Economic Classes explained - General

[QUOTE=sgman91;52419231]I'm just saying that something big changed somewhere around the late 60s to the early 80s that fundamentally change the way our society worked, both economically and socially.[/QUOTE] it's largely to do the end of capitalism (a process which began in the early 20th century) and its transition into managerialism (something completed under reagan) i would argue. shortly afterwards there was the onset of modern globalization, de-industrialization, and the fact that the rich countries started to hit diminishing returns on investment about the same time too.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419285]This is very subjective. What is a benefit? Making useless toys which nobody really wanted until they were hyped up in viral market campaign? Wearing expensive diamonds and driving overpriced supercars? It only benefits the few people with vasts amounts of money to spend, not benefiting the community as a whole. Things like water access, electricity and healthcare benefits everyone.[/QUOTE] What do you mean by useless toys? You said you wanted freedom, but apparently I'm not allowed to buy my useless toys now? Sounds like your definition of freedom sucks dick. Not everything is supposed to be useful, some things are just meant to be fun.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52419274]Yes, they are both true. And I'm completely okay with that. Running a business isn't as simple as pushing the "make free money from thin air" button every morning, you know. Business owners pay a fuckload of taxes, especially in the EU where you are, and you as a laborer are entitled to a minimum wage. With that in place, there's only so much money a business owner can pocket. Not to mention that running a business isn't the easiest job either.[/QUOTE] If every worker were a owner of the business though, more people would benefit from it. Sharing the profits, wouldn't that be a more rewarding alternative (for the most amount of people)?

[QUOTE=RB33;52419257]Venezuela isn't trying to be proper socialists or else the private economy would already be disolved. They are calling themselves socialists and at the same time not taking the necessary steps to continue and is just in a kind of semi-socialist/capitalist authoritarian mess without any control. I will make that assumption, because all the other countries, you mentioned are not proper industrialized western countries. In which socialism was intended to implemented in. [/QUOTE] "I have no data so I'm happy to make this assumption." okay. The french commune, CNT spain, etc. were all in developed countries. [QUOTE=sgman91;52419231]I'm just saying that something big changed somewhere around the late 60s to the early 80s that fundamentally change the way our society worked, both economically and socially. It can't be a coincidence that a huge number of economic and social trends all started within 5-10 years of each other. What caused it all? I really don't know. It's so hard to pick apart the causes from the effects when there are SO many convoluted statistics with high correlations. [editline]30th June 2017[/editline] If I were an economist or sociologist, trying to figure out this confluence of change would be my life's work. I feel like it's key to understanding where we are today.[/QUOTE] That chart is pretty bad btw. It's charting aggregate productivity against average incomes, which is naughty naughty. The way things are often calculated for these stats is p. much always pretty dubious (how compensation is calculated,) here's [URL="https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/the-region/where-has-all-the-income-gone"]something that responds decently[/URL]. EPI is a leftist thinktank lol There isn't really a large unknown here. The two main changes at the time regarding labor and the economy were in the family, and participation. At the time we saw large amounts of women entering the workforce, contributing in large part to the participation increase. As well, the family structure changed, fewer children, more college, more divorces, etc..

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52419298]What do you mean by useless toys? You said you wanted freedom, but apparently I'm not allowed to buy my useless toys now? Sounds like your definition of freedom sucks dick.[/QUOTE] You never wanted them until you were tricked into buying them. You will just realize how useless it was and throw it into the bin the next day. You just recovered otherwise lost time and money.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419257]So if I work for the wealthy business owner, he doesn't make any profits because of my work? They can both be true.[/QUOTE] You work for money. A business hires you to increase production, which increases revenue, which gets given back to you as a wage or salary, and to all the other employees and executives. The rest is reinvested into the business which allows it to grow.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419300]If every worker were a owner of the business though, more people would benefit from it. Sharing the profits, wouldn't that be a more rewarding alternative (for the most amount of people)?[/QUOTE] Businesses with employee ownership exist you know.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52419298]What do you mean by useless toys? You said you wanted freedom, but apparently I'm not allowed to buy my useless toys now? Sounds like your definition of freedom sucks dick. Not everything is supposed to be useful, some things are just meant to be fun.[/QUOTE] to be fair, advertisers base their entire career around trying to get people to buy things they don't necessarily want, and since the advent of modernity they have gotten very effective at what they do.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52419303]"I have no data so I'm happy to make this assumption." okay. The french commune, CNT spain, etc. were all in developed countries.[/QUOTE] The commune was crushed by the army, Spain was in a civil war. Prove to me that peaceful, democratic socialism can't succeed in the west? I can't prove that it will succeed, because we haven't tried it yet.

