MAGAThread XVIII: The Authority Is Total

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Any property rights outside of things you physically occupy are a legal fiction, protected solely by government action. stop pretending that property rights are somehow a basic fact of human nature. Every country has a different concept of property, and to be quite fair, Us property rights are far less protective than those in civil law countries.

[Telconi]

Who's stuff do I feel entitled to own?

Your stuff.

Why do you feel entitled to any self or shared ownership?

Human dignity and rights.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Your stuff.

Why do you feel entitled to any self or shared ownership?

Human dignity and rights.

The right to life trumps any right to property.

[Telconi]

Human dignity and rights.

The right to life trumps any right to property.

I've yet to meet a person dying from lack of factory ownership.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

The right to life trumps any right to property.

I've yet to meet a person dying from lack of factory ownership.

The point as obviously broader and you understand that perfectly well. The point is that property rights are not absolute. There are instances here property rights are subservient to other, more important rights.

And, of course, there are plenty of people ho have died because a factory owner prioritised profit over worker safety, both employees and bystanders.

[Aureumterra]

Owning a factory requires a lot of work.

Administration consists of nothing more than sitting in Corinthian leather chairs, swigging big snifters of brandy, while smoking huge cigars and saying "hurumph!"

Don’t forget the top hat and monocole

[Telconi]

I've yet to meet a person dying from lack of factory ownership.

The point as obviously broader and you understand that perfectly well. The point is that property rights are not absolute. There are instances here property rights are subservient to other, more important rights.

And, of course, there are plenty of people ho have died because a factory owner prioritised profit over worker safety, both employees and bystanders.

Which isn't actually relevant to the conversation.

[The Emerald Legion]

Human dignity and rights.

The right to life trumps any right to property.

Simply incorrect.

[Ifreann]

It's not rightfully their property.

---

Why would I choke? This bread is warm and delicious.

---

It's simple mathematics. If workers were paid the full value of their labour, there would be nothing left over for the owners. For the owners to profit they must pay the workers less than the value of their labour. This is obviously exploitation.

"""Obviously"""

Yes.

---

It's not rightfully their property.

That's a rather dubious prospect. If they own it, legally it is rightfully theirs. Regardless of whether or not they work in it.

Why would I choke? This bread is warm and delicious.

And imaginary.

It's simple mathematics. If workers were paid the full value of their labour, there would be nothing left over for the owners. For the owners to profit they must pay the workers less than the value of their labour. This is obviously exploitation.

Labor has no value, beyond what people are willing to pay for it.

Labour's kinda a necessary component to having a society.

Also not necessarily. The owners could still pay the workers the value of their labor, and turn a profit by charging for more than he paid the workers.

If the products of the workers labour are being sold for more than the workers are being paid, then the workers aren't receiving the full value of their labour, are they?

---

It's bizarre to see someone who doesn't own a factory get so mad at the idea of factories being given over to the workers.

Y...you don't see why someone who has bought property and built a factory using their own money and resources would have a problem with a group of people seizing the factory by force?

I don't see why you, who if I recall correctly plans to be a long haul trucker after your time in the military, is so emotionally invested in the plight of factory owners.

Gosh, I don't know. Maybe because he has a sense of right and wrong?

I mean, it's quaint to be sure, but maybe Chernoslavia just feels that it's wrong to take someone's stuff just because you want it and nobody likes the person whose stuff is being taken, even if he's not the one to whom it's happening?

But surely he, based on his own personal experience, knows that it is no terrible hardship to not own a factory. Not that the life of a working stiff is all sunshine and lollipops, but once people are financially secure they're generally pretty happy.

Just a thought, mind you. I mean, I'm not black, and yet I find the idea of whites stealing shit from blacks back in the Jim Crow era offensive. Which they did. Often. And yet I'm white. So why does it upset me?

<shrugs>

Who knows? People are funny, aren't they?

Funny, yeah. I hear that some people even think that being abused because of one's race is morally equivalent to not being allowed to exploit the labour of others for one's own personal profit.

---

And you get money by working for it. But the people who own factories don't work for their money. They get it by exploiting people like us, they get rich off our work by paying us less than the value we create by our labour, and they use those riches to buy up more factories and farms and tech startups and what have you and thus exploit more people. That all rightfully belongs to us. Seizing the means of production is just taking back what's ours, not stealing your toothbrush.

