think it is we still have a 40 Hour Work Week even though productivity levels have more than tripled since 1950? Because it doesn't matter how much labor saving technology increases workers output. Everything the workers produce belongs to the owner. Just like if you were to double the milk output of a cow, that doesn't benefit the cow because all of the milk belongs to the farmer.
    1
  33.  @limitisillusion7  , yes. Capitalism is the problem. It allows the richest members of society to own most of the capital on the planet. That creates a massive power imbalance right there. If I wanted to open a restaurant or a coffee shop tomorrow, I would have to pay about $20,000 a month in rent to some landlord. I can't even buy a cup of coffee or a can of beans without having to pay extortion fees to a capitalist owner and landlord. The capitalist owners. Under capitalism the government and the law are also controlled by the owning class which allows them to maintain control and ownership of their private property. Sure, workers can organize but you still have the slave / master dynamic. The owners can move production to a different province, state, country, Etc. They can claim bankruptcy under one corporate entity and then re-establish production under a completely different name. With every passing day we can produce more and more with less and less labor. e.g. A car manufacturing plants can be run by a handful of people, turning out hundreds of thousands of cars a day. Everything produced belongs to Rich shareholders. Citizens have to pay extortion fees in order to gain access to what is produced. It's kind of like arguing that feudalism isn't really a problem. Or that slavery isn't really a problem because if people organized and they can get Fair treatment. Capitalism is economic feudalism. That is a serious problem. In order to for people to be free and get the true value of their labor, you have to have economic democracy. And that's what socialism is. Economic democracy. Saying that feudalism an economic feudalism is not a problem as long as workers are organized, well that's just not true. As long as the Masters maintain control over the means of production and the resources necessary for survival, there's always going to be a problem. And the United States is not between socialism and capitalism. I don't even think of fraction of the GDP come from worker-owned companies. The concentration of wealth and capital ownership is higher today than it is or has been in the history of the world. And again, when you work for an employee, you can never get the full value of your labor. It's not possible. You're going to lose time off of your life producing profit for other people. Human beings are not livestock. If a person Works 8 hours they should be paid for 8 hours. The full 8 hours. Why should anyone have to work extra hours in order to pay for some landlord's lifestyle, some capitalists Factory? When you have a system where one group of people, the capitalists, are living off of other people's labor, you're going to have a situation where workers could not get the full value of their labor. It's not possible. They can organize so that they can reduce their exploitation to it's barest minimum, But ultimately it's the wealth produced by the workers that have to pay for the landlord's lifestyle, the factory and the tools of the capitalists, Etc. That all amounts to unpaid labor. Why would any human being give up decades off of their life pay for someone else's Factory or tenement? When the new deal was proposed, the working class was divided. Half wanted to accept the deal and the other half wanted to take control of the capital. People such as Emma goldman, big Bill haywood, Eugene Victor debs, and many others, they know that if we didn't go all of the way and take control of the capital, it would only be a matter of time before the ruling class was able to roll back any Privileges and protections under the law that the workers had gained under the New Deal. Under capitalism unionizing and regulating or only temporary measures. We should have transitioned away from capitalism a long time ago. It's extremely undemocratic. Doesn't matter what kind of privileges workers can obtain for themselves. They are still in a Master / Slave situation where are one side gets to dictate the orders and owns everything that's produced and the other side has to follow orders and owns nothing of what is produced.
