The landlords and bosses are worthy of total classicide, right Jow Forums?

Because they smell and 我吃狗

Only if we go full on Khmer rouge and crush the urbanite

Imagine that, a filthy red with no sense of humor. Just fucking kill yourself

based
You find people with no senses of humour literally everywhere. I don't consider myself a no fun allowed guy, but when one enter a right-tard hive, all happiness evaporates.

Bosses: No
Landlords: Yes.
Bosses that are also Landlords: Yes.

We need to seperate capitalism into PRODUCT MAKERS and RENT SEEKERS.

One is good.
The other one is bad.

True,
Especially when said landlord and boss is the state apparatus.

Attached: chiapet.jpg (460x543, 52K)

That's basic Socialism my friend

Attached: 23356462235.jpg (855x455, 106K)

Whether private or state-owned, it is irrelevant. They are both equally deserving of the agrarian education.

Attached: 43218192_460342331142602_11459342112915456_n.jpg (640x453, 30K)

Any man who can't bench 3 sets of 10 at 100lbs goes to the gulag. Socialism doesn't need bourgeois weakness.

Thank you, Stalin, very cool

Bosses intrinsically live off the labour of others. There's no reason admin should be paid more than labourers.

I see it more as basic Geolibertarianism.

I have no problem with people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk. I have no problem with hollywood actors, and youtube streamers and pewdiepie either.

I literally have a problem ONLY with landlords.

They trade, accumulate and speculate a made up thing which is essentially the government protected "right of exclusion" from a piece of the universe.

It is a hugely valuable thing, that exists only by consent from the rest of society (as opposed to most things that exists by consent of the one making them. If a wood carver doesn't carve, you dont get the carved thing) and extremely badly mispriced. It is the one place capitalism is broken.

I don't hate rich people. I literally hate ONLY landlords. I want to make this clear. (obs, often they can be both, like Dyson in the UK. In which case I do hate them for that aspect).

As a minimum, my idea to fix this is to have the rent cost per cubic volume of space be fixed (and pretty lowish). That way the only way to make money in, say, London would be build higher buildings.

Have a market based on the creation of space, not the scarcity of it.

I respect your views, for you are on the red road. You're in the anti-landlord stage.

Attached: 34580053_391895297884161_3764612691201622016_o.png (1234x598, 375K)

>get the money from the amount of labour you put in directly into your pockets?

Labour or productivity? And who determines? And hasn't this system been tried before repeatedly only to result in literally the worst death and suffering and starvation in human history?

>an apartment isn't a product

Oh user I have bad news

Apartments are products and building is a service yes.

But the "right of exclusion" from a piece of the universe, is a completely different thing. And has been priced way too wrongly and cheaply.

A guy making a fancy crown for a king makes a product too, this doesn't mean that the idea of royalty and divine birth is "capitalistic".

Cool so how many homeless people will you let sleep in your house tonight?

You know, so that you're not excluding them from a piece of the universe.

You're rent got raised again, eh comrade?

>communists only kill wealthy

Attached: Holodomor 2.jpg (459x600, 76K)

Why do commies oppose hierarchy? Its a natural phenomenon and ensures that only the strongest succeed. Isnt your shitty ideology just asking for death when you decide to oppose hierarchy and fill it with trannies, basedboys, low IQ brainlets and other weaklings?

Attached: 1539919438669.jpg (850x1177, 181K)

Democrats hate landlords and rich people but hate Trump's SALT tax reform. Peak hypocracy

Replace landlords and bosses by jews and niggers and then yes.

One well placed grenade could take everyone there out.

I know that bosses look like rent seekers but in theory they provide a service. The service being that they put the business together (having generated those jobs in the first place), and they manage the logistics of taking decisions about labourers, suppliers, what they do etc. It looks easy, but it isnt.

As a rule of thumb, without the "work" a boss puts in a business ought to fail. (which is why communists feel surprised when strangely in commie nations factories start to shut down) If it doesn't, then its inefficient and it ought to be non-competitive.

Commies don't believe in long lasting friendships, just ask Che and Fidel.

They're a nessassary evil.

Attached: 15492896131666957822669697338409.jpg (2560x1440, 1008K)

Poor people are just as bad.

Attached: letsbehonest.jpg (960x529, 101K)

I told you the solution already idiot.

Fixed the price of rent per offered cubic meter of space. Fix the minimum number of services that space ought to offer too.

That way, you can still speculate, you can still have a market, but the only way to make money off it would be to make MORE space. And if you can't, then gtfo and go do something else.

