1. Your cunt

No, absolutely not, Jupiter is trying to push that meme but this isn't going anywhere

Boomers are the ones that voted for "trickle down" economics and the ones that voted for presidents that sent all jobs to china. They're the reason why everything is so fucked in the first place

France seems to be one of the most resistant nations towards the increasing corpratization of the world. Your nation truly does embody the ideals of liberty, equality, and brotherhood. I admire France and the French people. Stay resilient, friend.

Are you even trying? Communists took massive pride in working. That's because they were building their countries, not serving McCoffees to their masters that drive to their executive "jobs" in $80k cars

This country is going to crash and burn with no survivors tho

i fucking hate working so much desu
I'm gonna get the easiest job that requires that i work as little hours as possible. i need one that pays enough so i can buy a small house in the cheapest part of the country but that's it.

Attached: 1544731027943.jpg (586x524, 42K)

you gain nothing from wage slaving.

"Hustle" doesn't seem like just working hard. Its being goal oriented and proactive. It doesn't seem to focus on the system at all.

OP, you must be one passive, bitter shitter to start a thread about others having a different attitude than you. Yeah, it must've been real hurtful that someone told you to nut up and do something or whatever triggered you. Let us huddle together and seethe at people on the internet

>muh boomers wuznt so bad

they literally sold later generations out for retaining their own privileges, esp. at union level. US boomers are all around trash.

NPCs, hollow husks

>wage slaving.

You gonna be a self-employed socialist entrepreneur when the planned economy utopia comes, huh? lel

I would love working under communism because if working as intended you are doing what you love, own a stake in your workplace and get to oversee your work directly into societal profit. Working under capitalism is wagecucking for 16 hours a day so you can see your boss get rims for his Cadillac.

>I would love working under communism because if working as intended you are doing what you love, own a stake in your workplace and get to oversee your work directly into societal profit.

Imagine literally and unironically being this retarded.

>if working as intended
arr u 'avin a giggle moit? a laff? a flippity floppity bum skackin cacklety?

>Boomers are the ones that voted for "trickle down" economics and the ones that voted for presidents that sent all jobs to china

Attached: Dy_WcyGUwAARBit.jpg (640x723, 22K)

>Communists took massive pride in working
Lmao

You'll notice I was being incredibly idealistic. The problem with capitalism that I have is that it offers no hope things will ever get better. Somehow the workplace becomes more soul crushing year after year.

I didn’t say boomers were good, just that they were more protective of some things such as pensions.

>The problem with capitalism that I have is that it offers no hope things will ever get better
And you think it would be better under communism where there's no toilet paper in the stores and you get arrested for pointing out that there's no toilet paper in the stores?

t. owner of pic related

Attached: tq2juwwbsid11.jpg (1024x536, 133K)

Don't need toilet paper when you #hustle for 20 hours a day.
mobile.twitter.com/business/status/894922691098148865?lang=en

what kind of a slave mentality is this shit? and dont give "muh capitalism", a proper capitalists looks out for his own self interest, as an employee this shit goes extremly against your interests. I can see why the employeer would like to push shit like this but not why on earth anybody would swallow it.

In capitalism the person with the most capital is king. Why are so many ardent capitalist anti union by your logic?

you gain lots of money which is nice

It's a joke

I unironally feel awful every time I come home from work. The worst part is that I feek so bad that I have no motivation to do anything I normally would enjoy.

This seems to be a common problem in the modern world and I don’t know how to solve it. It’s not like everyone can just get a different job.

holy cringe

Thats not true though. In capitalism you naturally have winners and loosers. The winners obviously like the system. But it doesnt make them king. They oppose trade unions because it goes against their self interest. But trade unions, even if commies are big fans of them, are not inherently anti capitalist. Labor is a good to be sold like any other. banding together to have a stronger negotiating position is something private companies do all the time especially in retail. As long as the government doesnt interfere and you act in your own rational selfinterest without the use of violence you are engaging in capitalism.

And yet capitalist thoughout history have used violence to squash unions independent of any government interference. Interesting.

