Come up with a rebuttal for pic related

>what is risk?

>Hey guys, let's fix the problem of a hundred million workers by having one guy start a company!

Let's have every single person in the entire world follow that advice, and see how well it works. Oh, you mean that isn't a real solution?

Tax is the same as paying rent, if you don't like taxation then you don't like landlords either.

Are you goddamn retarded? Risk that can yield benefits like $$$, not risk that lands you in jail. What a false analogy.

OP btfo'd

Attached: 1557943011714.jpg (600x849, 245K)

So what you're saying is, everyone should go out to Vegas and put everything into a slot machine?

If his labor is only worth a few pennies, why do the workers keep him around? They can just hire another worker who can do that.

>labor theory of value

kek

How do you determine the value of your labor? If the marketable value of the product represents the productivity invested, then there is a valid heuristic for determining surplus value. If the product produced by labor is not a standard for determining the value of said labor, then what is? Anything that alienates the directness of the producer-consumer relationship alienates the producer from the product product insofar the value of labor is concerned. Aristotle says as much in so many words, reducing usury to a magnification of said relationship, in his Politics.

you can choose to rent and your rent goes to maintaining the building.
taxes are forced and you have very little say over where it goes

Makes a good point but far too much text. Trim that shit down 90% and it might be persuasive.

It's pretty simple.

My company's owner charges clients $140 an hour.
He pays his techs $25 an hour.
He pays me and two other managers to run the company.

He steals $115 per hour that the techs could be charging the clients directly themselves without him. The techs could then pay me and my fellow managers a salary to run the background stuff they need to charge the clients, and we don't need him. They each pitch in a little to keep the lights on, and boom, everyone actually working makes more money.

the pennies is his revenue after taxes and expenses. there's this position called management where people gather resources and people to get things to work. the cashier at your local mcdonalds doesn't have the time to buy supplies, equipment, advertise the business, organize shipments, and issue paychecks. if one of those cashiers wants to, they can apply for a position called management. people in management get paid because they keep the business alive which allows people to have a job so they can use their money on other businesses keeping those ones alive.

i'm pretty shit at editing images. feel free to trim it if you want to

Value is created with a mix of capital and labour. You need labour to extract capital from its state of nature and is accumulated over time within an economy. If there was no price for capital it would never be created or sustained. Let’s be real though this is just some commie fag who isn’t looking to change their mind

My labor was purchased from me at a mutually agreed upon price, retard.

Why don't the cashiers hire a manger then?

You're legitimately a fucking retard

Yes, a completely fair agreement where the offers were:
"I'll take this job (or a similar one), or else I will starve to death" vs "I'll hire you, or else just keep making my other employees work harder like they are doing without you right now. In fact, it's really no trouble to me at all if you don't take this job"

Totally equal bargaining position right there.

Taxes are huge over your income and the company's income too. Also the government distorts the market so much in hundreds of different ways to crush small and medium business and overcentralize everything into the hands of huge bloated shitty corporations led by cocaine addicts and jews.

Where's the circle that denotes how must infrastructure, R&D, and negotiations were required before your labour was capable of producing that type of vaue?

Capitalism working as intended.

Corporations who don't use the government to crush the competition would get out-competed by the ones that do. You'd have to be a shitty businessman not to try to get the government on your side.

>what are employers
>what is a low level employee asking for a higher position
i'm not suprised a communist has never applied for a job, let alone figure out what an employer or manager does by looking at the name

Attached: 1557463116507.png (500x875, 259K)

Why does some other guy get to decide how much of the money I earned goes to "negotiation" ? Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow?

I agreed with my employer how much income I get from/out of my value. I don't get to make such an agreement with taxation.

This post is a supernova of fuckin unmitigated stupidity.

If a person is born in America or any other country that I know of for that matter, they are forced to pay taxes. Let's go through it.

So you're born, okay, someone needs to take care of you, feed you, clothe you, or you die. If that someone is family, then theyre being taxed on the work they do to earn money to be spent on you. If you immediately go to an orphanage, the government is using tax money on you, or the orphanage owner is paying taxes on the land, their work, on behalf of their employees, etc. Being born period means taxes are forced on someone to pay for you.