Freedom is being able to blow your money on useless shit you don't need and to be unhappy with material goods.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419317]The commune crushed by the army, Spain was in a civil war. Prove to me that peaceful, democratic socialism can't succeed in the west? I can't prove that it will succeed, because we haven't tried it yet.[/QUOTE] about the only place you could probably try something like that out would be in the swiss cantons otherwise the big problem with modern society is that we need a big massive bureaucracy to manage everything (the very fact our society is large and complex prevents the creation of either a true capitalist or true socialist society, largely because those systems are completely incapable of doing what managerialism has been doing for decades) [QUOTE=OvB;52419321]Freedom is being able to blow your money on useless shit you don't need and to be unhappy with material goods.[/QUOTE] tis a most miserable kind of freedom when birth rates plummet, families implode, and people turn to drugs and junk food of ever increasing potency while working "do-busy" jobs that barely add any productivity to the economy and their wages stagnate (something they attempt to fix by taking on debt)

[QUOTE=sgman91;52418735]Armchair communists who think they're extremely informed while spouting mountains of simplistic ignorant crap is like an internet pass time.[/QUOTE] You can replace communist with pretty much anything here tbh.

[QUOTE=OvB;52419314]Businesses with employee ownership exist you know.[/QUOTE] Yes, but it should be the norm. The few shouldn't profit off the many. The many shall profit only for themselves. The result of this is a more equal society with higher living standards for all.

Business owners: - Take the large majority of the risk - Organize individual workers into a process that is able to create much more value than each worker can on their own - Keep workers working efficiently - Figure out how to efficiently utilize scarce resources - Etc. Owners do create value, much more of it than an individual worker. [editline]30th June 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=RB33;52419337]Yes, but it should be the norm. The few shouldn't profit off the many. The many shall profit only for themselves.[/QUOTE] There's nothing stopping them other than the fact that it's REALLY hard to do, and most people don't want to take that kind of risk.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419306]You never wanted them until you were tricked into buying them. You will just realize how useless it was and throw it into the bin the next day. You just recovered otherwise lost time and money.[/QUOTE] I was never tricked into buying anything in my entire life. I don't buy anything unless I need it or unless I really want it. I'm really not the buyers' remorse kind of guy. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;52419316]to be fair, advertisers base their entire career around trying to get people to buy things they don't necessarily want, and since the advent of modernity they have gotten very effective at what they do.[/QUOTE] We have false advertisement laws all over the globe to prevent people from getting outright scammed. If a person didn't get scammed, and just made an uninformed purchase, then it's all on them. Freedom isn't just "I can do whatever the fuck I want", it comes with responsibilities.

[QUOTE=OvB;52419321]Freedom is being able to blow your money on useless shit you don't need and to be unhappy with material goods.[/QUOTE] That freedom, I will happily trade away. Because it's really useless freedom to have.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419317]The commune was crushed by the army, Spain was in a civil war. Prove to me that peaceful, democratic socialism can't succeed in the west? I can't prove that it will succeed, because we haven't tried it yet.[/QUOTE] Then drop your assumption that it will fam lol. It's unfalsifiable at this stage as you reject any evidence that can be used. So there is none. It's "unprovable" either way.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419350]That freedom, I will happily trade away. Because it's really useless freedom to have.[/QUOTE] The freedom to buy what you want is a useless freedom now? What the hell are you smoking

[QUOTE=sgman91;52419341]Business owners: - Take the large majority of the risk - Organize individual workers into a process that is able to create much more value than each worker can on their own - Keep workers working efficiently - Figure out how to efficiently utilize scarce resources - Etc. Owners do create value, much more of it than an individual worker.[/QUOTE] the problem is that owners increasingly no longer actually control the companies which they ostensibly own. the managers are the real ones making decisions that impact people and the wider economy consequently the people making these decisions are shielded from the risks, and mostly create additional value not by innovation or improved production, but largely by outsourcing labour or obtaining it for pennies using exploitative internships or hiring illegal immigrants secretly. they likewise consolidate businesses and seek government support [QUOTE=Laserbeams;52419344]We have false advertisement laws all over the globe to prevent people from getting outright scammed. If a person didn't get scammed, and just made an uninformed purchase, then it's all on them. Freedom isn't just "I can do whatever the fuck I want", it comes with responsibilities.[/QUOTE] well yeah there's laws, but these advertisers try their very best to follow the letter of the law and not necessarily the spirit of it pretty much any advertisement with a food in it will be inevitably faked and the aesthetic qualities of the food greatly exaggerated

