Capitalists may have the same mentality as Nazis: that people must be enslaved

[TagliatelliMonster]

Do you know what dividends are and how they are generated?

Off course I do. I get dividends from the company I own and founded 10 years ago.
I can assure you I worked very hard for it.

I assert that no normal person can do enough hard work, just by themselves, to acquire enough wealth to maintain a lavish lifestyle. There may be exceptions for very talented or ingenious persons, or a stroke of exceptional luck.

For the past 10 years, not only have I worked much more then all my employees, I also took huge risks in building the business into what it is today.
If the business would have failed, I would have literally lost EVERYTHING, including my house.
Meanwhile, if the business would have failed, my employees would have lost NOTHING except their jobs, which they could easily replace elsewhere.

I get so tired of people being so judgemental of enterpreneurs who are in fact the people who PROVIDE people with jobs AND who risk it all in doing so.

I burned all my capital, put my home on the line, worked double the hours of "normal" people to build out a business. And I provided people with jobs and income in the process.

I think I earned it to enjoy the fruits of my success. And honestly, I feel insulted when I hear people tell me that I should then take the profits of my company and distribute it to the employees, who were in fact already paid for their work and who risked literally NOTHING.

Sorry - no.

If my company would have gone bankrupt or taken a loss in a bad year, these same people don't feel like the employees should reimburse their wages either.
It's a two way street.

You can't demand to take a piece of the profits while not taking on the same responsibilities if things go south.
You know what my income was in the first year? 1 symbolic euro. ONE.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

History hasn't taught you much, dear mister...I see.

Italians can tell you they support your war face to face, and plan the armistice behind your back.

Well, as far as I can tell Italy had troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So I will in the end go with what the governemnt of Italy does, as Italy is a representative democracy.

So they are not Christians as in effect lie as per the bold.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Go to Rome and interview random people on the street.

Why? If they don't say what you claim they'll say, you'll just call them "not real italians".
Just like you did with those germans I talked to when you claimed the same about them.......................


You don't seem to realize that you have already lost any and all credibility here.

 

[Estro Felino]

Well, I doubt all Italians have the same view. So some might not care at all, some might be neutral in regards to Ukraine, some might favor one side or the other.
And in effect you might find some who support war in some case and sense.

You still won't understand.
If I were PM, I would say I support Ukraine too.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You still won't understand.
If I were PM, I would say I support Ukraine too.

So you would in effect lie and thus not be a Christian.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You still won't understand.
If I were PM, I would say I support Ukraine too.

So you accuse your PM of lying then?

Funny.
So Germans (and likely italians) who don't agree with you are "not real germans".
And government officials who say things contrary to your claims are "lying".

Sounds like you are so convinced that you hold infallible truth that anything that doesn't fit your tiny worldview will be handwaved away with fallacies (like no true scottsman) and conspiratory nonsense.

 

[Kfox]

It is a matter of mentality.
Oilfields belong to the community...

When you say "the community" you actually mean "the government" right?

But...this concept is easily understandable by an European.
You are from the US, right,?

Yes,

 

[Estro Felino]

So you would in effect lie and thus not be a Christian.

No..
That would not be lying.
Because I do support the Ukrainian people.

 

[Estro Felino]

When you say "the community" you actually mean "the government" right?

Yes. The State who manages it.

Yes,

 

[Estro Felino]

So you accuse your PM of lying then?

Funny.
So Germans (and likely italians) who don't agree with you are "not real germans".
And government officials who say things contrary to your claims are "lying".

Sounds like you are so convinced that you hold infallible truth that anything that doesn't fit your tiny worldview will be handwaved away with fallacies (like no true scottsman) and conspiratory nonsense.

No. I disagree with her
I can disagree with the PM of my country.
Nevertheless the official stance of the government is that we are not at war with Russia.
Period.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No. I disagree with her
I can disagree with the PM of my country.

That's not what you insinuated when you said:

If I were PM, I would say I support Ukraine too.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No. I disagree with her
I can disagree with the PM of my country.
Nevertheless the official stance of the government is that we are not at war with Russia.
Period.