Let's say you find some magic way to avoid this until you're of legal working age. Well, as soon as you get any legal job, you're paying taxes. You'll probably pay state income tax, but definitely social security - or rather, your employer is forced to withhold money from you for those taxes. You could theoretically break the law and work illegally, but if you're caught, then you go to court and potentially jail - both of which are paid for by citizen taxes. You don't get a choice to not pay into social security taxes, even if you have no intention of using it. Even if you want to expatriate, you literally can't get to the age whereby you could choose that on your own without paying taxes, unless mayyyyyyyybe your entire life is undocumented and completely illegal - your parents can't birth you in a hospital, their income must be untaxed via illegal means, and yours must be too, until you can leave the country, which you must also do illegally as, according to the state, you don't exist since you don't have a birth certificate.

Tldr, the act of being born forces taxes on someone and eventually you, there is literally no legal way to avoid paying taxes no matter what possible path you take.
Taxation is theft.

When agreeing to work for a company there is an agreed-upon social contract between both parties involved making it a voluntary transaction meaning it can't be theft.
Taxation is theft because the government is forcibly taking your property despite you never signing a social contract saying they can do so, therefore, taxation is theft.

kek

please be a troll

Attached: 1563572027735.jpg (222x293, 18K)

>Makes a good point but far too much text.
thats the point dude

>Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow?

Yes, yes you are. Go out and get on it. Feel free. Meanwhile, I am making 6 figures and living a comfy life. IDGAF if the guy who hired me is making millions of dollars a year (he isn't) because I am not a greedy fucking envious jealous lazy assed communist bastard who hasn't the skill set to earn 6 figures.

>operating a machine to produce the product is the same as the genius to come up with the product

no

>Come up with a rebuttal for pic related

'Taxes " needs to be a much bigger circle while "Surplus Value" needs to be much smaller.

Wages = Red
Taxes = Orange
Surplus Value = Yellow.
OP = Faggot

But you agreed to pay taxes as soon as you got a job in a place that charged income tax. You could have gotten a job somewhere else, after all it's a "free market" am I right? If charging no taxes was a better system, then countries would be doing it right now or they would be out-competed on the global market, right?

No? You mean markets don't work to solve problems like this on their own? You mean it's possible for people to not have any option to get paid what they actually want and have to settle for what's around? That can't be right.

He is, if he is self-employed. If he decides to go into the employ of someone else, he agrees to the terms, including wage. Nothing is stopping him from being self-employed and using only his own labour.

Okay, all the workers of the world will just take your job.

>Nothing is stopping him from being self-employed and using only his own labour.
Except that the entire world economy would implode if everyone followed that advice.

"Go start your own company" is only good advice as long as no one follows it.

>Only having one job to choose from
Hahaha

the owner is bringing in clients. brokering is a value-add because it connects parties that otherwise wouldn't have contracted.
go build a book of business yourself if you want to capture more of the revenue. the owner is providing you a reliable, limited liability entity for stable cash flown from clients he acquired. or he's providing a brand that makes clients want to contract with the firm.
you're free to do exactly what he does... so go do it. otherwise, understand that owners take on risks you don't, have skills you don't (such as procuring business), and are literally entitled to the share of the free cash flow they own.
if you're undervalued, demonstrate it and get higher pay. if you're not, you're earning exactly what you deserve - the same wage he could pay somebody else to do the same job.
you have no right to the revenue beyond your agreed upon compensation without being a shareholder or debtholder, and they only have that right because they risked capital by providing it to a business that could collapse and not pay them back.
just because there are x people in the supply chain doesn't mean they all contribute or are legally entitled to 1/x of the earnings. the law is very clear on who is entitled to earnings - equity holders and credit providers, period.
so, go deploy some capital or start your own business and retain some of its equity.