Right now, the same people who accumulate the land, have an interest NOT to make new space, because it makes the value of the space they already have higher.

If the only way to generate money, was to make more of it, we would end up with a form of capitalism, where people would literally compete in making higher, bigger, better buildings. (Since he who would offer 1000 apartments in one, can make more money from the one who could only sell 500, for the same surface area)

The funny think is that I am quite a neoliberal in everything else. I often say how much cheaper food/calories today are compared to the past, how much better electronics are, everything else is great. Even "big stuff" like cars and private aircraft are cheaper/better. All except ONE chart.

The place where capitalism is broken.

Attached: Homeownership-Rate-2015.png (2680x1780, 176K)

But user then there's still a right to exclusion, that won't fix the problem you brought up at all.

Also that solution is retarded, and you are crazy wrong about what people's interests are.

>being this much of a brainlet
wew
By right, he doesn't have to let a single one in his personal property. If he has a second home, though, I don't see any issue with turning it over to a homeless individual if there is no permanent occupancy or use of said building.
>muh gommies don't like the holodomor? what the frick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The "Commies" you have presented in that picture probably haven't even picked up a book of Marx's. This might be a shock to you, my friend, but I don't believe diversity to really be that important. What matters is class, I couldn't care less if some transgender demanded special treatment. If that trans got special treatment, that in itself is sort of anti anything about Communist.
I find this hard to believe when, like Republicans, they are made up of landlords and rich people. Communists hate the Democrats just as much as they hate Republicans.

Yeah I'd rather die in a total famine, or executed by some kids with PPSHs and red books

Attached: 1548824023335.jpg (103x154, 3K)

Btw, I know that some Jow Forumsacks will mumble something about immigrants, but concider how stupid that is.

Immigrants, should in theory mean more demand for space.

More demand, does send prices higher temporarily, but it also means that now you can make more of something.

More of something means than now you can employ economies of scale.

Economies of scale + competition, eventually ends up with things being cheaper.

When laptops were basically owned by 6 government dudes, they cost millions, when millions wanted them, they cost less than a car.

If many wanted houses, you'd think many would try to throw as many houses as possible at them, and as our construction techniques got better, making them would become cheaper and cheaper. Que in "mile high" skyscrapers, arcologies and all this "futuristic" stuff people assumed as a natural progression.

But it didnt happen. It didnt happen, because what we have right now, is essentially as if the was such a think as the "right to computation" (a limited amount). Which then people got very very cheap, accumulate and constantly speculate and trade upwards. Unsuprisingly, laptops have not only just ended up very expensive, but people have an interest to accumulate as much of them as possible, so as to make them even more expensive for everyone else.

In order to break that, you need to make the only way to make money to make MORE of it, than less. Fix rent, and have people compete in making taller buildings.

Attached: hugh_ferriss_02.jpg (750x896, 370K)

Why not a second room? Why not just some empty space on his floor?

Because it's personal property. I mean, if the occupant of said house welcomed the homeless man in, that would be no problem at all.

a second house would be personal property too

>t. poorfag

No, a second house is private property. What distinguishes between personal and private property is exploitation. Private property is something you use to hold power and gain something from others. Like factories, office buildings, apartment blocks, and multiple home ownership.

Okay so if he has an extra room it's personal property, but if he charges rent for it it's private property.

And if he has a second house but doesn't rent it out it's not private property.

That first part is correct, but the second part is not. Why should a house just be left to rot with no one living in it just because someone owns it? It ain't being used, mate.

omg, you autistic stickler. Fine, the problem is not the right of exclusion, the problem is that it was badly mispriced from people who had no right to price it as such in the first place. (talking about the original 300 year or something government leases).

It is an amazing right to own. It literally sold the future as well as the right to have it eternally protected by police. Unsurprisingly once people realized the true value of it begun accumulating the fuck out of it. Almost all of the modern banking system is essentially designed to accumulate that right and it is ruining capitalism. (since the more people spend for their housing, the less products by everyone else they can buy)

Suppose we were selling (sometimes we do) the right of people to own a freshwater source. It usually also comes with regulations, that we ALLOW you (read: not kill) to do so, but it comes with limitations, like for example, dont start throwing radioactive material in it.

If you didnt, you would in fact creative an incentive for someone who already owns a fresh water source, to also own others and destroy them, so as to make his "more valuable" and expensive.

A good rule of thumb would be that it is granted with the assumption that you will make more of it/more efficiently than if the same resource was commie managed.

