Where's the edginess coming? I'm waiting for a very funny top 10 British Atrocities etc so i can share it around on Vaush and Xanderhals discord server so it can be spread like Corvid-19 OR as some call it... Corbyn-19
"if I want to rent myself to someone and have them pay me a wage less than what I actually produce who's gonna stop me?"...... This is literally what your saying.
@@El_Rebelde_ Yes, it is. Are you going to use or advocate violence to stop it? What's makes a transaction not robbery? Consent. What make sex not rape? Consent. What makes labor not slavery? Consent. Leave consenting adults to their own. When someone who is involved with the business arrangement says there's been an injustice, then it's time to take a look at it. But you cannot stand on the sidelines and tell someone that they are being immoral because you cannot speak for them. Let individuals make their own decisions on what to do with their lifes. Some people enjoy selling their labor for pay and not many people will pay you 100% of the value you create because it's against the laws of thermodynamics ;)
To answer your original question, the operation of a gift economy would mean that it wouldn't be worth anyone's while to try and set up a business to begin with. Regarding consent, there's a limit to the extent to which exchange can be meaningfully consensual if one party is compelled into it as a matter of survival. On the other hand, I don't think people would, by and large, enter into transactions if they didn't have to. I certainly don't think that people would, in the main, directly sell their labour power to someone else if they had a viable alternative. As David Graeber points out, people have never historically sold their labour power to a boss unless compelled to do so. As for labour receiving all of the value it creates being contrary to the laws of thermodynamics, please! That is such self-serving balderdash! One person enriching themselves through another's labour isn't a function of any law of physics. There's nothing natural about it. It is entirely socially constructed. There are businesses in which the workforce does have possession of the entirety of the value that it creates. They're called worker co-operatives, and incidentally, they're more productive by total-factor productivity than private firms.
welcome back king
Can you please do a response video on some hoppeans
kind of missing your music videos
.. I prefer his cooking videos
what's the dislike someone can not follow simple arithmetics? : D
Thank you!
The Best Arguments for and against a system are made evident through its application and consequences.
Hey I think you should do video on the 10 planks
Where's the edginess coming? I'm waiting for a very funny top 10 British Atrocities etc so i can share it around on Vaush and Xanderhals discord server so it can be spread like Corvid-19
OR as some call it... Corbyn-19
In an anarcho-communist society, what law would keep two *consenting* individuals from doing *any* business agreement?
The very Nature of Anarchism is such that there will be no apparatus to prevent the inter-generational emergence of new systems or hierarchies.
"if I want to rent myself to someone and have them pay me a wage less than what I actually produce who's gonna stop me?"...... This is literally what your saying.
@@El_Rebelde_ Yes, it is. Are you going to use or advocate violence to stop it?
What's makes a transaction not robbery? Consent.
What make sex not rape? Consent.
What makes labor not slavery? Consent.
Leave consenting adults to their own. When someone who is involved with the business arrangement says there's been an injustice, then it's time to take a look at it. But you cannot stand on the sidelines and tell someone that they are being immoral because you cannot speak for them. Let individuals make their own decisions on what to do with their lifes. Some people enjoy selling their labor for pay and not many people will pay you 100% of the value you create because it's against the laws of thermodynamics ;)
To answer your original question, the operation of a gift economy would mean that it wouldn't be worth anyone's while to try and set up a business to begin with.
Regarding consent, there's a limit to the extent to which exchange can be meaningfully consensual if one party is compelled into it as a matter of survival. On the other hand, I don't think people would, by and large, enter into transactions if they didn't have to. I certainly don't think that people would, in the main, directly sell their labour power to someone else if they had a viable alternative. As David Graeber points out, people have never historically sold their labour power to a boss unless compelled to do so.
As for labour receiving all of the value it creates being contrary to the laws of thermodynamics, please! That is such self-serving balderdash! One person enriching themselves through another's labour isn't a function of any law of physics. There's nothing natural about it. It is entirely socially constructed. There are businesses in which the workforce does have possession of the entirety of the value that it creates. They're called worker co-operatives, and incidentally, they're more productive by total-factor productivity than private firms.
Demographic Dominion,
Look up 'reverse dominance'.