• Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Did… did I say they couldn’t? I think this continues to be a misunderstanding of what socialists believe.

      • galloog1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        So ah… What’s the issue then? You can have what you want under capitalism. Attacking the system is forcing your own on others. This is unironically what makes socialism unpopular in the context of history.

        • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They said it in the first comment

          they hate workers not having any power or democratic choice in how they interact in the market

          • galloog1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The western left doesn’t agree on one form of socialism to align around so it is both impossible to criticize with any specificity and serves as a catch-all in opposition to the current system. It breaks down when they suddenly have to align on specific policies.

            • hglman@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s a good thing; socialism is a fledgling idea. It needs discoure and experimentation. The attack that lack of exact details and perfect cohesion is an empty one.

              • galloog1@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Wanting to burn down the system without a coherent and specific approach to replace it only hurts people.

                • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  How do you feel about Bernie or AOC, they are the system and aren’t trying to burn it down. They just want to fix the system.

    • CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nothing stops them! except shitty wages that are not enough to pay your absurdly high bills for housing, utility and shitty food plus competition which does not treat their eorkers fair and is therefore much more profitable and can easily destroy your worker-friendly cooperative, which they totally will do because CAPITALISM

    • Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nothing in America stops the workers from owning the factory or the profits.

      Fully stop? No, not technically. But our society makes it as close to impossible as it can be without being illegal

        • gerbilOFdoom@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure: becoming a member of a corporation costs money. You either have to pay to get it set up or buy a share to get in so those who already paid are made whole.

          Unfortunately, the US as an example, our society is structured such that the majority of people here have zero savings with wages decreasing in value every year due to inflation. A person in this situation cannot produce money to buy-in; squeezing water from a stone situation.

          • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            All people are essentially born with no assets, and if they want to secure wealth, they must sell their labor to achieve it.

            In other words, children of parents who own an outsized number of assets do not have to sell their labor to achieve it, because it is offset by their parents assets. This inherently produces an unequal/unbalanced system where some people simply never have to work this way. This is why extremely in-demand internships at companies in places like New York City are often unpaid, and thus generally end up going to people who already have money, access, and support systems. Because only those kind of people can afford to take on an unpaid internship to move upward in the capitalist system.

            This is also the source of generational poverty, because it can be really hard to escape when generation after generation are born to no assets.

            • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              All people are essentially born with no assets

              False. The children of rich people are born rich. That’s a major part of the problem. It creates dynasties.

              • DataDecay@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                This is an area I have said needs to be taxed to hell, there is no good reason we should allow the passing of wealth without heavy penalty. I’m convinced that if we taxed all forms of wealth transfer at something like 80%, we could pretty much get rid of income tax. Income you have earned should be your entitlement, assets passed down to you should be where the taxes cut in.

                • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So, you have to sell off 80% of your dead mother’s mementos unless you’re rich? Careful—your proposal is good in spirit, but has ugly side effects that need to be carefully avoided.

                  • DataDecay@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I’d rather sell off mementos than lose livelihood. We all know the top 1% shelter and live off non income based tax shelters, and then just pass those shelters on through legacies. Given the arbitrary caps on assets your grandmother’s Polaroids would likely be safe. You wont see good faith attempts to fix taxes regardless though, as politicians are in the business of making money, so would never go after their own livelihood.

            • gerbilOFdoom@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Inflation’s been happening since currency was created. We don’t notice day to day because the effects are stretched over a long period.

              Try calculating the value of a 2010 dollar against the current 2023 dollar. You’ll find the cumulative effect of ~5% inflation each year is significant.

              In addition, periods exist throughout American history during which inflation has spiked noticably within a year or two - this is nowhere near the first time.

        • Sanctus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Look at the current environment in America. Look at the absence of worker co-ops besides like Winco. Why aren’t there more? What factors are at play that is seemingly preventinf the natural formation of worker co-ops if they are allowed? Are children taught they can do that? Do people getting MBAs learn this in their classes? There are a lot of questions to ask here. While we do have some examples, for whatever reason they are not common here. I do think it has something to do with the resources the average citizen has available, the current ecosystems within existing markets, and all around education of the average American citizen.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Only in the most technical of technical senses. Much like “there’s nothing stopping someone who’s born poor from becoming a millionaire”. Legally? No. Practically? Yes, there’s so freakin many barriers to such a thing happening, it’s almost statistically impossible. It’s so rare that when it happens it makes national headlines.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ok now I know you’re a troll. And a liar.

          Poor people who became millionaires exist, but they’re a rounding error. I don’t think you’re one of them, though I bet you tell yourself that. Having daddy pay for your tuition or whatever is just conveniently left out.

          Actually, I bet you’re not even a millionaire.

          Whatever it is, the point is that what you’re claiming is so statistically rare, I don’t believe you. And then you’re also claiming it’s common.

          Ergo, troll.

          I’m done talking with you.