This game is awful

[Clemente]

I love the period, but I hate the war "mechanics". It's a shallow game, with the entertainment value of Cookie Clicker.

[Rooter]

Stuff it, Ive had a couple of refreshers, 7pm, all work completed, here we go you little wannabe communists.

Had a customer for 20 years, he is 80 now.
He cant hands on in the business anymore.
His 4 employees all have 10-20 years service.
The business has been unprofitable for the last 2-3 years.
November last year he told me the situation, he cant sell it due to the numbers so he will be closing it all down.
Now these employees, I have known each of them for 10-20 years, we are friends.
The owner, he is my friend.
So I asked him if I can see the books.
My accountant was a straight up NO.
I offered him $550k cash and I bought the business. That cash came from my surplus lifetime of work.
I took ownership on 1/3/23
It was losing $500 a day after factoring in a repayment of capital as per Accountants insistence.
$3500/week, so I used my surplus accrued labor to subsidise this loss.
So after purchasing the business, my youngest son and I would go in after 9:30 pm, using our self owned labour, and we thoroughly cleaned, painted, weatherproofed and signaged three separate locations.
Having performed maintenance on these sites I knew what had to be fixed, the things the previous owner couldnt afford to do.
This occurred over the first four weeks.
On week three I noticed incomes improving dramatically.
Week 5 and 6 I have made consecutive profits over $1000/week factoring in the initial purchase price repayment.
This is during the SLOW season, its a seasonal business.
I did my regular meet up with the same accountant as above, amazingly someone I have become good friends with over the last 8 years.
We crunched the numbers and he made me a genuine offer of $1mill to buy this business off me, 6 weeks after purchasing it. Capitalism Baby.
I declined because I have already decided to give the business to my youngest son who willingly gave up his holidays and spare time to help when everyone was too busy, he gets the business, cause he understands what life is about.
He is 17, he listens, he learns, he knows because I will teach anyone.
I dont know how old you are, but painfully die inside your own mind understanding the fact that a Proletariat is going to happily create your definition of a capitalist in his own son.
So, at the latest age of 21, with these numbers maybe 19, my son is going to be a millionaire Capitalist as you define it.
My father who raised me in the tin shed, will be cared and provided for shortly by me, his son.
Three generations, with the possibility of a 4th, all living under one roof.
♥♥♥♥ it, call me a Communist, I live more like your ideals than you do.

[Rooter]

Origineel geplaatst door -=COMMUNIST=-:

Stop embarrassing yourself and continue providing your services.

I have to embarrass my self, as you are incapable of doing it for me.
So once again my Proletarian proclivities come shining through.
Im even so generous as to repeatedly embarrass you, for free, with no conditions.

Though, despite my criticisms of you, I beg you, dont become dismayed and discontinue your lofty goals of communism.

Im not sure if it was you that claimed to be comedic, but for sure, the comedic value of your presence here, volunteered, with no request for payment in return for you efforts is most commendable.

I feel slightly Capitalist though for benefiting from your labours.
What a confusing world we now live in, and Im starting to understand why you are so confused and willing to share that confusion with the masses.

Comrade, for the Motherland.

[whatamidoing]

Woah woah woah, you're handing capital down to your son? I thought you could only get capital through work though???
Also, what do you think a proletarian even is?

[Rooter]

What did Karl Marx say about labor?
Karl Marx further argues that the cost of labor-power is the total hours and cost society bears to allow the worker with the necessary capacity to work; it, for example, includes feeding workers. Marx concluded that the wage of workers should be directly proportional to the labor-power of the worker.

Is Marxism the same or different from communism?

Is Marxism the Same Thing As Communism? Marxism is a philosophy, while communism is a system of government based on Marxist principles. Marx envisioned a society in which workers owned the means of production. In real-world communism, governments own the means of production.

[Rooter]

Origineel geplaatst door whatamidoing:

Woah woah woah, you're handing capital down to your son? I thought you could only get capital through work though???
Also, what do you think a proletarian even is?

Yeah its my excess labour, cant you read?
Which came first the labour or the capital?
Im trying so hard to keep it simple
EDIT, Also I didnt invent the P word, marx did, and it means someone who owns the efforts of their own labour.
My son's labour helped turn my capital into a profit making concern, surely he should benefit from his own labour?
Are you sure you should be getting involved any further?

