If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   NYC fast food workers demand their companies charge $4 for a cheeseburger   (usatoday.com) divider line 297
    More: Asinine, unfair labor practice, fast food  
•       •       •

2979 clicks; posted to Business » on 30 Jul 2013 at 12:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



297 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-30 11:54:37 AM  
MugzyBrown:  There are many factors that make this point moot.  First, Costco still isn't paying their labor more than the value they bring to the company.   Second, Costco and Walmart have different customer bases.  Poor people are dependent on the cheap goods and food found at Walmart and cannot afford to shop at Costco (are there any Costcos in poor neighborhoods?)  It's weird I search for Costco around me and they are all in the suburbs, but Walmarts can be found in some rough neighborhoods in North Philly.
Costco receives 3xs more revenue per employee than Walmart.  Not because they pay them more, but because they have different customer bases and are located in different markets.


Poor people like those employed at Walmart, a company notorious for keeping hours to the minimum to prevent the need to pay for benefits and that has a department dedicated to assisting employees to get government assistance, is in no way culpable to creating the need for cheap goods and food? It is self perpetuating. Pay people less, they need cheaper food, which means you pay people less, ad infintium. The employees at Costco are able to afford to shop at stores like Costco which sells higher quality goods made by other higher paid workers,which allows other higher paid workers to shop at Costco. Also Ad infintium. Same coin, different side.
 
2013-07-30 11:55:39 AM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Honestly, it's like you are a character from an Upton Sinclair novel who came here in a time machine and haven't had a chance to read any 20th century history that refutes your laughably ridiculous Marxist fantasies. Very funny.


You're like some weird fellator of the capitalists, yet you will never ever be one. I find that extremely sad.
 
2013-07-30 11:55:45 AM  

FarkedOver: Saiga410: And workers united do? No we all trade money and work for the betterment of ourselves.

When workers control the means of production and run a workplace, factory or what have you via democratic centralism, yes that is infinitely better than capitalism and infinitely more beneficial to society as a whole.


I disagree.  It will benefit you at the expense of others.... so you are ultimately the caricature that you think capitalists are.
 
2013-07-30 11:57:05 AM  

FarkedOver: The capitalists REQUIRE labor.


Not really.  They can sit home and do nothing, or they can do the labor themselves, or they can hire others to do it.

FarkedOver: The replacement of the betterment of society is what should replace the profit motive


Nobody does anything simply for the betterment of society.  Even charitable work is done for personal motivations

FarkedOver: The intellectual input, the capital investments DO NOT make products.


Sometimes intellectual input is a product.  The company I work for produces nothing but intellectual input.

FarkedOver: The capitalist can buy all the goods necessary to create a product but thinking about it and throwing money at it isn't going to make the product come into being.


And a 'worker' can create a product, but all of their laboring will not magically allow a factory to be built or goods to be delivered or a legal contract to be negotiated for them.  Amazing how society functions.

HotWingConspiracy: Nah, I see where you stand.


So I assume you have no example.  Thanks.  As soon as you get a point, please make it
 
2013-07-30 11:57:45 AM  

Saiga410: At every level people are trading money/work. Everyone leaves the table with what they agree upon. If I can see an oportunity where I can come out with more money/work than I started with then I have used my intellect to multiply work.


That really doesn't address what I said. The shareholder intellect plays no part in multiplying the work in what they invest in. Their money, sure, but not their intellect. Again, I say they produce nothing, bear no responsibility, but feel themselves entitled to the lion's share of the returns, ever increasing, and indeed that's the system we have set up. I'm not even saying here that they deserve nothing, but as it is they contribute the least towards a company's success.
 
2013-07-30 11:57:53 AM  

Saiga410: I disagree. It will benefit you at the expense of others.... so you are ultimately the caricature that you think capitalists are.


Of course it will be at the expense of others.  The capitalists.  I have no problem with throwing the yoke around their necks, as they have done for the better part of human history under one guise or another.  It's time to let the true majority rule. The working class.
 
2013-07-30 11:58:17 AM  

FarkedOver: removal of the profit motive (greed, which is not human nature)


Aww, you are sooo cute.
 
