Except the fact that there is no one to give it back to? The labourer has parted with his labour in return for the money of the capitalist. Truly, we all already own our own means of production and we sell it to the highest bidder. There is nothing to seize other than the output which was already paid for. That is called theft.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Exactly correct Gregory. Communism is when you steal the product of other people's labor, namely which that went into the production of higher order production goods.
won't let me reply on the other one. im a communist i know what my system is about are you that stupid?
Your claim is that I'm stupid because you don't want to admit that you're a proponent of theft?
hit reply limit.....its taking back not stealing i already explained that. it doesn't matter if we steal it the rich take 95% of what we make either way and many people die because of them....
You still haven't provided evidence of how consensual exchange is theft so I'm left to believe that what you call "taking back" is actually an initiatory act of theft.
uhhh communism is getting the full results of your labor so I think you need to rethink that.....also it's owned by the rich not shared by everyone.....
What are the full results of my labour?
If company x offers me $20/hr for my labour in return for keeping what I produce and I agree. I own my means of production and I am voluntarily parting with it in return for money. If company X combine the product of my labour with the product of person b's labor (which they also paid for), then sell that for a profit (the price of THEIR labour). How has anyone done anything wrong? If I then turn around and tell company a that really the money they made for their part in the process belongs to me somehow I am nothing more than a thief and a schyster.
You need to labor for the rich to eat in this society they take most of what you produce
Walk me through this. Workers and employers have consensual relationships where workers trade time and labor for fixed sums of money because they prefer the money more than what they're producing (and the responsibility and risk that comes with owning what they're producing). Workers enter into these relationships because they expect to be better off than they otherwise would have been if they hadn't. This is called profit. Are you saying that the employer has no expectation of profit? Are you saying that workers are too stupid to agree to terms that are beneficial to them? Are you saying employers, investors and entrepreneurs don't work? Investors incur a majority of the risk in a business and entrepreneurs usually put in 16 hour days. At what point does it become reasonable to expect investors and "rich" people not to profit? What evidence do you have that they don't work?
It sounds to me like you're just class baiting like a typical Marxist
At what point does a consensual exchange become theft?
full results are everything you produce e.g. the equivalent of 400-500 thousand dollars a year min
What's your evidence of this claim?