[Rooter]

Origineel geplaatst door -=COMMUNIST=-:

Origineel geplaatst door Rooter:

I have to embarrass my self, as you are incapable of doing it for me.
So once again my Proletarian proclivities come shining through.
Im even so generous as to repeatedly embarrass you, for free, with no conditions.

Though, despite my criticisms of you, I beg you, dont become dismayed and discontinue your lofty goals of communism.

Im not sure if it was you that claimed to be comedic, but for sure, the comedic value of your presence here, volunteered, with no request for payment in return for you efforts is most commendable.

I feel slightly Capitalist though for benefiting from your labours.
What a confusing world we now live in, and Im starting to understand why you are so confused and willing to share that confusion with the masses.

Comrade, for the Motherland.

*facepalm*

You just embarrassed yourself, again, stop it

[whatamidoing]

Origineel geplaatst door Rooter:

Origineel geplaatst door whatamidoing:

Woah woah woah, you're handing capital down to your son? I thought you could only get capital through work though???
Also, what do you think a proletarian even is?

Yeah its my excess labour, cant you read?
Which came first the labour or the capital?
Im trying so hard to keep it simple
EDIT, Also I didnt invent the P word, marx did, and it means someone who owns the efforts of their own labour.
My son's labour helped turn my capital into a profit making concern, surely he should benefit from his own labour?
Are you sure you should be getting involved any further?

So there's people who haven't actually worked for their wealth?
No, if you own your labor you're bourgeoisie, although if you're even doing any substantial labor despite having capital you're probably petty-bourgeois (in your case, you definitely are). The proletariat survives by selling their labor to those capitalists, who then pay them less than they produce for the capitalist.

[Rooter]

Its possible that your definition of communism is that someone else works, while you dont, because its your right to do as you wish.
Its not, comrade, its we all take advantage or our own labour to benefit ourselves.
Communism entitles you to a job comrade, not a benefit from my labour.
I benefit from my labour, no one other than me owns my labour.
So innocently, without intent, I am what you aspire to be.
Acceptance of what I am telling you is reality, if its not prove it by quoting Marx, otherwise move along to greener pastures.

[Rooter]

Origineel geplaatst door whatamidoing:

Origineel geplaatst door Rooter:

Yeah its my excess labour, cant you read?
Which came first the labour or the capital?
Im trying so hard to keep it simple
EDIT, Also I didnt invent the P word, marx did, and it means someone who owns the efforts of their own labour.
My son's labour helped turn my capital into a profit making concern, surely he should benefit from his own labour?
Are you sure you should be getting involved any further?

So there's people who haven't actually worked for their wealth?
No, if you own your labor you're bourgeoisie, although if you're even doing any substantial labor despite having capital you're probably petty-bourgeois (in your case, you definitely are). The proletariat survives by selling their labor to those capitalists, who then pay them less than they produce for the capitalist.

Bro, three classes, read it.
I know you are lazy, so here it is:

#By all means read and understand everything below, read the last paragraph twice, three, maybe half a dozen times until you understand it. I am willing to accept your apology#

In Marxist theory, the capitalist stage of production consists of two main classes: the bourgeoisie, the capitalists who own the means of production, and the much larger proletariat (or 'working class') who must sell their own labour power (See also: wage labour). This is the fundamental economic structure of work and property (See also: wage labour), a state of inequality that is normalised and reproduced through cultural ideology. Thus the proletariat, in itself, is forced into a subservient position by the power of capital, which has stripped the means of production from them. As the proletariat becomes conscious of its situation and power, organizes itself, and takes collective political action it becomes a class for itself which has the revolutionary potential to become the ruling class.[2]

Max Weber critiqued historical materialism, positing that stratification is not based purely on economic inequalities but on other status and power differentials. Social class pertaining broadly to material wealth may be distinguished from status class based on honour, prestige, religious affiliation, and so on. The conditions of capitalism and its class system came together due to a variety of "elective affinities".[citation needed]

Marxists explain the history of "civilized" societies in terms of a war of classes between those who control production and those who produce the goods or services in society. In the Marxist view of capitalism, this is a conflict between capitalists (bourgeoisie) and wage-workers (the proletariat). For Marxists, class antagonism is rooted in the situation that control over social production necessarily entails control over the class which produces goods—in capitalism this is the exploitation of workers by the bourgeoisie.[citation needed]