2013-07-30 11:58:56 AM  

cybrwzrd: Poor people like those employed at Walmart, a company notorious for keeping hours to the minimum to prevent the need to pay for benefits and that has a department dedicated to assisting employees to get government assistance, is in no way culpable to creating the need for cheap goods and food? It is self perpetuating. Pay people less, they need cheaper food, which means you pay people less, ad infintium. The employees at Costco are able to afford to shop at stores like Costco which sells higher quality goods made by other higher paid workers,which allows other higher paid workers to shop at Costco. Also Ad infintium. Same coin, different side.


Do you think that a majority of the consumers of Costco and Walmart are the employees?  Your analysis doesn't make any sense.
 
2013-07-30 12:00:10 PM  

MugzyBrown: HotWingConspiracy: Nah, I see where you stand.

So I assume you have no example. Thanks. As soon as you get a point, please make it


The question is simple: Do you have a problem with corporation's artificial protections under the law and their illegal behavior to intimidate their competition or not?

An example isn't needed for you to answer this.

Or are you going to play it like corporations don't have artificial protections under the law and engage in illegal behavior to intimidate competition? You're free to pretend you're oblivious, but everyone can see the inherent dishonesty.
 
2013-07-30 12:01:38 PM  

MugzyBrown: Not really. They can sit home and do nothing, or they can do the labor themselves, or they can hire others to do it.


That would make them a terrible capitalist.  But since capitalism is basically fetishization of accumulation, they won't just sit on their laurels and not make money.

MugzyBrown: Nobody does anything simply for the betterment of society. Even charitable work is done for personal motivations


You're turning this into a human nature argument, and I don't agree with your premise one iota.

MugzyBrown: Sometimes intellectual input is a product. The company I work for produces nothing but intellectual input.


Can you give me an example.  Not being a dick, just curious.

MugzyBrown: And a 'worker' can create a product, but all of their laboring will not magically allow a factory to be built or goods to be delivered or a legal contract to be negotiated for them. Amazing how society functions.


I've already established that I have no qualms with workers seizing the factory and using it for their own purpose.  And what you are amazed at is how a capitalist society functions.
 
2013-07-30 12:02:14 PM  

Saiga410: FarkedOver: removal of the profit motive (greed, which is not human nature)

Aww, you are sooo cute.


OHHHH GREAT another human nature argument!? How cute ;)
 
2013-07-30 12:03:39 PM  

MugzyBrown: Nobody does anything simply for the betterment of society. Even charitable work is done for personal motivations


LOL

A thief thinks everyone steals. Don't assign your mindset to everyone.
 
2013-07-30 12:08:43 PM  

FarkedOver: Saiga410: FarkedOver: removal of the profit motive (greed, which is not human nature)

Aww, you are sooo cute.

OHHHH GREAT another human nature argument!? How cute ;)


For farks sake you were the one that brought that up... there is no facepalm great enough to exemplify my disapoint.
 
2013-07-30 12:09:26 PM  

Saiga410: For farks sake you were the one that brought that up... there is no facepalm great enough to exemplify my disapoint.


So, tell me why it is "sooo cute"?
 
2013-07-30 12:13:29 PM  
Calling for higher wages and the right to unionize, fast food workers took to the streets Monday in a series of rallies held throughout New York state. Calling for higher wages and the right to unionize
What's stopping them from forming a union? Surely it's not illegal. If so, that can't be constitutional.
 
2013-07-30 12:15:44 PM  

jigger: What's stopping them from forming a union? Surely it's not illegal. If so, that can't be constitutional.


Check out the NRLBs rules for forming a union.  It is next to farking impossible.  After card check the company will grind you down to nothing and put you under a microscope and fire you for any infraction.  They have I believe 3 months after card check before the next vote to actually form the union and by the point the main organizers have been drummed out and the employers have given small concessions like paid holidays or something but without having formed a union to collectively bargain on their behalf.

The NLRB rules are so lopsidedly pro-business, it is disgusting.
 
2013-07-30 12:20:36 PM  

FarkedOver: Check out the NRLBs rules for forming a union.


Those are rules for being certified by the NLRB. What's stopping these people from forming a union?

FarkedOver: After card check the company will grind you down to nothing and put you under a microscope and fire you for any infraction.


Who said anything about card check? Can't the workers get together after their shift and agree that they will only negotiate as a collective?
 
2013-07-30 12:22:42 PM  

jigger: Who said anything about card check? Can't the workers get together after their shift and agree that they will only negotiate as a collective?


