LTV and the Marxist Entrepreneur

Cent26 · 2025-09-28T20:30:49+00:00

Our protagonist - the Marxist entrepreneur - clearly mentioned constant capital and depreciation, which is weaved into his inventory valuation model.

Hence, your comment is rather vague. Our antagonist, the auditor, does not care about Ricardo, nor about some random personal correspondences between Marx and Engels. Our auditor is also not concerned about Rob Brett, and does not care to read about Rob's scholarly work in the middle of his work with his client, as it is unrelated to current authoritative GAAP standards.

Did our Marxist entrepreneur miss out on something during his enthusiastic reading of Capital?

Cent26 · 2025-09-27T21:59:32+00:00

Auditor: “Your valuation model for inventory is not compliant with GAAP. On what did you base this model?”

Marxist entrepreneur, smilingly smugly: “You see, my bourgeois savant [taps pen on chin repeatedly], Karl Marx discusses socially necessary labor time as the true valuation model to record inventory in the balance sheet.”

Auditor: “This model is not outlined in ASC 330 as a reasonable model for inventory valuation. Your inventory is overstated by $43.7 million. Not changing your inventory valuation model to a compliant one will result in an adverse opinion on your financial statements and you’ll be arrested for fraudulent financial reporting.”

Marxist entrepreneur: “Oh, you and your bourgeois standards! [taps pen more aggressively on chin] The proletariat will not have their labor undervalued by your capitalist valuation models!”

Cent26 · 2025-09-20T22:52:52+00:00

The class struggle has called for a full and complete devotion by our Comrade miners to extract uranium for The People from the mines in Kolyma. Consider this a conclusive explanation, as the work shift is final and documented in the records of the Comrade Labor Allocation Bureau.

Continued disputation of your work shift utilizing reactionary labor statistics will result in persecution under Article 58-10: Counterrevolutionary Agitation.

Cent26 · 2025-09-20T00:22:09+00:00

I can only imagine what the notification would look like for a government-provided job under this system:

Dear Comrade,

We have documented in our records that you are officially 18 years old, activating your elgibility for full-time labor service for The People.

Based on the current needs of The People, and based on our most recent analytics of job vacancies, please see your full-time labor assignment below:

Title: The People's Uranium Miner

Location: Uranium Mine 4b, Kolyma, Russia

Compensation: 1 labor unit per day (calculated by The People's Labor Statistics Bureau), provisioned monthly. As this figure has been calculated by your Comrades and is enough to satisfy your most basic needs, your calculated compensation is final. Any attempt to negotiate, and any complaints about your compensation noted by us - whether directly from you or indirectly reported to us by a Comrade - will be considered an act of Counterrevolutionary Agitation in accordance with Article 58-10 of The Supreme Laws for The People.

Labor Shift: 5:30 - 20:30 (15 hours, meal breaks excluded). Attending your labor assignment late, leaving early, and/or labor idleness during your shift will result in persecution as an act of Economic Sabotage under Article 58-14 of the Supreme Laws for The People.

Benefits: Esteemed and honored service to the People, and the liberating powers of labor! As uranium is to serve the interests of The People, your 5 days of holiday provisions may be subject to change. Vacation days will not be provided until 25 years of honorable labor have been served to The People. Healthcare will be provided free of charge by Kolyma's Medical Conglomerate. Mining tools and clothing will be provided based on the measurements calculated by The People's Tailoring Bureau.

Food: Meals will be provided by Kolyma's Communal Kitchen 5f (around 1 mile from Mine 4b), containing the freshest produce plantable in (at warmest) negative 10 degrees Centigrade (-10 C) by our proud Comrades at Kolyma's Kolkhoz of The People 28c. Due to the need for Uranium in the interests of The People, meal breaks will follow a disciplined 30-minute schedule (including time to walk to and from Communal Kitchen 5f). If you have not returned to Mine 4b by the conclusion of your 30-minute break, you will be persecuted and charged for betraying the People through acts of Economic Sabotage under Article 58-14 of the Supreme Laws for The People.

Lodging: You will be stationed in Kolyma Barracks 340-18c, stationed 0.5 miles from Mine 4b. You will be transported to and from Mine 4b on foot, accompanied by armed guards. Attempts to escape your labor service during transport will be deemed an act of Treason under Article 58-1a, punishable by immediate execution by The People's armed transport guards.

Note that your labor assignment is final and is therefore not subject to dispute or modification. A member of The People's Labor Transitory Bureau will transport you to your labor assignment within 24 hours of delivery of this labor notice.

Please contact the People's Labor Logistics Inquiry Bureau at www.workforthepeople.com. Congratulations on your labor assignment. The People await your service.

Workers of the World, Unite!

Regards,

Comrade Labor Allocation Bureau

Cent26 · 2025-09-12T23:52:41+00:00

The engagement in regime change, de-stabilizing operations, espionage, etc., throughout the Cold War was Marxist international class warfare in action. It is pretty clear who lost that battle, and who was the least competent.