    1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36.  @limitisillusion7  , technically speaking, capitalism is an anti economic system. One of the central goals of Economics is to achieve equilibrium. But the goal of capitalism is to maximize profit. Profits are maximized are maximized by getting workers to produce as much as possible while paying them as little as possible. The more successful company is at maximizing profits, the less purchasing power workers have. Workers can never get the full value of their labor. It's not possible. Therefore workers will never be able to afford all of the goods and services that they put into circulation. You have to be increasing the purchasing power of workers if you want the economy to expand. Either that or you have to increase access to credit. Capitalism is not conducive to free markets are thriving economies. The consequence of capitalism is you end up with most things being made in China and most of the wealth going to the owners of capital. Capitalist can move production, replace workers with scabs or automation. Even if you're someone that's selling music lessons from door to door as a music teacher, Someone like Bill Gates can Corner the market overnight by hiring an army of people, undercutting whatever your charging and offering huge prizes. Your average person would have to charge enough to survive on. Bill Gates doesn't have that problem. He can operate below cost for as long as it takes for you to go bankrupt. Capitalist can also afford state-of-the-art automation technology. Competition between workers and Technology drives the value of Labor downward. And with every passing day we can produce more and more with less and less labor. People that lose their jobs as a result of automation end up competing for jobs in other sectors. We should have made the transition to an economic democracy a long time ago. https://youtu.be/-VdbFzwe8fQ
    1
  37.  @limitisillusion7  , you see, capitalism is not about working. It's about the maximization of capital accumulation for the purpose of extracting wealth from labor. Capitalists buy apartment buildings, houses, grocery stores, Electric companies, railroads, and then try to maximize their profit. That increases the cost of living and the amount of work that the rest of us have to do. That's why so many people turn to socialism and communism, even in the United states. Here's an example of Communism at the micro level. https://youtu.be/wBJADlN2Bic that community pays for electricity at cost because they own their own means of production. The workers get paid top dollar and no expense is spared on quality, infrastructure and safety. But when you buy electricity from capitalist companies you're not just paying for the infrastructure and the labor, there's a huge amount of money going to people like Bill Gates and Donald Trump. And there's lots of examples of tragic incidents that have resulted because they cut corners on safety in order to maximize profit. For example, in Norway if there's an explosion or fire that breaks out on an oil platform in the ocean, there's acoustic shut-off valves that will prevent the oil from leaking into the water. Just prior to the major oil disaster in the United States, the oil company went on records stating that they didn't spend money on acoustic shut-off valves because they weren't necessary and very expensive. And look at all the people that froze to death in Texas because they didn't upgrade their electrical infrastructure to compensate for the increasing colder temperatures during the winter. When you need water, food, medicine, you shouldn't have to pay extortion fees to someone like Bill gates. When you want a job you shouldn't have to constantly be increasing your human capital in order to increase your volume to someone like Bill Gates and compete with other workers. Capitalism is economic feudalism. Sure, if you're in prison, you can organize with your fellow inmates in order to gain more privileges, better treatment, improved laws and regulations, but you're still under their thumb! Likewise, everything you produce at a capitalist Company still belongs to someone else. And the portion of wealth that they extract, even at its minimum, still represents unpaid labor. Who in the right mind wants to constantly be working in a Master Slave environment? Where one group of people get to give the orders and extract as much profit as possible while the other group has to do all of the work and only gets a portion of the wealth they create? It's crazy. It's far better to have an economic system were people actually have to work for a living. This whole notion of living off of other people's labor should have been overthrown a long time ago. If you want something, work for it! Don't buy a McDonald's or a grocery store and then get an army of poor desperate workers to produce as much wealth as possible. One of the reasons groceries are costing so much now it's because capitalist by food products and then resell them at the highest price possible! 😀 there's one grocery store chain where I live we decided to double the price of olive oil, selling it at $20 a bottle. The openly admitted that they just wanted to see how many bottles they could sell at that price. And then they reduced the price by $5 calling it a sale. They put out a flyer with all these amazing price rollbacks, that's what they called them. But technically speaking, olive oil didn't decrease by 5.00. It increased by $5. It's like something out of 1984. 😀 the other day I talked to the landlord and I asked him why he literally doubled rent over the last 2 years. He said he's going to charge as much as he can get away with.
    1
  38.  @limitisillusion7  , like I said, people can get organized in order to get a greater portion of the wealth that they produced. What workers should be able to get all of the wealth that they produced. Not just a portion of it. Those who own and control the mean of subsistence along with the government and police to protect that private property, they're going to have a huge advantage over the general population. But when workers own their own means of production, that makes them less dependent upon capitalist corporations and the government when it comes to jobs and consumer goods. We need economic democracy. Why would you want to continue living under Democratic feudalism with constant contention between the owning class and the wage slaves? Why would you want to maintain such an archaic system that's based on exploitation? If you don't own the product of your labor, then you're nothing more than human livestock. Doesn't matter how much the cows organize and negotiate. The fact is the cow should own the milk that they produce. Not some farmer. Human beings are not cows. 