Without union protection, that would be a gamble.

jigger: Those are rules for being certified by the NLRB. What's stopping these people from forming a union?


If you are not certified by the NLRB you're probably not going to have much luck in court or in the workplace.
 
2013-07-30 12:23:20 PM  

FarkedOver: Saiga410: For farks sake you were the one that brought that up... there is no facepalm great enough to exemplify my disapoint.

So, tell me why it is "sooo cute"?


That you went with the human nature argument and were so wrong.
 
2013-07-30 12:23:48 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: ThatDarkFellow: 7.25 is too low, yes. 15 is ridiculous, though. There are people who work jobs that require an actual skill or education that can't even find work for 15/hr right now.

Why is $15 ridiculous, especially in a major city with a high cost of life like NYC?  I do agree that more skilled professions should be paid even more.  Don't look at it as McDonalds employees asking to be overpaid, look at it as people finally starting to stand up to our current reality of record corporate profits and historically high wage inequality.  All non-executive employees should be demanding more pay.

As to the headline, McDonalds is welcome to charge $4 for a cheesburger, and they'll be pushed out of the market if they do.  It's time to take some of those huge profits and put them towards employee wages - the people at the top end take a little bit less of the pie and give the people who actually do the work their fare share.


It is ridiculous because they can find 1000s of people willing to work for $7.25 an hour.  They will find millions once Obama's immigration dreams come true. The Mcworker of today will be worth even less soon.

/Do any libs know how the free market works?
 
2013-07-30 12:24:18 PM  

jigger: Calling for higher wages and the right to unionize, fast food workers took to the streets Monday in a series of rallies held throughout New York state. Calling for higher wages and the right to unionize
What's stopping them from forming a union? Surely it's not illegal. If so, that can't be constitutional.


I won't name the company, but down in South FL the workers there wanted to unionize, so what the company did was bring down a bunch of corporate people to work at the plant and vote against the union.

This same company has plants world wide and a bunch of them are unionized, but they keep preventing it in Florida
 
2013-07-30 12:25:31 PM  

Saiga410: That you went with the human nature argument and were so wrong.


What would your argument be then?
 
2013-07-30 12:25:59 PM  

MBK: How about not paying their CEOs millions of dollars to...

What exactly DO CEOs do?

I mean for a company like McDonalds.  You are pretty much one of the most recognizable symbols in the world.  Your food is sold all over the place.  You introduce a new burger every year.

What the fark does a CEO do that requires millions of dollars?


Didn't you kind of answer your own question?
 
2013-07-30 12:26:11 PM  

KellyX: I won't name the company, but down in South FL the workers there wanted to unionize, so what the company did was bring down a bunch of corporate people to work at the plant and vote against the union.

This same company has plants world wide and a bunch of them are unionized, but they keep preventing it in Florida


The pitfalls of right to work legislation.
 
2013-07-30 12:26:18 PM  

FarkedOver: jigger: Who said anything about card check? Can't the workers get together after their shift and agree that they will only negotiate as a collective?

Without union protection, that would be a gamble.

jigger: Those are rules for being certified by the NLRB. What's stopping these people from forming a union?

If you are not certified by the NLRB you're probably not going to have much luck in court or in the workplace.


Ok, so unions are worthless. It's the force of government that you want to use.
 
2013-07-30 12:26:18 PM  
Um, how about a big fat NO, YOU GREEDY LYING SACKS

I realize that it's HuffPo, but they do link the study.

Wall Street and corporate execs need to learn to be OK with (even encourage), say, 5% growth per quarter in return for consistent, long-term profits, rather than 45% growth now and layoffs/bankruptcy next year.  That might allow for more than slave wages, hell, maybe even health care (what a novel concept!)  But why should they care when they've got their golden parachutes, and more than enough insider info to short-sell their stock?
 
2013-07-30 12:27:03 PM  

Nemo's Brother: Didn't you kind of answer your own question?


They show off burgers? I can do that! Where's my billion dollar salary!?
 
2013-07-30 12:29:09 PM  

jigger: Ok, so unions are worthless. It's the force of government that you want to use.