Marx himself argued that it was the goal of the proletariat itself to displace the capitalist system with socialism, changing the social relationships underpinning the class system and then developing into a future communist society in which: "..the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." (Communist Manifesto) This would mark the beginning of a classless society in which human needs rather than profit would be motive for production. In a society with democratic control and production for use, there would be no class, no state and no need for money.[citation needed]

[Rooter]

Origineel geplaatst door -=COMMUNIST=-:

Origineel geplaatst door Rooter:

Its possible that your definition of communism is that someone else works, while you dont, because its your right to do as you wish.
Its not, comrade, its we all take advantage or our own labour to benefit ourselves.
Communism entitles you to a job comrade, not a benefit from my labour.
I benefit from my labour, no one other than me owns my labour.
So innocently, without intent, I am what you aspire to be.
Acceptance of what I am telling you is reality, if its not prove it by quoting Marx, otherwise move along to greener pastures.

Again, nobody’s taking away your shack where you offer your services. You don’t own any means of production that are relevant to society so you can continue being self-employed with or without communism.

And you can continue to dismally fail to understand what you proclaim knowledge on.
Read my post before this, as, according to Marx I am the harbringer of revolution against those you despise.
Foolish, foolish little man.

[whatamidoing]

Origineel geplaatst door Rooter:

Its possible that your definition of communism is that someone else works, while you dont, because its your right to do as you wish.
Its not, comrade, its we all take advantage or our own labour to benefit ourselves.
Communism entitles you to a job comrade, not a benefit from my labour.
I benefit from my labour, no one other than me owns my labour.
So innocently, without intent, I am what you aspire to be.
Acceptance of what I am telling you is reality, if its not prove it by quoting Marx, otherwise move along to greener pastures.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man’s own labour, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.

Or do you mean the modern bourgeois private property?

But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation. Property, in its present form, is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labour.

[Rooter]

Communism deprives no man of the ability to appropriate the fruits of his labour. The only thing it deprives him of is the ability to enslave others by means of such appropriations.
Karl Marx

Labour is ... not the only source of material wealth, i.e, of the use-values it produces. As William Petty says, Labour is the father of material wealth, the earth is its mother.
Karl Marx

Marx advocated for self ownership of labour and recognised it as the only form of wealth creation.

His vision was a democratic society, where the people owned what was theirs and the focus of labour was shifted from enriching the few, and focussed on society.

If you read everything I have written you will see a remarkable similiarity in what I have done to what Marx wanted.

What you have quoted is not what Marx wants, but sees as a problem in society at that time.

You quoted this above:

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that

As I mentioned, do you really want to be involved in this conversation?

[Rooter]

Marx wouldnt have liked Microsoft or Nike, but he would have absolutely loved me.
I doubt he would think much at all about someone who desired what they wont work for but someone else has.
A marxist wouldnt desire anything from me, or anyone else, they would be happy with the full fruits of their own labour.
Its ok, I wont remind you about your poetic statements on my knowledge.
And if you have any further questions, feel free to ask.

[whatamidoing]

If you employ (exploit) other people, you're against Marx.

[Rooter]

So employing two 50+ year old cleaners and paying them $60/hr + 11% super and full insurance is exploitation?
I have posted all Marx opinion and you still dont understand.
Its there comrade, but I like you, you make me feel like giving you stuff, so I will give again. Thats called charity, not communism.
Scenario:
I own an apple orchard, its mine, Marx wants it to be mine.
Marx knows someone must care for that orchard and usually the most caring is he who owns it.
The fruit yield is worth 99 shekels material value.
I cant harvest it on my own, the produce requires three people to harvest it.
Up until harvest time, I alone have tended the orchard - weeding, watering, pruning, fertilising etc, no one else has shared in those labours or costs.
In a one week period I need to harvest 12 months work and ownership.
Marx wants me to harvest the orchard, because society needs that produce.
Marx wants me to pay 2 of my fellow members of society to help me harvest.
So Marx wants that 99 shekels split between us, do you really think he would say we get 33 shekels each.
Marxism isnt a free ride, its not even an equitable ride, its a fair ride.