Well, yes, only Ukraine are at war with Russia. So has the Italian goverment give military aid to any of those 2?

 

[Heyo]

Off course I do. I get dividends from the company I own and founded 10 years ago.
I can assure you I worked very hard for it.

Worked, past tense. So I assume you have retired, and the dividends are generated from the work of people who haven't. That is exactly my point. At the moment, you live from the work of others. That is a simple fact. No accusation there.

For the past 10 years, not only have I worked much more then all my employees, I also took huge risks in building the business into what it is today.
If the business would have failed, I would have literally lost EVERYTHING, including my house.
Meanwhile, if the business would have failed, my employees would have lost NOTHING except their jobs, which they could easily replace elsewhere.

I get so tired of people being so judgemental of enterpreneurs who are in fact the people who PROVIDE people with jobs AND who risk it all in doing so.

I'm not judging, I'm stating facts.

I burned all my capital, put my home on the line, worked double the hours of "normal" people to build out a business. And I provided people with jobs and income in the process.

I think I earned it to enjoy the fruits of my success. And honestly, I feel insulted when I hear people tell me that I should then take the profits of my company and distribute it to the employees, who were in fact already paid for their work and who risked literally NOTHING.

Sorry - no.

Did I tell you, you should not enjoy the fruits of the success of your business?

If my company would have gone bankrupt or taken a loss in a bad year, these same people don't feel like the employees should reimburse their wages either.
It's a two way street.

You can't demand to take a piece of the profits while not taking on the same responsibilities if things go south.
You know what my income was in the first year? 1 symbolic euro. ONE.

Since you so vigorously defend your values, let's talk values after you have accepted the facts.

I'll be so bold and assume you have, or you will.
Let's first go back to the initial question: what is "rich" in your opinion?
Would your position change if you had inherited the stocks in your business and never worked a day in your life?
Do you think it is OK that you pay less taxes on your dividends than your workers pay on their wages?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Worked, past tense. So I assume you have retired, and the dividends are generated from the work of people who haven't. That is exactly my point. At the moment, you live from the work of others. That is a simple fact. No accusation there.

I still work.
And I still disagree, regardless whether I am still active or not.
The company / stocks didn't fall out of the sky.
They are the result of my work.

Did I tell you, you should not enjoy the fruits of the success of your business?

I may have jumped the bullet there and made an assumption based on past experience with other people.
Whenever people bring up, or hint at, that dividends are "money earnings that you didn't work for", that's usually where it leads to.
My apologies if I went ahead of myself there.

Since you so vigorously defend your values, let's talk values after you have accepted the facts.

I'll be so bold and assume you have, or you will.
Let's first go back to the initial question: what is "rich" in your opinion?

I think that's a hard, and perhaps even subjective, concept.
If you take the spectrum from "poor" to "filthy rich", with "middle class" in between, then to the far right it is mega obvious if you are rich or not.
Those are the people with mega mansions, a yacht and a lambo and whatnot.

But the "border" between middle class and rich, is very very blurry.

So I would say that you can call yourself "rich" when you can maintain a somewhat luxurious lifestyle, while not having to worry about being able to pay the bills.
That's rather vague in a sense, but that's only because that "border" between middle class and rich is vague.

According to such a definition, I am not rich.
I might be if I would sell the company though. But at present that doesn't interest me. I want it to grow more before then.

Would your position change if you had inherited the stocks in your business and never worked a day in your life?

You could say that about any type of inheritance. Be it in the form of buildings, other assets, stocks or just cash.
If I would have inherited the company from my parents, then it would have been the fruit of the labor of my parents.
And I don't see how it matters that the inheritance is a company vs simply a pile of cash.

Do you think it is OK that you pay less taxes on your dividends than your workers pay on their wages?

Yes.

As an independent, I am responsible for my pension. I'll be getting close to nothing from the state. This is not the case with my workers.
Also, I live in Belgium... you don't want to know the amount of taxes *I* (which is to say: the company) have to pay on the wages of my workers. It's basically what the workers pay on their wages, times 3.