Unions as they exist today are worthless.  They have a cooperative spirit with management.  I agree.  But any union is better than no union.  As for the government, they pretty much rule on the side of business all the time.  I am a socialist and advocate socialist revolution and socialist government.  I mean dictatorship of the proletariat.  Then I would trust the government, when it is made up of workers and workers councils (aka Soviets....*gasp*)
 
2013-07-30 12:29:15 PM  
We should end this once and for all, We should have the government pay us a living wage whether we work or not. It's only fair
 
2013-07-30 12:30:14 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: ThatDarkFellow: 7.25 is too low, yes. 15 is ridiculous, though. There are people who work jobs that require an actual skill or education that can't even find work for 15/hr right now.

Everyone should make a living wage. I also agree with you.

Occasionally I get e-mails about open positions from recruiters. I have a background in graphic design. I got one recently for a copy editor with experience using InDesign and it paid $12/hour. Another job was a graphic design job, required experience in graphic design and Adobe Creative suite. That one paid $14/hr. (Both of those are in the Dallas/Ft Worth area.) That's what I was paid at my entry-level job... about 12 years ago. What the hell happened to wages? (And living on those wages is do-able in Dallas but it would still be difficult. I can't imagine what it would be like to live on those wages in NYC.)


This.  I was offered a copy editor position that was supposedly at a director level.  My boss would be a VP and I would be responsible for not only editing the content, but assisting in determining the direction of the publication.  Starting pay: $10/hour.

A constant stream of illegals and H1 Visa puts downward pressure on wages.  When a cashier at McDonalds is only worth $7.25, then everyone (except CEOs) is worth less.  Adding 20-50,000,000 unskilled workers into the workstream will help nobody but the 1%.
 
2013-07-30 12:32:52 PM  

FarkedOver: Saiga410: That you went with the human nature argument and were so wrong.

What would your argument be then?


That greed is human nature.  Just spend a few days with a child and a few of the more said fraises are "I want" and "mine."  It is the basis of greed.  The fraises that we have to teach our kids are "sharring" and "playing nice".
 
2013-07-30 12:34:08 PM  

FarkedOver: Nemo's Brother: Didn't you kind of answer your own question?

They show off burgers? I can do that! Where's my billion dollar salary!?


I mean that they are all over the world.  I'm not saying CEOs are grossly overpaid most of the time, but if a CEO can help a company grow to a multi-billion dollar company, they deserve to be paid a lot.
 
2013-07-30 12:35:45 PM  

Saiga410: FarkedOver: Saiga410: That you went with the human nature argument and were so wrong.

What would your argument be then?

That greed is human nature.  Just spend a few days with a child and a few of the more said fraises are "I want" and "mine."  It is the basis of greed.  The fraises that we have to teach our kids are "sharring" and "playing nice".


That's a really insightful argument you have there.  But I disagree. My argument would be that human nature is the ability to adapt to changing social circumstances..... I know very crazy.

Just because a human being has the capacity for greed does not make it part of "nature". 
We are just as capable of compassion and charity as we are greed.  So fark your greed is human nature. It is learned behavior propagated by capitalism.
 
2013-07-30 12:36:03 PM  

FarkedOver: But any union is better than no union.


Apparently not.

FarkedOver: Unions as they exist today are worthless.


But the union that these workers would form doesn't exist. There all right there yelling with signs. What's stopping them from stopping all the yelling, turning to each other, and agreeing that they are all in a union now? Let's go to the park and figure out what our collective demands are.

FarkedOver: As for the government, they pretty much rule on the side of business all the time.


Probably because the usual case is a case of property rights. I would hope that the government is enforcing property rights, don't you? I mean, you don't magically own a workplace because you got hired to work there that day.
 
2013-07-30 12:36:29 PM  

Nemo's Brother: I mean that they are all over the world. I'm not saying CEOs are grossly overpaid most of the time, but if a CEO can help a company grow to a multi-billion dollar company, they deserve to be paid a lot, at the expense of their workers.


There. I fixed that for you.
 
2013-07-30 12:38:21 PM  

jigger: Probably because the usual case is a case of property rights. I would hope that the government is enforcing property rights, don't you? I mean, you don't magically own a workplace because you got hired to work there that day.


Which is why I am for the abolishing private property.

/I guarantee you have no clue as to what i mean by that.
 
2013-07-30 12:39:47 PM  

FarkedOver: jigger: Probably because the usual case is a case of property rights. I would hope that the government is enforcing property rights, don't you? I mean, you don't magically own a workplace because you got hired to work there that day.

Which is why I am for the abolishing private property.

