Anti-woke leftist looking for a place with less brain-rot.

submitted by [deleted] from self.Introductions

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]bobbobbybob 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

I have a business. If I need help, I'd like to be able to offer someone an amount of money in order for providing me with specific uses of their time. I absolutely 100% do not want to offer them a share in ownership of my business, which I have built up over years with sweat and toil.

I don't think you've ever owned your own business. Am I right?

[–][deleted]  (13 children)

[deleted]

    [–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

    That doesn't even make any sense.

    I build a business. Invest time and money into building it up, building a clientele. Investing in plant and buildings and advertising.

    That's called 'working'. My activities, my toil, creates income.

    When I want to expand that business, to make it grow, why should I give half of that away?

    You've never run your own business, have you? Your rhetoric is that of someone who is small and resentful in the face of corporations

    [–][deleted]  (11 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]bobbobbybob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      It shows. 'parasite class', you are using to describe me.

      I'm poor, i'm hardworking, but I'm working for MYSELF.

      Am I a parasite? Do I suddenly become one when I want to hire help- a choice the person I am offering money to would make themselves I don't also want to give away a share of my company?

      What share is acceptable? could i just offer 0.001% of profits (and profits are about $10k a year), or would a fixed wage be better?

      Your ignorance and prejudice shows. Marxist, not leftist, and you lied in your introduction.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]bobbobbybob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        There's no ethical way to exploit the labor of others for your own profit.

        Yeah, there is. I offer someone some money to do a job, they do it. All choice, the person gets to decide the value of their labour. Adulting all around, 100% ethical.

        What is unethical about it? Because I'd say projecting your mixed up marxist seethe (and lets not forget, Marx was the ultimate worthless parasite) onto consenting adult relationships is the unethical part.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]bobbobbybob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          Workers have two choices, they can beg for scraps from a parasite (you) or they can starve.

          this is not true. They can do what I did and put the work in and build their own business, instead of demanding an unfair share of mine. I notice that you didn't address the "how much is fair" question.

          I brought up marx because you spoke marxist language. Tell me i'm wrong.

          Instead of cherry picking what to answer, why not address every point? A real debate, not a deceptive one, please.

          [–]wecandobetter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

          Would you like to explain how you believe new businesses are going to come about? Because it sounds like what you really want is the divvying up of existing pies that someone else baked, and haven't given a thought beyond that.

          [–][deleted]  (3 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]wecandobetter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

            Ehhh I still get the sense you haven't really thought your plan all the way through. I'mma stick with the version of society where those who take on the burden and risk of creating wealth are free to enjoy the rewards of it. It has a proven track record of feeding its population, unlike various public enterprise schemes through the decades that have routinely resulted in starvation.

            [–][deleted]  (1 child)

            [deleted]

              [–]wecandobetter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Free markets feed people, not capitalism OR socialism. And to answer your question, it's because capitalism never promised to feed anyone. It's just good at it as a by-product. The world now is actually producing more food than it needs under capitalism. Distribution and localized corruption is the issue. State-run agriculture has been a repeated disaster on the other hand.