Ironically, lo and behold, the commies were shit at everything, but were at least making Commie Blocks.

They didnt have food, or electronics, but had apartments.

We have obesity rates and iphones, but house ownership is collapsing. People's lives get more and more focused in existing only for the purposes of rent or mortgage. And the more they do so, the less products they buy from everyone else as well, causing them problems.

Solution: Either build more space or gtfo. Have the the right only go to "more space" builders.

(And then the "more space" builders can compete with each other)

Well wait you said that something was only private property if it was used to exploit or gain power over others. If a house just sits empty it's doing neither.

Or did you want to add some sort of additional qualification to that definition?

This is one of the laziest LARPs in a while.

>when a leaf makes an excellent post

Attached: good_dog.jpg (500x860, 219K)

What happens if I decide to change classes mid game? Can I get a respec?

youtube.com/watch?v=7DqvweTYTI0

>be landlord
>be carpenter
> forced "agrarian education"

Lol, you and what army, Buzzfeed quiz director? I would hit your pansy-ass so hard in the head with a hammer that you'd wake up in a Soviet version of Oz.

Red chinese presence detected. Deploying countermeasures.
六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 法輪功 Falun Dafa 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 肅清 活摘器官 黑社會 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 東突厥斯坦

Attached: 5BC96479-3C2C-4A4C-B783-5A0443D558B8.jpg (387x550, 40K)

I agree.

>OP gets a call from a recruiter for a huge corporation
>oh oh yes! that opportunity sounds wonderful! I'll be a manager for 80k/yr
this kills the gommunist.

Yes, please qualify. Also, what if I personally use both houses, instead. For example, I live on one side of the city, but have rentals in a nearby city where my wife also works. What if she stays in our second home during the week to be close to work? That should be fine by your definition. So, as a landlord, if private property ownership is abolished, why shouldnt I turn it into personal property and use it myself? Does that fix your housing pricing concern?

You aren't talking about classes, you're haggling over wages

>t.pillow humping faggot who's never built anything in xirs life

>I dont want to starve
>U dum lmao

Imagine being this much of a brainlet

Commie position or not, there is an inevitable problem with landlords. In my area everything except two apartment buildings has gone section 8. One is absolutely unlivable, the other is way too overpriced. Most are owned by people from the twin cities, 3 and a half hours south of us. Ever since my wife and I got married we can no longer just leave me off the lease in order to have a place to live.

CHINKS BTFO
六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 法輪功 Falun Dafa 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 肅清 活摘器官 黑社會 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 東突厥斯坦

What is happening in pic?

Attached: communist privilege.png (1000x1000, 102K)

Attached: other peoples money.png (600x400, 164K)

Landlords yea, bosses no

fuck anyone who doesn't produce things

Attached: bossman.jpg (400x400, 41K)

good old state granted privilege turned to monopoly. Fuck rent seekers

Attached: landplow.jpg (960x640, 77K)

I mean, you aren't entitled to live where you want to live dude. There are other cheaper areas to live in.

Found the millennial

Attached: 723C4298-9BF2-4B7D-B7E3-D9B94AB9D3C8.jpg (500x524, 42K)

jidf in full force

>you aren't entitled to live where you want to live dude

We are way past homesteading

If only some people "own" the earth, then only some have a right to live upon it.

All individuals must have access to the earth in order to exercise their right to sustain their own lives. Thus, to allow the earth to become the unconditional property of a relative few is to deny this right to everyone else, since it makes the latter obligated at birth to pay the former for mere access to the planet -- as if the former were responsible for the earth’s very existence.

While the private collection of land rent may seem harmless at a micro-level, at a macro-level it constitutes an entitlement scheme, whereby Group A receives payment from Group B, even though Group A renders no service in return. In that sense, it violates the right of the members of Group B to the fruits of their labors.

Attached: freelunch.jpg (854x750, 64K)

>Commies of Alberta
Ahh yes, rEdmonton.

Luckily, the closest thing we have to a Commie Party (the NDP) is going down in flames this year.

What is that image of?

Georgism would fix it

Attached: ally.png (500x2993, 1.87M)

Just buy land faggot

working on it baguette

Attached: anlol.jpg (960x922, 100K)

Bitch please. Goergism ends at anti rent seeking. Henry George/Georgism/geolibertarianism is a celebration of free markets. George even called Marx "The prince of the muddle heads". George knew human nature would never allow for communism and said as much

Attached: billbo.jpg (400x252, 29K)