Beyond bookkeeping and other inflationary bank practices, the divorce of product from transactional value, and productivity from product value, causes inflation, which is a function of value-product in disconnect. Your business owner is operating as a sort usurer as per Aristotle. The employer-employee relationship is relatively new. In antiquity, it was shameful for a free man i.e. a citizen to sell his labor. The modern employer acts somewhere between the role of merchant and producer.

Yeah, you could take Job 1 which pays you less than you earn, Job 2 which pays you less than you earn, or even Job 3 which pays you less than you earn.

So many choices!

Are you retarded? Capitalism is only the use of money and reinvestment, idiot. Nobody could invent a substitute for this (maybe a complement like direct trading, ...). Everything else is a jewish hallucination or retards echoing it.
Any other system except very few occasions were based on shitty monopolies (including all the commie, socialist and fascist stupidity you masturbate here).

>Not everyone can do it, so it doesn't exist
Hahaha

>the owner is bringing in clients. brokering is a value-add because it connects parties that otherwise wouldn't have contracted.
That's IS what I do for the company.

The whole rest of your post is nonsense though - it only works as long as everyone else doesn't do it. I can start a company sure, but if everyone quit their job started a company, then life as we know it would end.

"Go start a company" is just another way of saying "Stop complaining that everyone is being exploited, after all one person could stop being exploited if they wanted to"

>Slavery is normal right guys

If you knew jack shit about history you'd know that the US government had more money than it knew what to do with before the income tax was instated

>But you agreed to pay taxes as soon as you got a job in a place that charged income tax.

I did not, the government forces itself into the equation without my say. Would you say it's just that a third middleman shows up in the middle of two people making a voluntary transaction between each other and claim it's right that he gets a share by force?

In antiquity, the citizens were the 1% and there were non-personed slaved and peasants fucking everywhere.

Who do you think worked the fields?

Imagine being so low IQ you think the problem of global capitalist exploitation through wage slavery is just "one person isn't getting paid enough"

Hahaha

Yes, you can go work in a state that charges no income tax, and more and more people are doing that. It's a personal choice and typically salaries have to be higher in states/municipalities where taxes are higher, so like in any market the labor market has trade-offs. It's not really a "problem" and it's well established that more taxes and more bureaucracy (two of the things socialists champion) lead to more waste and less efficiency.

Attached: 1527400643604m.jpg (1024x971, 130K)

Why are you a dumbass? One of your underlying propositions is that all the workers of the world are my equal. There is no such thing as equality. I spent decades building a skill set, decades you stupid fuck. Decades of doing without, working long hours, studying what I do until I got very good at it. THAT is what gives MY labor value. Some nigger spending his spare time playing video games and smoking weed between the hours he spends at a Walmart is not my equal. He doesn't deserve the same amount of money because it takes zero skill to but a box of fuckin' Pop Tarts on a shelf and sweep a floor. That lazy, stupid son of a bitch can't take my job because he can't do my job. Just like there are hundreds of jobs I can't do, and would fail at immediately. I don't deserve whatever money those people doing those jobs earn, because I don't have the skills required. I will never have those skills for a multitude of reasons, one of which being I am not those people.

Why are you people so utterly stupid and without a clue as to how things actually work?

we need to nationalize silicon valley

I don't see that as a valid heuristic for determining value. You understand, I am sure, the contingencies of time, place, and personality which could manipulate the agreed upon value of the same performative acts. The question of inherent value is the same whether it is applied to ethics, metaphysics, or labor. To deny the possibility of a real value of labor, rather than a purely relative market value, is entirely nihilistic and atheistic in its ultimate application.

Attached: rebuttal.png (1312x1410, 261K)

You could have gotten a job somewhere else. You specifically chose to get a job at a company based in a place that taxes the companies and workers there.

I mean, you DO have a choice right? You aren't saying you had to take that job against your will because no one would offer you any other option right? That doesn't sound like something that could possibly happen under capitalism :^)

That has no bearing on the point. The chart in OP implies that one's labour is extracted and creates more value than his wages reflect. "If everyone was paid exactly as much as their labour produced, no one would have a job." So, it's a stupid fallacy.

>Go get a job like me if you don't like your salary!
>You can't get a job like me.