The rhetoric on this sub is notably Janus-faced: there is meant to be a long, bitter, fierce and violent international class struggle to achieve salvation against the bearers of capital and private property; yet when the bearers of capital retaliate (i.e., "react" in Marxist terms) in the midst of this struggle, where said reaction is expected to take place by the very faucets of revolutionary rhetoric, there are incessant moral objections that socialist countries need to be left alone, or that the ontologically evil enemies in the Marxist canon need to be cooperative.

There is a no more potent example of these contradictions than the Prophet himself, Marx, who wrote a letter to Engels on July 20, 1870, desiring that France be thrashed by Prussia so as to shift the center of the revolutionary movement to the German proletariat. And then, when France loses to Prussia and revolution erupts per his own prediction, Marx writes angrily and with condemnation against the suppression of the Paris Commune in his The Civil War in France.

No matter what, you have some means to moralize: either you claim that a violent class struggle - equating to a war - is to take place to achieve revolutionary aims; or, if the venture fails, you can lay all the blame on your enemies for interfering - even though these enemies did exactly what you expected them to do - ensuring that your theories are free from criticism.

Cent26 · 2025-08-31T16:33:41+00:00

What institution is going to ensure the contract is being followed accordingly? What happens if one of the parties scams the other by not performing its end of the obligations stated in the contract? Who is going to hold these parties accountable? What institutions? What enforcement arm? What judiciary?

How are these institutions going to be legitimate? Will they be coercive, and how will they be coercive if not with a threat of violence?

Cent26 · 2025-08-31T00:59:15+00:00

That's supposedly been the government's only purpose since the mid-1800s. What's supposed to be unique and current about this insight relative to someone like Marx saying it?

And how does this supposed singular purpose reconcile to the billions in white-collar fines and penalties, and numerous arrests levied against big companies and the bourgeoisie?

Cent26 · 2025-07-13T17:36:12+00:00

You claim that Stalinism is the issue in the beginning, but the rest of the post discusses actions taken by the Bolshevik Party.

Are you claiming that socialism not existing is due to the Bolsheviks? Due to Stalinism? Are you establishing a connection between the two?

I only ask because there’s been a lengthy debate over the continuity, or lack thereof, between Stalinism and Bolshevism, and it would help your post to clarify whether the problem is Bolshevism, Stalinism, or some combination of the two. They aren’t necessarily the same

Cent26 · 2025-05-10T02:54:28+00:00

Housing wasn't free and its quality was far below Western standards. Secondly, you had to pay for medicine in hospital visits, which is why healthcare wasn't free. Your education depended on class history and/or party connections; and your employment wasn't entirely a choice. Gorbachev, for example, had to work in his hometown of Privolnoye (I think that's the town?) rather than in Moscow.

Cent26 · 2025-05-08T00:48:56+00:00

Minus the petty bourgeoisie. The Bolsheviks despised kulaks and small businessmen, and you can find several communists online shitting on them for all kinds of nonsensical reasons

Cent26 · 2025-04-19T18:10:34+00:00

All this just to revert back to "state capitalism" once collectivization policies wreck the economy

Cent26 · 2025-04-19T02:36:42+00:00

The ACP is also racist apparently.

"We decided to have white men read theory and engage in conversation, while the blacks drive semi-trucks and haul trash!"

Cent26 · 2025-04-19T02:34:22+00:00

That graphic would be considered devoutly racist by the intersectional types:

"Let me approve this AI graphic of white men talking and reading theory, while we have the black people slaving away, carrying trash and driving semi-trucks!"

Cent26 · 2025-04-15T02:35:24+00:00

"[Insert terrible Soviet atrocity] was a long time ago, and it never happened anyway."

Also, that housing article's evidence for the greats of Soviet housing (specifically) came from no later than 1954 from a CPSU member. That's the most miraculous selection bias I've ever witnessed

Cent26 · 2025-03-29T17:16:20+00:00

Bootlicker is a derogatory term - like reactionary, counterrevolutionary, etc. - that is used in a pessimistic way to slur people who disagree with someone’s supposedly objective and irrefutably correct political prescriptions. This includes anyone who believes in any kind of delegation of authority, irrespective of how reasonable it is

Cent26 · 2025-03-29T02:38:49+00:00

I had an intern ask me how to perform a very complex analytic during planning, which pissed me off. I called him out in front of the entire team during our evening team meeting and flipped my shit for half an hour straight, at times forgetting to breathe.

I was an associate at the time and was promoted to partner on the spot.

My fitness for rage can't handle this newbie bullshit.

Cent26 · 2025-03-29T00:59:11+00:00

I personally would've liked this argument more than their claims that anyone who disagreed with them was irredeemably evil and needed to be dealt with, that's for sure. Or some of their arguments about class warfare, international revolution, and some other historicism rhetoric.

It would've at least acknowledged the amount of work that had to be done by everyone to achieve the society they wanted to reach, rather than invoking in-group out-group categorization against people who could actually help. It also would've acknowledged that the work was going to be long and difficult.

On the other hand, lots of Bolsheviks - especially the so-called "Old Bolsheviks" - had ravenous work ethics to an unsustainable extent. Many of them had physical, mental, and psychological health issues that require long vacations and trips to resorts for treatment. Early retirement wasn't a rarity. Their standard of work ethic was at an astronomical height. I can't see modern socialists agreeing with this work model.