/I guarantee you have no clue as to what i mean by that.


It means you favor poverty for all. 

And are you going to make some arbitrary distinction between "personal property" and private property?
 
2013-07-30 12:39:49 PM  

Saiga410: fraise


Phrase.  Not trying to argue, but it's phrase.
 
2013-07-30 12:42:15 PM  

jigger: And are you going to make some arbitrary distinction between "personal property" and private property?


No.  I mean private property in the sense of property that has been used to oppress the working class, i.e. factories and other business establishments.

I like that you came in here "concerned" with questions about unions, when all you really wanted to do was shiat on them.  Don't come in here asking questions.  Come in here and defend your pro-business point of view instead of shrouding it in concern.
 
2013-07-30 12:42:24 PM  

gnosis301: Saiga410: fraise

Phrase.  Not trying to argue, but it's phrase.


Thank you. it looked wrong but went with it.
 
2013-07-30 12:42:51 PM  

Saiga410: gnosis301: Saiga410: fraise

Phrase.  Not trying to argue, but it's phrase.

Thank you. it looked wrong but went with it.


It's not a spelling contest, who cares :)
 
2013-07-30 12:44:13 PM  

MugzyBrown: cybrwzrd: Poor people like those employed at Walmart, a company notorious for keeping hours to the minimum to prevent the need to pay for benefits and that has a department dedicated to assisting employees to get government assistance, is in no way culpable to creating the need for cheap goods and food? It is self perpetuating. Pay people less, they need cheaper food, which means you pay people less, ad infintium. The employees at Costco are able to afford to shop at stores like Costco which sells higher quality goods made by other higher paid workers,which allows other higher paid workers to shop at Costco. Also Ad infintium. Same coin, different side.

Do you think that a majority of the consumers of Costco and Walmart are the employees?  Your analysis doesn't make any sense.


That's not the point. Obviously you can't see the bigger picture. If you can't understand the depth of a supply chain and how differing cost pressures impact the system there is no point in trying to explain macroeconomics.
 
2013-07-30 12:46:09 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: The question is simple: Do you have a problem with corporation's artificial protections under the law and their illegal behavior to intimidate their competition or not?

An example isn't needed for you to answer this.

Or are you going to play it like corporations don't have artificial protections under the law and engage in illegal behavior to intimidate competition? You're free to pretend you're oblivious, but everyone can see the inherent dishonesty.


I would be against any artificial protections for businesses too.  I just asked for an example of such things, like I provided for labor unions.
 
2013-07-30 12:48:31 PM  
MugzyBrown:

BTW this is funny shiat!

img.fark.net

/would lol again
 
2013-07-30 12:52:51 PM  

FarkedOver: Can you give me an example.  Not being a dick, just curious.


Well a lawyer produces no product.  He provides nothing but intellectual capital.

FarkedOver: I've already established that I have no qualms with workers seizing the factory and using it for their own purpose


So what if the evil capitalist simply burns down his factory.  So now what the workers do?  Your whole premise is that marxism works because even though 'the workers' don't have the capability of producing anything themselves, they can steal other people's property?  What labor would they have to sell if there never was a factory to begin with?

cybrwzrd: That's not the point. Obviously you can't see the bigger picture. If you can't understand the depth of a supply chain and how differing cost pressures impact the system there is no point in trying to explain macroeconomics.


You're trying to compare Walmart and Costco as if they are the same when they are very different companies.  It's like criticizing Mcdonalds for not paying their workers like those at Le Bernardin. They both sell prepared food, right?
 
2013-07-30 12:53:57 PM  

untaken_name: TuteTibiImperes: Why is $15 ridiculous, especially in a major city with a high cost of life like NYC?

Because the money to pay the workers has to come from somewhere, and that's going to be the customers. When prices rise higher than people want to pay, people will stop buying fast food and then all those fast-food workers will get $0/hr. Will that make their situation better? Also, raising the minimum wage has traditionally resulted in increased prices of basic goods and services, leading to minimum-wage workers being hardest-hit, as they must use the largest percentage of their pay of any class of worker for those basic goods and services. In other words, when your food budget is 5% of your total budget, a price increase of 20% is not terribly damaging. However, when your food budget is 20% of your total budget, it's a much bigger hit. This leads to minimum-wage workers actually being negatively impacted by rises in the minimum wage. It isn't the CEOs who will be harmed by price increases. They can withstand them easily. It will be the very workers who pushed for increasing the minimum wage in the first place that will be harmed the most by it. That's one of the little ironies of life.