Nice argument there user. Your solution to people being underpaid is to tell them to do something that you tell them they cannot do.

Then why was major infrastructure non-existant? The military were just retards with springfields? Federal law enforcement was worth shit? Taxes are the price of living in society.

Surplus value is a made up term created by communists. The reasons surplus value is a dumb concept are
>the investor is the reason the employee has work
>the investor is the one taking the risk in hopes of a return on investment, the worker gets a steady paycheck regardless
>progressives keep pushing for equal pay, however different employees create different amounts of value for a company
>all the capital is owned by the employer, not the employee
>often progressives decry marketing, management as unnecessary. These same people have never run a business.

>Everything be can't start their own company cause it wouldn't work!

Yes, it wouldn't work. Which is the point.
Those who can, do; and provide employment opportunities for those too scared, incapable, or unwilling.

It's not that you can't do it on your own.
It's that you don't want to. And the cost of not wanting to do everything all by yourself is a fraction of your produced value being taken by those who do it for you.

It's not complicated, and margins aren't actually that high.

The Walton family income comes out to like $25-50 dollars per employee.

Overhead and supply of a business are absurdly expensive.

In a restaurant you're looking at 2-5% profit, not counting what you have to reinvest into the restaurant repairs. Employees are 1/3rd of expenses, supplies and overhead 2/3rds.

Grocery stores never break 1% profit margins.

That's silly. You eat food right? Someone didn't need to take money out of your income to choose what food to feed you. You manged it all by yourself - and if you needed help you paid a doctor or nutritionist for advice.

So why don't people just use some of their money to pay for all the things needed to keep the lights on at THEIR company? Why do they need someone else to do it for them? If they need help deciding how to spend the money, they can CHOOSE to pay for a manager.

Sorry I'd actually like to discuss this seriously, can we stop just shitposting for a moment so I can try to wrap my head around this one?

What is "Surplus Value" and how is that actually determined?

tell me where is this land that has no taxes

Attached: 1565501393234.gif (332x332, 1.94M)

Slaves are the property of the slave-owner. In a similar manner, peasants are tied to the land. These are legitimate relationships. The extension of citizenship to men who are not economically liberated is a farce that divorces the ownership class from their natural responsibility.

It is the difference between the market price of a product and the cost of production.

Educate yourself user.

Attached: 881EADDC-351D-43DC-B130-48A9EE6F9A30.jpg (1225x1126, 122K)

Jesus Christ. It isn't the universe paying me for my work- it's a particular person or company. And they have particular needs at particular times, so yes, the same "labor" is going to fluctuate in value based on the needs of those paying me to perform it. So go ahead and come up (in your dorm room or commieblock) with some asinine and arbitrary "real value" of making an abacus - it doesn't mean anyone in their right mind is going to pay it in 2019. You have to figure out what's important (read: VALUable) to whom, at what time, and how to provide it efficiently. And you need to figure this out years in advance. It's why you're not Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos (and frankly why I'm not either).

No you idiot. I am telling you that not everyone is equal. Never will be. Who decides what is "underpaid"? You can't live in a McMansion and have a new iphone every year? You have to buy a used car instead of a brand new one? Under our system, as imperfect as it is, our poor people are fuckin' obese. You understand this? We have fat people who are allegedly living in "poverty". Fat people with air conditioning, refrigerators, cell phones, cable, electric washers and dryers, televisions, computers, etc. etc. Little tards like you have no idea what under fucking paid actually is. People are typically not underpaid. They are educated at the expense of others for 12 years. There are libraries, job training programs, welfare etc. etc. to help people already. If some lazy son a bitch can't make it work with all of that, let them be "underpaid".

And no, I am telling you that just because someone feels they are currently underpaid, they can, if they do what is required, get paid more in the future you complete idiot. You want the gravy and the rib-eye without having to kill the cow. You don't deserve it. You deserve a fucking rope around your communist neck.

First off, grasp that value =/= price.
Value is what something is worth. Price is what something costs. They aren't the same thing. Got it?