Not to put to fine a point in it, but I hope you realize that Marx's Labor Theory of Value has logical holes big enough to hold entire countries.

Would you like me to point out a few of them for you?

Sure. I'm a big ol' dumb-dumb and learning is fun.

---

It's simple mathematics. If workers were paid the full value of their labour, there would be nothing left over for the owners. For the owners to profit they must pay the workers less than the value of their labour. This is obviously exploitation.

Assumptions. You should consider them carefully.

<pause>

Let me help you with this: Why is the value of a worker's labor equal to the total price of the product when sold at market, rather than the value of the wage that was paid for their work?

Because it is by the workers' labour that the product is worth anything.

Consider your answer carefully, because it will reveal any and all assumptions made in reaching that answer.

Oooh, ominous. Are you going to give me a bad grade if you don't like my answer?

[The Emerald Legion]

"""Obviously"""

Yes.

---

That's a rather dubious prospect. If they own it, legally it is rightfully theirs. Regardless of whether or not they work in it.



And imaginary.



Labor has no value, beyond what people are willing to pay for it.

Labour's kinda a necessary component to having a society.

Also not necessarily. The owners could still pay the workers the value of their labor, and turn a profit by charging for more than he paid the workers.

If the products of the workers labour are being sold for more than the workers are being paid, then the workers aren't receiving the full value of their labour, are they?

---

Gosh, I don't know. Maybe because he has a sense of right and wrong?

I mean, it's quaint to be sure, but maybe Chernoslavia just feels that it's wrong to take someone's stuff just because you want it and nobody likes the person whose stuff is being taken, even if he's not the one to whom it's happening?

But surely he, based on his own personal experience, knows that it is no terrible hardship to not own a factory. Not that the life of a working stiff is all sunshine and lollipops, but once people are financially secure they're generally pretty happy.

Just a thought, mind you. I mean, I'm not black, and yet I find the idea of whites stealing shit from blacks back in the Jim Crow era offensive. Which they did. Often. And yet I'm white. So why does it upset me?

<shrugs>

Who knows? People are funny, aren't they?

Funny, yeah. I hear that some people even think that being abused because of one's race is morally equivalent to not being allowed to exploit the labour of others for one's own personal profit.

---

Not to put to fine a point in it, but I hope you realize that Marx's Labor Theory of Value has logical holes big enough to hold entire countries.

Would you like me to point out a few of them for you?

Sure. I'm a big ol' dumb-dumb and learning is fun.

---

Assumptions. You should consider them carefully.

<pause>

Let me help you with this: Why is the value of a worker's labor equal to the total price of the product when sold at market, rather than the value of the wage that was paid for their work?

Because it is by the workers' labour that the product is worth anything.

Consider your answer carefully, because it will reveal any and all assumptions made in reaching that answer.

Oooh, ominous. Are you going to give me a bad grade if you don't like my answer?

You're answer is silly in that it assumes all value comes from the labor, with no value added by the facilities or tools offered by the factory.

If that was the case, why bother seizing the factory at all? Stand in a field and make your valuable goods.

[Ifreann]

Yes.

---

Labour's kinda a necessary component to having a society.


If the products of the workers labour are being sold for more than the workers are being paid, then the workers aren't receiving the full value of their labour, are they?

---

But surely he, based on his own personal experience, knows that it is no terrible hardship to not own a factory. Not that the life of a working stiff is all sunshine and lollipops, but once people are financially secure they're generally pretty happy.


Funny, yeah. I hear that some people even think that being abused because of one's race is morally equivalent to not being allowed to exploit the labour of others for one's own personal profit.

---

Sure. I'm a big ol' dumb-dumb and learning is fun.

---

Because it is by the workers' labour that the product is worth anything.


Oooh, ominous. Are you going to give me a bad grade if you don't like my answer?

You're answer is silly in that it assumes all value comes from the labor, with no value added by the facilities or tools offered by the factory.

If that was the case, why bother seizing the factory at all? Stand in a field and make your valuable goods.