Hit second hardest is the middle class. They will not get a raise increase to coincide with the minimum wage increase.  All of a sudden your $60,000/year salary is worth $45,000
 
2013-07-30 12:57:48 PM  

MugzyBrown: Well a lawyer produces no product. He provides nothing but intellectual capital.


I think Bill Shakespeare had something to say about these gas bags.

MugzyBrown: So what if the evil capitalist simply burns down his factory. So now what the workers do? Your whole premise is that marxism works because even though 'the workers' don't have the capability of producing anything themselves, they can steal other people's property? What labor would they have to sell if there never was a factory to begin with?


That is why the workers should be armed to protect the gains of the revolution and defend themselves from the inevitable capitalist backlash.

The workers have the capability to produce but do not have the capital to do so.  The reason being is that they have been exploited from ever having the chance to own capital.  See my Engels quote above somewhere in this thread.

I don't call it stealing when workers have been in bondage because of the wage slave system.

Labor would produce what is needed.


/sorry if i missed anything
 
2013-07-30 12:58:38 PM  

Nemo's Brother: TuteTibiImperes: ThatDarkFellow: 7.25 is too low, yes. 15 is ridiculous, though. There are people who work jobs that require an actual skill or education that can't even find work for 15/hr right now.

Why is $15 ridiculous, especially in a major city with a high cost of life like NYC?  I do agree that more skilled professions should be paid even more.  Don't look at it as McDonalds employees asking to be overpaid, look at it as people finally starting to stand up to our current reality of record corporate profits and historically high wage inequality.  All non-executive employees should be demanding more pay.

As to the headline, McDonalds is welcome to charge $4 for a cheesburger, and they'll be pushed out of the market if they do.  It's time to take some of those huge profits and put them towards employee wages - the people at the top end take a little bit less of the pie and give the people who actually do the work their fare share.

It is ridiculous because they can find 1000s of people willing to work for $7.25 an hour.  They will find millions once Obama's immigration dreams come true. The Mcworker of today will be worth even less soon.

/Do any libs know how the free market works?


Of course not. Welcome to fark.
 
2013-07-30 01:00:38 PM  

FarkedOver: Saiga410: FarkedOver: Saiga410: That you went with the human nature argument and were so wrong.

What would your argument be then?

That greed is human nature.  Just spend a few days with a child and a few of the more said fraises are "I want" and "mine."  It is the basis of greed.  The fraises that we have to teach our kids are "sharring" and "playing nice".

That's a really insightful argument you have there.  But I disagree. My argument would be that human nature is the ability to adapt to changing social circumstances..... I know very crazy.

Just because a human being has the capacity for greed does not make it part of "nature". 
We are just as capable of compassion and charity as we are greed.  So fark your greed is human nature. It is learned behavior propagated by capitalism.


I would say that both are part of our nature, greed and compassion.  Greed has a more natural tendenacy as shown by it being shown earlier in human early development.  Greed is shown before we are able to even talk, how is it a learned behavior?  Hell even your compassionate self agreed earlier that you are acting in greed with your desire to eat the wealthy.
 
2013-07-30 01:05:55 PM  

FarkedOver: Debeo Summa Credo: Which is why it worked perfectly in the USSR, Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea, Nicaragua, etc etc. Marxist economic platforms thrive whenever they've been tried.

The issue here is that socialist revolutions were attempted in nations that were not ready for such revolutions, as they had no bourgeois revolution prior.  They had no capitalist class with which to seize the capital from.

Had Germany, the UK, France or the US had socialist revolutions during the early part of the 1900s, we might all be comrades right now! Germany came the closest, I would say but the rise of fascism (which is a capitalist reaction to socialist movements) quelled that revolution.


First off, you are farking nuts if you don't think there was a capitalist class in Russia before the revolution. Private property, including farms and factories, were seized by the Bolsheviks. Some of those might have been owned by nobles or whatever, but they were still used in profit making capitalist ventures.

But if your pathetic excuse was true, you would be admitting fully that a Marxist society needs to seize capital from a preceding capitalist society to succeed - ie Marxist societies can't develop and thrive on their own because under marxism, no new capital assets are created.
 
Displayed 50 of 297 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report