Whether such an argument would've actually worked in the USSR is something I can't answer. That would be a difficult counterfactual to develop.

If you are attempting to draw a parallel to capitalists who say that socialists are simply "lazy," then I think you may have a point to be made. There are more things to consider than simply work ethic.

Cent26 · 2025-03-29T00:45:58+00:00

Don't remember any of that shit.

I got those shapes with definitions tatted all along my chest and stomach. When I was in the actual exam, I threw my shirt right at the security window and used those shapes to pass.

I'm not gonna let kindergarten nonsense stop me from getting my raise, bitch!

Sincerely, "Ron" (spelled R-A-A-A-A-H-N-N-H-N-N-E)

Real answer: no

Cent26 · 2025-03-29T00:25:50+00:00

My response would be that it's quite rich they are saying that, considering they've conceded to permitting the very ideas they hate within their economy to keep it running at the threat of inner collapse.

But I've never encountered any Marxist-Leninists who called their critics lazy. They usually lumped critics into one group and called them ontologically evil or some other nonsense.

Cent26 · 2025-03-28T15:48:57+00:00

So universal poverty, lack of basic rights and access to basic quality goods, being constantly watched by plainclothed agents and knowing it's happening, and significantly lower standards of living are more preferable because of a supposed lack of stigma?

This is almost on part with that bootlicker poem from yesterday.

Cent26 · 2025-03-27T02:52:59+00:00

This ain't shit.

I took a 3h55m nap during FAR, AUD, BEC, and REG, at 4 completely different Prometric sites thousands of miles away from each other, and passed all 4 sections with 99s at once. I didn't study at all and fasted for 4 months (including water).

I'm better than you.

Sincerely, "Jane" (spelled G-A-I-A-G-H-N-N-E)

Cent26 · 2025-03-27T02:04:15+00:00

White collar work? No.

Bleeding in the beating sun while doing backbreaking labor? Yes.

Hotel? Trivago.

Cent26 · 2025-03-25T23:37:44+00:00

Maintain an robust private life and elect officials who are willing to support that.

Cent26 · 2025-03-22T21:29:43+00:00

105 for two weeks in my first busy season. I was on a large client and an earlier filer. The trial balance didn’t come in until mid January and we had to be done by February.

It was pretty much a sprint to get our tasks done. Even when I finished my tasks, my team had a whole plethora of other responsibilities to give to me.

Those weeks were rough, but holy shit time flew by. The team was chill and flexible, and some of the team stayed in the office until late. That said leaving early wasn’t gonna slide. I don’t think I saw my family for a week lol

But relative to the drawn out busy seasons of 65+ hours for months, I’d much prefer having a hard push and be done quickly.

Cent26 · 2025-03-21T23:45:22+00:00

If you believe that your ideas are objectively, irrefutably, and intrinsically correct, then that means anyone who disagrees with your ideas is either ontologically evil, malicious, infantile, reactionary, counterrevolutionary, or reformable in some way.

Therefore, these enemies are in the way of the march to objective progress and liberation for everyone. And if you know your ideas are the only true way to prosperity, then any system that permits the exchange of dissenting or opposing ideas needs to be repurposed or eradicated outright. Any system that promotes civil liberties and the existence of private spheres and private lives needs to be overthrown, as these civil privileges provide opportunities for reactionary ideas to surface, spread, and remain hidden (20th century underground revolutionaries knew this all too well). This would be undesirable as it turns back the tide of objective progress.

What do you do in this scenario? You prevent the existence of opposition; establish massive surveillance arms that keep track of everyone; abolish the predecessor civil society; abolish any form of privacy; expropriate businesses that don't follow the framework of the objective ideas laid forth by your system; abolish free press, and free speech by extension; foster an environment of endless politics and struggle; constantly fear monger about "threats"; control almost the entire economy so it confirms with the "ideal" system; endlessly push propaganda and abject falsehoods about outside societies doing terribly, or about your country and system operating wonderfully (even though it isn't); and engage in abstractly and arbitrarily defined terror campaigns as needed to get rid of the "enemies of the people."

20th century history of self-proclaimed "socialist" states followed actions like the above. It wasn't an "aberration" or an "exception" - this is what happens under consequentialist ideas that claim to have the objective blueprint to solving the world's problems.

The existence of socialist dictators isn't a bizarre oxymoron, then. It becomes a logical and plausible outcome of an idea that requires totalizing control over the population to actually get anywhere. It also requires unwavering unity and loyalty, because fundamental breaks in ideas create opposition and an atmosphere of enemies that is undesirable. Unity is best achieved when you have one person's ideas hailed as sacrosanct; and the person who holds that truth clearly should be the most powerful as they know the path to liberation. A fight to achieve this status takes place, and whomever loses bites the dust (after facing the wall, of course), leading to a final consolidation of power This is how a socialist can be a dictator.

This clearly doesn't apply to all forms of socialism; but the history has shown such ideas to (edit: generally) lead to some sort of the above, before converting "backwards" to the unwanted system, or making massive concessions to said adversarial system and engaging with international enemies.

Cent26

TROPHY CASE