😀 Every time the working class is able to organize and erect regulations and extend the floor of the cage by getting more privileges, each and every time, over and over again, the ruling class ends up circumventing those gains all the while living in extreme opulence while the workers have to do all of the fighting, all of the working, all of the organizing, etc. Over and over and over again. How long do you want this to continue? how many times do you want to repeat the cycle? Emma Goldman and Eugene Victor debs, and many others, pointed out before accepting the New Deal that if we don't take control of the capital so that we can be independent, if we leave control of the capital in the hands of the ruling class, it's only going to be a matter of time before they roll back all the progress that we made. They were right! Why the hell should you have to pay someone like Bill Gates extra money to get a blood test or buy an apple? To hell with fighting for more privileges. We don't need capitalists. Capitalists are unnecessary middlemen that just increase the cost of living and the amount of work the rest of us have to do. You should have had a 20 hour work week a long time ago. But people need to work 40 hours for longer because the cost of living is so high and wages are so low. What drives up the cost of living? What drives wages downward? You do not need capitalism in order to have a business, have a market, have innovation, have people selling and trading with one another, etc. So what's the point of leaving the ruling class in control of the means of subsistence? Your argument is that we should maintain the capitalist system because if workers are more effective at networking than they can get more privileges? What the hell are you talking about? 😀 you should be trying to end slavery, not talking about how much power the slaves have to increase their Privileges and protections under the law. You should be addressing why they are slaves in the first place
    1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. ​ @tarmotyyri6733 , of course capitalism is responsible for debt. It's a debt-based system. The goal of capitalist companies is to maximize profit. Profits are maximized by getting workers to produce as much as possible while paying them as little as possible. So, the more successful capitalist company is, the less purchasing power workers have. The richest 1% now has almost as much wealth as the poorest 91% of the American population. The 8 richest people have almost as much wealth as the poorest half of the Earth's population. And that's because the owners of capital get most of the wealth produced by labour. If 80% of the wealth goes to the owners of capital, the richest 1%, then the workers are only going to be able to afford 20% of the goods and services they create! In order for the economy to expand you have to increase workers purchasing power, not erode it. If consumption slows down, people get laid off. If people get laid off they can't consume. That results in even more people being laid off. That's fine for the capitalist in the short-term because those downturns allow them to buy up capital for pennies on the dollar. In order to get the economy to expand you either have to increase the purchasing power of citizens or you have to pump credit into the system. Capitalism wouldn't be able to survive without fractional Reserve banking. It's a pyramid scheme. There's a natural ceiling limit to how much wealth you can extract from labour before there's an economic downturn as a result of insufficient purchasing power.
    1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. Capitalism is what leads to corporatism. Under the capitalist system most of the capital goes to those with the most money. Those that own most of the capital get most of the wealth produced by labour. Their wealth grows exponentially faster compared to everyone else. Those are the top get to decide what is produced, how things are produced, where things are produced, how much workers get paid, Etc. Corruption is almost guaranteed. Capitalism is not conducive to free markets. Capitalism destroys free markets. How can you have a free market when you got people like Bill Gates buying up most of the farmland and other resources? Bill Gates even owns a big chunk of the Canadian Railway system. You have to pay an extra $100 to Bill Gates every time you get a blood test, that's $100 that you no longer get to spend into the economy. The goal of capitalist companies is to maximize profit. Profit is maximized by getting workers to produce as much as possible while paying them as little as possible. That's not conducive to a free-market. If you want the economy to expand, you have to increase purchasing power. You can't be going out of your way to destroy it. One of the central goals of Economics is to achieve equilibrium. How can you achieve equilibrium when production output increases at a faster rate than income? The consumption slows down, then the economy contracts. People get laid off. If people get laid off then they can't consume. Then more people get laid off. The more successful capitalist companies are at maximizing profit, the more credit has to be pumped into the system in order to maintain rates of consumption. That's why there's so much debt. Capitalism requires borrowing more and more from the future. Basically a pyramid scheme
    1
  50. ​ @ExPwner , competition -> winners -> competition between winners -> stronger winners -> .. Capitalism gravitates toward monopoly for many reasons: 1. Economies of Scale: In many industries, larger companies can produce goods or services more efficiently and at a lower cost per unit. This makes it difficult for smaller competitors to compete, leading to the consolidation of market power in the hands of a few large firms. 2. Barriers to Entry: Monopolies or oligopolies arise when there are significant barriers to entry in an industry, such as high startup costs, access to distribution channels, or intellectual property protection. These barriers can discourage new competitors from entering the market. 3. Network Effects: Some industries, like social media or telecommunications, exhibit network effects. The more users a platform or network has, the more valuable it becomes. This creates a winner-takes-all scenario, where a single dominant player emerges. 4. Mergers and Acquisitions: Large companies acquire or merge with smaller competitors, further concentrating market power. 5. Regulatory Capture: Powerful corporations can influence or capture regulatory agencies, shaping regulations in their favor. This allows them to stifle competition or maintain their dominant position in the market. 6. Innovation and Patents: Companies with significant resources can invest in research and development and secure patents, protecting their innovations from competition for a certain period. This leads to monopolistic advantages in technology-driven industries. And the list goes on and on. Can you imagine how bad things would be if we didn't have antitrust laws and regulations?
    1