:(

ching chong ming mong bing bong pork fry rice in rickshaw free roast doggo 233333 haihaihaihaihai!!!!

Not quite true. Usually they exerted preassure on the government to do it for them. And the use of violence is not a defining feature of capitalism. If it were we would revert to a feudal society. It says nothing about the ideology of the rich. The capitalist doesnt usually have the means to use violence, atleast not normally. This restricts his power to the use of capital within the economy. If he would be able to freely use violence his primary power would come from his military, he would be a warlord operating entirely different especially in the face of competition. Why do you think non agression is the core principle of ancaps as meemy it may be? Because capitalism cant exist when violence is the go to solution of the powerfull. It also explains why, on a large scale azleast, it arose so late in human history.

>Not quite true
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States

I am not saying attempts arent there nor that there isnt any motivation for it. But the scale of violence the capitalist is able to get away with is very limited so that he often has to rely on the Government or more subversive tactics. He cant go out and make his workers slaves after hiring private military. It is this limitation that seperates the capitalist from the aristocracy or warlords. Without it companies wouldnt compete, they would openly wage war against one another.

They cooperate in a clandestine manner and wage war on their rebellious workers instead. Read what I linked.

Holy shit, I can't imagine going 226k into debt in order to get a fucking degree, how can people this dumb exist? How can't they at any point ask themselves if getting even more debt is a smart idea?

I did. And the scale of violence is still limited and was limited further over time. Do you really want to suggest companies can use violence freely? Some would love to but that is not the case. And of course they cooperate against workers. Aristocracy does too in the face of peasant rebellions, still when the peasants are pacified they usually fight each other. That is the same you would see with those factory owners if the use of violence wasnt restricted, it would regress to feudalism. That the use violence has become more and more restricted is what allowed capitalism to arrise of course it wasnt fully there yet in the early days.

Some are. I don't know about that particular person but I do know people sometimes choose to pursue education in fields which are not considered public necessities. If I start working at 18 I will be paying taxes to subsidize the education of someone who chose to begin working later and might even be out of work because she won't consider doing the jobs I will choose to do without college degree. If we are talking about fields which are useful for private sector but not public sector, then it makes even less sense for those to be tax-funded since the main beneficiaries are the students that chose not to work so I would pay them for them to get later jobs that will pay more to them than I am paid - basically it is asking lower class people to subsidize the future middle and upper class people.

It's a shame that people are turned away from sciences, engineering, healthcare, social service, MB&A or things like that because of poverty or fear of poverty. I don't care about for people who waste money to learn fancy words to convince me on paying for their wasteful livings.

Grievance studies, postmodern studies, literary analysis, philosophy - if you want to study these things it is wrong of me to stop you, but the expense should be squarely on you.

The other option would be going into a trade or doing shitty low wage work.

Independent labour unions are legal and protected today. In fact, in my country we are dealing with limited public sector strikes because even the state can't infringe on these rights. In the auto industry and factories in general unions are still very much heard in corporate boardrooms and arbitrage is effective enough that these jobs are safe and well paid while the companies still bring in steady profits and the ensuing tax revenues.

In the USSR and Pol Pot's Cambodia they weren't as they still aren't in Cuba and China. In Venezuela and other strongman-type countries like in Africa, unions and companies that don't kowtow don't get public contracts, so only loyal puppets can get ahead.

lmao no 95% of people complain about work

Are you me?

Attached: 1539480134495s.jpg (240x240, 6K)

When I went to Europe this summer I saw for the first time how unions in developed countries work. It's something that isn't really present in most industries here.

Do you not know how our tuition system works?

Americans are consumerist as fuck. Every worker at McDonald's has the newest iPhone, earpods, an iWatch, and Gucci clothing instead of investing that money into a better future.

just got off work (strong woman emoji) 11 hours aahh #killme but i love what i do #blessed #nevergiveup #onedaycloserthanyesterday #goals

YAAAAAAAS KWEEN SLAY #HUSTLE