• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Workers work for wages, Capitalists recieve profits off of ownership. This isn’t “my” world, this is the world.

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      so workers do not own anything they make profit off of? Like a car they use to do uber rides? in this world. that is what you think? you think that is reality?

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Uber drivers are gig workers, and firmly in the Proletariat. They ultimately use and depend on Uber’s infrastructure and Capital. Owning a car for personal use and also using it for your job you work for a wage for does not mean you profit off of ownership in the manner a Capitalist profits off the work of others.

        This is, in fact, reality.

        • HubertManne@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Ill accept it for the arguments sake. How about a homeowner that rents out a room and they only advertised with a sign in the window they bought themselves. They also have a job keep in mind. The rent from the room does not exactly pay all their needs it just offsets the mortgage. Are they workers?

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Petite bourgeoisie. Capitalists that do not drive enough income to survive without working. It’s a bit muddier than this, with respect to their personal job their power dynamic is clearly Proletarian, but they are attempting to escape that dynamic and become full bourgeois via landlording.

            • HubertManne@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              ok. so if they did not rent the room and the would be tenant stays homeless then they are good workers or whatever foreign word you use for them. so bad if the one guy has a roof over his head but good if he does not?

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I am not making a moral judgement on what happens within Capitalism, I am stating that Capitalism itself should be replaced with a collectively owned system. Microcosms do not represent the system as a whole, nor represent the average.

                In a better scenario, landlording would not need to be a necessary evil to give this person a home, when public housing can be an option.

                • HubertManne@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  yeah this is much bigger topic and I doubt I would change your mind on that level. For myself I have never seen any indication that would work but also for extreme capitalism (old libertarian thought although as a movement its way away from its roots) and believe elements of both make a good society. We have way to much private ownership right now though and way to little publically ownership so I would be in favor of more changes toward your paradise but if its all or nothing then I would be against them.