Machines and tools are, of course, very useful things. Things that were made in another factory, by other workers, who should also receive the full value of their labour. Also necessary is raw materials, which are extracted by other workers. And people need to know what to do with their tools and raw materials, which requires workers to educate and train other workers. Turns out that the people you need the least are the ones who get all the profit. Weird that.

[The Emerald Legion]

You're answer is silly in that it assumes all value comes from the labor, with no value added by the facilities or tools offered by the factory.

If that was the case, why bother seizing the factory at all? Stand in a field and make your valuable goods.

Machines and tools are, of course, very useful things. Things that were made in another factory, by other workers, who should also receive the full value of their labour. Also necessary is raw materials, which are extracted by other workers. And people need to know what to do with their tools and raw materials, which requires workers to educate and train other workers. Turns out that the people you need the least are the ones who get all the profit. Weird that.

Considering the ones who get all the profit are the ones who arranged for all of the above....

Also, not really. Workers are increasingly irrelevant. Soon factories will be able to run more or less entirely automatically.

[Ifreann]

Machines and tools are, of course, very useful things. Things that were made in another factory, by other workers, who should also receive the full value of their labour. Also necessary is raw materials, which are extracted by other workers. And people need to know what to do with their tools and raw materials, which requires workers to educate and train other workers. Turns out that the people you need the least are the ones who get all the profit. Weird that.

Considering the ones who get all the profit are the ones who arranged for all of the above....

But they don't. They just own all those things, and thus, under our current system, they get the profits. Sure, in smaller businesses you get people who are both owners and workers, sometimes in those businesses the owner does most of the work, but someone like Trump or Bloomberg just has their name on the right pieces of paper to be legally entitled to huge amounts of money without meaningfully contributing to any of the processes that created that wealth.

Also, not really. Workers are increasingly irrelevant. Soon factories will be able to run more or less entirely automatically.

That is the dream.

[The Emerald Legion]

Considering the ones who get all the profit are the ones who arranged for all of the above....

But they don't. They just own all those things, and thus, under our current system, they get the profits. Sure, in smaller businesses you get people who are both owners and workers, sometimes in those businesses the owner does most of the work, but someone like Trump or Bloomberg just has their name on the right pieces of paper to be legally entitled to huge amounts of money without meaningfully contributing to any of the processes that created that wealth.

Also, not really. Workers are increasingly irrelevant. Soon factories will be able to run more or less entirely automatically.

That is the dream.

Of course they meaningfully contributed. They own all the stuff being used to manufacture more wealth.

[Ifreann]

But they don't. They just own all those things, and thus, under our current system, they get the profits. Sure, in smaller businesses you get people who are both owners and workers, sometimes in those businesses the owner does most of the work, but someone like Trump or Bloomberg just has their name on the right pieces of paper to be legally entitled to huge amounts of money without meaningfully contributing to any of the processes that created that wealth.


That is the dream.

Of course they meaningfully contributed. They own all the stuff being used to manufacture more wealth.

Owning stuff isn't a meaningful contribution.

[The Emerald Legion]

Of course they meaningfully contributed. They own all the stuff being used to manufacture more wealth.

Owning stuff isn't a meaningful contribution.

Of course it is.

Suppose you need to make a table. But you don't have a hammer, Saw, Nails, Wood, or measuring tape.

You're SOL until you get those things. By whatever means that I obtained them. I have those things.

Now the right and proper way to do things is that I, being a lazy shit, don't want to make a table. So, you and I come to some arrangement where you use my materials and tools to produce finished goods. Which can then be sold for profit. Since ALL you bring to the table is labor. I pay you for your labor outright, that way regardless of how well the table sells, you get your labor compensated. Then the remaining value goes to me.

Under the Communist model, you call me names, burn down my house, kill my family and take the tools you didn't earn because my tools are of no value to you despite your homicidal need to deprive me of them.

[Ifreann]

Owning stuff isn't a meaningful contribution.

Of course it is.

Suppose you need to make a table. But you don't have a hammer, Saw, Nails, Wood, or measuring tape.

You're SOL until you get those things. By whatever means that I obtained them. I have those things.