 

[GoodAttention]

You're as enigmatic as Thomas S. Elliot.

It was a way to say we are Communistland?

Only a Vivienne Haigh-Wood can make a compliment sound less than flattering.

Articles 42-43

I will read this with pleasure.

 

[Revoltingest]

This obsession with profit maximization is not normal.

This is true.
I don't know anyone in business who thinks that way.
When profit is focused upon to the exclusion of other
important goals (eg, reducing risk, planning for the
future), a company endures the kind of debacle
that GE did (think of Jack Welch).

 

[Revoltingest]

Worked, past tense. So I assume you have retired, and the dividends are generated from the work of people who haven't. That is exactly my point. At the moment, you live from the work of others. That is a simple fact. No accusation there.

I'm not judging, I'm stating facts.

"Just stating facts"
That phrase always warns me that someone
pursues an agenda by cherry picking some
facts, while leaving out significant others.

For example, you left out that the business
hired workers for agreed upon wages, &
paid them. The workers didn't invest money
or time in the business. They risked none
of their own money. They got what they
agreed to.
Employees live off of employers who create
& run the business that accomplishes things
they could not.

Did I tell you, you should not enjoy the fruits of the success of your business?

Since you so vigorously defend your values, let's talk values after you have accepted the facts.

As you vigorously attack capitalism, it would
be wise to stop & consider facts inconvenient
to your argument.

I'll be so bold and assume you have, or you will.
Let's first go back to the initial question: what is "rich" in your opinion?
Would your position change if you had inherited the stocks in your business and never worked a day in your life?

Do you oppose inheriting taxes?

Do you think it is OK that you pay less taxes on your dividends than your workers pay on their wages?

As a shareholder in business, he actually pays
more tax than the employees.....
- Payroll taxes on behalf of employees (who
pay only half of the incurred payroll taxes).
- Dividends are paid from after-tax company
income. The dividends are then taxed again
when the shareholder receives them.

 

[Stevicus]

I assert that no normal person can do enough hard work, just by themselves, to acquire enough wealth to maintain a lavish lifestyle. There may be exceptions for very talented or ingenious persons, or a stroke of exceptional luck.

I often find that when people claim they did a great deal of "hard work," it's mostly self-serving and impossible for anyone to verify anyway.

Also, does this imply that people who earn little in wages don't do any "hard work"? For example, people who work in textile mills in Bangladesh or cobalt mines in the Congo? Do they not do "hard work"? Is there some kind of mathematical formula that we can use to calculate what is "hard work"?

Of course, in discussions like these, we don't hear from the owners of those cobalt mines or sweatshops where workers earn a pittance. They're not inclined to step forth and defend capitalism and their business practices. They don't have to.

Instead, we typically hear from Western small business owners who have made a nice living as a petite bourgeois and are generally nice people, treat their employees well, and are pillars of their community. They vigorously defend capitalism as if it's a matter of life and death and something very personal to them. In essence, they're getting in the way and running interference on behalf of the far more malignant types of capitalists who exist further up the food chain.

 

[Kfox]

I assert that no normal person can do enough hard work, just by themselves, to acquire enough wealth to maintain a lavish lifestyle. There may be exceptions for very talented or ingenious persons, or a stroke of exceptional luck.

Do you value work just because it's hard? I think the type of work you do is far more valuable than how hard it is. You can have a job where you run in circles all day, that might be hard but doesn't deserve compensation.

 

[Kfox]

There is no absolute value to rich, it is always in comparison to your neighbours. Owning a home and a car isn't rich in a developed nation. Owning two homes and two cars is well off.

By whose standard?

Owning stocks that allow you to maintain two homes and two cars without having to work is when richness starts (in a developed nation, today). (And it is obvious that at that point you get your money from the work of others.)

Wouldn't it depend on the value of the homes and the cars you own? You can have 2 shacks worth very little, and 2 used cars practally worthless and still be poor.