Capitalism is the process of paying labor a lower price than what it is worth, and keeping that extra money. So if a guy who owns a plumbing business charges a client $500 for a job, he pays his worker $100 of that $500 that the worker earned, spends some of that $400 on the company, and keeps the rest.

You have the freedom to run an employee owned company and do whatever with your "surplus"
>pic related

Attached: employee-owned-companies.png (400x232, 157K)

owned
/thread

So communism is just neo-feudalism, which sounds apropo.

The proletariat in the USSR were just serfs to be moved around on the whims of the party.

Why are you so angry about something this thread isn't even about? When did you get on the topic of "equality" when no one else is talking about that?

We're talking about how ALL wage labor is theft. Every single person paid a wage, from the minimum to you is being exploited.

Attached: 1489985536721.jpg (255x255, 16K)

the left cannot meme

Attached: F54DD49D-77CB-427A-9B52-D979A9E14420.jpg (735x626, 70K)

So prove you can do it. No one is stopping you from proving him wrong.
THAT was his point.

Attached: 1527728389380.gif (338x288, 2.51M)

consent you fucking retard, thats it. I never consented to taxes or some fucking social contract, it is forced.

But that's a post-facto reasoning. You can't know whether or not a good or service is going to make a return at business launch. Most businesses fail within six months of launching in fact.

So if all profit is the result of surplus value being skimmed from the laborer, wouldn't that mean that laborers from failed businesses have exploited the business owner by not producing value equivalent to the cost of running the business?

I.E., if I hire ten people to carve wooden ducks to sell, and my wooden duck business goes under, do those workers owe ME money because they didn't make good enough wooden ducks?

Moreover in a multi-stage economy how do we even know what percentage of labor goes to each person? And what about the person buying the product, do the laborers owe HIM money if the product doesn't work, or is it the guy who runs the business?

It seems as though this is all backwards. If we accept that the market price of the good is its total value because that is what people paid for it, does it not follow that the value of the labor itself is whatever the worker accepted in return for his service?

Because otherwise you basically need a time machine to determine whether or not you should be paying a worker to do a job, or he should be paying you to fuck up a job you want him to do.

Attached: siaues-only-dumb-assholes-get-in-this-box-92-20-42275408.png (500x517, 132K)

It's sarcasm user. You can't get a job in a country that doesn't charge taxes any more than any worker can get a job at a company that doesn't exploit their labor.

It's not a freely made choice because no other option exists. You can choose which country, but you pay taxes regardless. You can choose which company, but you get paid less than you're worth regardless.

Oh boy. You're degenerating into "real communism hasn't been tried yet!" at an alarming rate.

And I'm saying sure, let's get all 7.5 billion people on earth to do that one job. After all, that's what he's telling us is the solution to the problem. Just get a 6 figure job. So let's have everyone on earth do that.

Sounds completely reasonable to me!

And Americans under capitalism have their jobs sold to chinks, no healthcare, no proper homes, no infrastructure that isn't crumbling, no good wages for the shitsack jobs they do have, alongside rich kikes in wall street making gorillions of dollars off the working class' sweat. And Drumpfberg just cut their taxes, therefore putting the tax burden on what little middle class we have.

>OP's pic doesn't actually make a point
>OP's pic suggests a map of possible relations

What's there to refute?

Sage bait threads.

Save up for a few years, invest in stock dividends, and bam, you have a basic income for the rest of your life. No?

So if we give everyone in the country some stocks, then no one has to work?

Sounds completely workable to me.

The worker also gets a surplus which is equal to (his wage) - (his reservation wage)

>implying surplus value is a real thing and not just mental gymnastics

Attached: 1544986487020.png (680x1483, 38K)

An entrepreneur can specialize in just about anything, it's not "one job", it's an umbrella of wildly different fields approached from one common perspective.

see

>employment is exploitation
And this is why Marxists never existed before the industrial revolution. Our biggest mistake, truly and ironically, was creating a society so great that out of misplaced compassion we could allow weak, feckless ingrates like yourself to survive where they otherwise wouldn't have. And now your weakness is spreading like a mind virus.

Attached: 1533309979572.jpg (400x331, 80K)