Now the right and proper way to do things is that I, being a lazy shit, don't want to make a table. So, you and I come to some arrangement where you use my materials and tools to produce finished goods. Which can then be sold for profit. Since ALL you bring to the table is labor. I pay you for your labor outright, that way regardless of how well the table sells, you get your labor compensated. Then the remaining value goes to me.

I do everything that causes there to be a table instead of just a pile of wood, and you do nothing. But for some reason you get most of the money instead of none of the money. I could cut you out entirely, get the tools I need from the people who make them, and the table would be the exact same. Your ownership of the tools doesn't make any difference beyond profiting you.

Under the Communist model, you call me names, burn down my house, kill my family and take the tools you didn't earn because my tools are of no value to you despite your homicidal need to deprive me of them.

I like to think that there wouldn't need to be any burning or killing, you just wouldn't be involved in the making of tables.

[The Emerald Legion]

Of course it is.

Suppose you need to make a table. But you don't have a hammer, Saw, Nails, Wood, or measuring tape.

You're SOL until you get those things. By whatever means that I obtained them. I have those things.

Now the right and proper way to do things is that I, being a lazy shit, don't want to make a table. So, you and I come to some arrangement where you use my materials and tools to produce finished goods. Which can then be sold for profit. Since ALL you bring to the table is labor. I pay you for your labor outright, that way regardless of how well the table sells, you get your labor compensated. Then the remaining value goes to me.

I do everything that causes there to be a table instead of just a pile of wood, and you do nothing. But for some reason you get most of the money instead of none of the money. I could cut you out entirely, get the tools I need from the people who make them, and the table would be the exact same. Your ownership of the tools doesn't make any difference beyond profiting you.

Under the Communist model, you call me names, burn down my house, kill my family and take the tools you didn't earn because my tools are of no value to you despite your homicidal need to deprive me of them.

I like to think that there wouldn't need to be any burning or killing, you just wouldn't be involved in the making of tables.

You could. Yet you don't. Why is that?

Like seriously. There is nothing preventing you from partnering up with some Machinists and making your own factory, with blackjack, Hookers, and Communist values.

Why then do you need my factory/tools/etc?

[Proctopeo]

If the products of the workers labour are being sold for more than the workers are being paid, then the workers aren't receiving the full value of their labour, are they?

That's not how value works.

Really your whole argument is steeped in such incredible amounts of ignorance that I don't see it worthwhile to continue, especially not to go point-to-point with you. I think there's a proverb about that.

[The Emerald Legion]

There's also the fact that your actions again, rely on obtaining materials and tools from others.

If those others are on board with your communist bandwagon? Sure. Go ahead. Knock yourselves out. But if they aren't? You don't have some inherent right to tools or facilities or materials that belong to another.

[Bear Stearns]

Owning a factory requires a lot of work.

Administration consists of nothing more than sitting in Corinthian leather chairs, swigging big snifters of brandy, while smoking huge cigars and saying "hurumph!"

That actually sounds fun.

[Cisairse]

There's also the fact that your actions again, rely on obtaining materials and tools from others.

If those others are on board with your communist bandwagon? Sure. Go ahead. Knock yourselves out. But if they aren't? You don't have some inherent right to tools or facilities or materials that belong to another.

Very interesting of you to use "inherent right" and "belong" in the same sentence.

[The Emerald Legion]

There's also the fact that your actions again, rely on obtaining materials and tools from others.

If those others are on board with your communist bandwagon? Sure. Go ahead. Knock yourselves out. But if they aren't? You don't have some inherent right to tools or facilities or materials that belong to another.

Very interesting of you to use "inherent right" and "belong" in the same sentence.

I'm sorry?

[The East Marches II]

Any property rights outside of things you physically occupy are a legal fiction, protected solely by government action. stop pretending that property rights are somehow a basic fact of human nature. Every country has a different concept of property, and to be quite fair, Us property rights are far less protective than those in civil law countries.

I see you've taken the TEM pill. Very based, very based.

[The Emerald Legion]

Any property rights outside of things you physically occupy are a legal fiction, protected solely by government action. stop pretending that property rights are somehow a basic fact of human nature. Every country has a different concept of property, and to be quite fair, Us property rights are far less protective than those in civil law countries.

Not really. And should the government fail to protect your property rights, you can always just protect them yourself with physical force. Or hire someone to do so.