Anyway, I'm tired. I'm turning my phone off. Here's a parting picture of me.
Straw man argument. You change well intentioned people to liars within 7 words. They can't be both.
Its not arbitrary because the wage system enables the payer to keep the financials secret. If the inputs and outputs are divided then the whole balance sheet must be transparent. Withholding and omitting knowledge is shady as well.
Thank you for at least calling me well intentioned. This is an improvement.
Who said anything about force? I would never want to control anyone with force unless in defence. I'm an anarchist.
The less experienced ones can be mentored by an individual or a group.
If you wanted to be an apprentice lineman then I, as a journeyman lineman, could bring you into the fold in a 4 man crew. 2 journeymen, an equipment operator and an apprentice is a typical crew. Well we could say all income could be divided like journeymen take 30% each, equipment operator takes 20% and you the apprentice could take 20%. Or whatever is negotiated beforehand. This way everyone knows all the values and costs. The pay for the work is not secret. No secrets.
Calling be an NPC is no way to discuss opposing views. This post is probably idiotic. I wouldn't know because I didn't read past the second sentence.
So? I fail to see how is the risk assessment an argument against.
People can and should work together, then they should divide the output according to anegotiations before. Renting a human is as wrong as owning one.
If a child offered to shovel your driveway you should negotiate the price for the whole job. You SHOULD NOT pay him according to how long it takes. That would be renting a human, which would be slavery.
I'm criticising capitalism. You assume any criticism of it is communist. You're stuck.
Here's a position: if owning a human being is wrong then renting a human being with a wage is wrong as well. If one of the core tenets of capitalism was the abolishment of the wage system then I could get behind it.
You keep arguing against me like I'm making communist assertions. Its like all the capitalist propaganda you're repeating is calibrated against communism and you can't make pro capitalist arguments unless the opposition is communist. Stop repeating the shit you read by rote.
I did not say before that inheritance should be redistributed. I say that nobody should have more than they can build with their own two hands, or in partnership with their neighbors. Nobody should hire anyone for a wage because wage labour is just temporary slavery. Every human being should own everything resulting from their labour and sell it if he chooses.
My point is true capitalism does stay pure for long. The heirs of the successful ones will either create systems of control (AKA governments) or corrupt and coopt existing governments.
Feudalism was an improvement on slavery, capitalism is an improvement on feudalism. Now we need an improvement on capitalism. My contention is Anarchism Without Adjectives could be it. (NOT Anarcho-Capitalism!!) Communism had its chance and it failed because the levers of power were seized by the Stalinists, as predicted by Anarchists such as Bakunin.
How am I supposed to respond to 3 different topics a paragraph each? We're all over the place. Each position is known. I'm calling it here. To be continued...
In the meantime you should read things outside your ideology and challenge yourself with views adversarial to your own. I've heard capitalist arguments and propaganda ad nauseum over decades. Start with Hegel.
Capitalism without adjectives, maybe. In Vitro Capitalism. It cannot last in the real world for long. You come up with some LARP or idealized system on paper but it hasn't yet succeeded out in the real world. The Paretto distribution takes effect and the winners use undue advantages over others and the egalitarian ideal collapses. It always corrupts; power always corrupts.
True my rate of pay climbs, but 'cushy' would not be a valid adjective.
No I cannot start an electric utility. Nor can I purchase small pieces of power line. Don't even try to theorize it because the ruling class has that all locked up. The only good model of electric utility out there in use now is if local municipalities had the guts not to sell in the 50s, 60s and 70s and kept it in house like the water and sewer services.
Here you go talking about the government again. I agree with your view on government so save it. You're such a binary thinker you can only imagine a spectrum of two possibilities. The cold war is over, but the ruling class remains.
You have no idea if my job is cushy so don't make judgments on things that are impossible for you to know. I happen to have just worked eight 16 hour days in a row out in the rain and mud fighting to keep lights on. So fuck off.
The goal for the capitalist is domination. They say: "You don't like being a wage slave? Then you should start a business. If you're successful you can aquire some wage slaves of your own." Capitalism epouses freedom from government, but freedom from capitalists with dark triad traits has never been part of the deal.
The goal is to climb the tiers with the help of nepotism until your and your descendants are the ruling class. The ruling classes are always basically evil. Inheritance is the one thing that breaks the neat logic of capitalsism. Capitalism without inheritance could actually have a chance of working, but sadly that can never happen because appropriating inheritance would require an unjust use of force.