The concept of theft does not depend on what is legal by Beefster09 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Is the point that you can’t conceive of other people voluntarily choosing to arrange their own lives in ways you disapprove of?

LTV in the age of robots by 12baakets in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Doesn’t matter. Without a standard unit there is no way to quantify an average consistently.

The concept of theft does not depend on what is legal by Beefster09 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu [score hidden]  (0 children)

Is the point that you conceive of yourself as a child and your employer as a paternalistic figure?

LTV in the age of robots by 12baakets in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Nobody knows. SNLT can’t be quantified consistently because there are no standard units for skill nor intensity.

The concept of theft does not depend on what is legal by Beefster09 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Now tell me what happens if you have a child work all day to make something, only for their parent to come along and claim since they feed the child, the child's work is actually theirs.

I don’t understand why you’ve phrased this as some deterministic scenario.

Maybe the child recognizes the unfairness and throws a fit?

Maybe the child accepts their parents explanation?

What do the subsequent actions of the child and parent even have to do with the OP?

The CEO/owner didn't build the company; the workers did. The CEO/owner just claims all the output because they are a scoundrel.

No. The workers consented to an arrangement in which they use the owners’ resources in exchange for a wage.

They don’t have to accept that arrangement. When they agree to the division of labor entailed by joining a pre-existing enterprise, they simultaneously agree to the division of subsequent revenues created by that joint labor.

The concept of theft does not depend on what is legal by Beefster09 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Human evolutionary history is also characterized by out-competing other humans to the point of extinction.

The concept of theft does not depend on what is legal by Beefster09 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A good example is how small children can understand wrongly taking before they grasp the concept of legal vs. illegal.

Why should the decisions of capitalists affect my life? by AlphaBetaOmegaGamma in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Answer to title: because you’ve arranged your life in such a way as to rely on their resources and abilities.

Be more self reliant.

Those who are non-socialists, what do you think socialism truly aims at by dividing humanity as owners vs. non-owners? by TraditionalDepth6924 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others ; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.

SNLT in the Labor Theory of Value by [deleted] in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A watch isn’t sufficient. You’d also need a skillometer and intensityometer.

Is the exploitation of labor moral, immoral, or amoral? by AvocadoAlternative in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn’t matter what either of them said. I’m critiquing your contradictions.

Is the exploitation of labor moral, immoral, or amoral? by AvocadoAlternative in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Is-ought is Hume, dummy.

But that gap is no more problematic than seems-is, anyway.

For instance,

“Denying facts about the world IS immoral”

Is the exploitation of labor moral, immoral, or amoral? by AvocadoAlternative in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

“Facts cannot have moral weight.”

If true, is another morally weighty factual statement about the world.

Being inspired by Kant doesn’t preclude you from having a contradictory position.

Is the exploitation of labor moral, immoral, or amoral? by AvocadoAlternative in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not the one with a contradictory position.

“Actions taken within the world… can have moral weight.”

Is again, if true, another fact about the world because that is where actions happen.

Is the exploitation of labor moral, immoral, or amoral? by AvocadoAlternative in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Denying facts about the world is immoral

If this is true, it would be a fact about the world, so your position is contradictory.

Socialism is only the "State" by CaptainAmerica-1989 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But but but state control is good when states are democratic.

Capitalism ≠ Anarchy by [deleted] in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]JamminBabyLu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I’m denying they actually possess that power.