[QUOTE=sgman91;52419341]Business owners: - Take the large majority of the risk - Organize individual workers into a process that is able to create much more value than each worker can on their own - Keep workers working efficiently - Figure out how to efficiently utilize scarce resources - Etc. Owners do create value, much more of it than an individual worker.[/QUOTE] Without the workers, the owner could only do as much profit as an individual worker. The owner is not some superior being deserving greater luxaries and standard of living, just because he have a piece of paper which says 'owner' on it. [QUOTE]There's nothing stopping them other than the fact that it's REALLY hard to do, and most people don't want to take that kind of risk.[/QUOTE] So let's make it easy, even enforce it a bit.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52419341] There's nothing stopping them other than the fact that it's REALLY hard to do, and most people don't want to take that kind of risk.[/QUOTE] [B]Can't[/B] take that form of risk

[QUOTE=RB33;52419361]Without the workers, the owner could only do as much profit as an individual worker. The owner is not some superior being deserving greater luxaries and standard of living, just because he have a piece of paper which says 'owner' on it. So let's make it easy, even enforce it a bit.[/QUOTE] He wouldn't be as productive as an individual worker. He'd be LESS productive than an individual worker, that's the point of having businesses and management. More went into that than just having a piece of paper saying owner on it. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52419365][B]Can't[/B] take that form of risk[/QUOTE] Quite a few people could take loans to form businesses if they really wanted to. But they don't want to, because that's typically a very dangerous idea that may leave you horribly indebted. More than you might think. Fuck there's facepunchers who've carved out businesses and livings off of selling/running game servers.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419361]So let's make it easy, even enforce it a bit.[/QUOTE] So you want all the people who are not going to own the business to take the risk instead of the workers who are going to own it? The risk is inevitable. If the workers who own the business aren't going to take the risk, then someone else has to.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52419351]Then drop your assumption that it will fam lol. It's unfalsifiable at this stage as you reject any evidence that can be used. So there is none. It's "unprovable" either way.[/QUOTE] Well, if you tried modern American capitalism in a feudal African country. You wouldn't have so much success either, it all depends on the circumstances.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419377]Well, if you tried modern American capitalism in a feudal African country. You wouldn't have so much success either, it all depends on the circumstances.[/QUOTE] That doesn't mean your socialism will work, so it's irrelevant.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52419360]the problem is that owners increasingly no longer actually control the companies which they ostensibly own. the managers are the real ones making decisions that impact people and the wider economy[/QUOTE] Now that just sounds like bad business.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52419372]So you want all the people who are not going to own the business to take the risk instead of the workers who are going to own it? The risk is inevitable. If the workers who own the business aren't going to take the risk, then someone else has to.[/QUOTE] What exactly is this "risk"?

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52419371]He wouldn't be as productive as an individual worker. He'd be LESS productive than an individual worker, that's the point of having businesses and management. More went into that than just having a piece of paper saying owner on it.[/QUOTE] If all the employees had one of those papers and share all the benefits of the business, you would see large increases in living standards. Especially in the third world. Seems like a waste of resources to only give one or two guys the papers.

[QUOTE=RB33;52419377]Well, if you tried modern American capitalism in a feudal African country. You wouldn't have so much success either, it all depends on the circumstances.[/QUOTE] Assuming you also reformed their absolutely corrupt government, then sure it would work.

[QUOTE=OvB;52419388]Now that just sounds like bad business.[/QUOTE] it's just how a company is going to work though. I work for a fairly large company. I work in the headoffice of that company. I hear the conversations that dictate how 48 offices will do their business. The people having those conversations aren't the two owners of the companies. They're some middle managers and the like who have some concept of how the work should be done. I for instance, had to actually show them the system people use. They don't use it, so they don't know. It's just how companies work when they're large.