From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

>From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

Why is this bad again?

Attached: file.png (1200x1200, 1.19M)

who decides ability who decides need
oh a bureaucratic army of my overlords - who could have predicted this?

because the societal benefit of distributing resources to those with little to no ability is less than if the resources go to those with ability.

muh inheritance

Spoken like true spoiled children

Nope you reap the benefits of what you sow. Do not expect anyone to buy into this retarded garbage.

It is slavery, bro. Damn. I understand the appeal that genuine libertarian leftism has to people, but not Marxism. Marx is the most blatantly statist, authoritarian, slave driving tyrant in the history of political literature, but the lefties will all tell you "no dude its libertarian, its anarchism, its anti government, u just never read Marx! You don't understand!" and it's basically just a blatant flat out lie. You actually take the time to read him and Marx is literally like "Yeah you gotta do capitalism, and big government, and massive authoritarianism, and then maybe one day a bajillion years from now it will all just magically stop". I mean that's basically the TLDR of marxism. It's no wonder it ends in authoritarian dictatorship every time.

How does an Amazon worker reap the benefits of his work? He reaps $12/hr, significantly less than the value he adds to the company

imagine being ESL

it's not.
people are not against that just everything else the ideology produces

There is no objective measure of ability or need so obviously mine are both greater than yours so fuck you.

>He reaps $12/hr, significantly less than the value he adds to the company
how much does he actually add, then

marx was more redpilled on the JQ than half of /nu-pol/

Attached: 587423238669778.jpg (850x400, 48.19K)

Who determines either of these things?

lol this

>ESL
So you earn money with a job that creates no value at all. You're the living breathing quintessence of an argument against capitalism.

me :)

Yes because packaging is hard and intensive labor worthy of benefits and above an hourly minimum wage

I'd say 200-300% of that.
>b-but then Amazon shareholders would get nothing
Exactly, shareholders aren't needed and can safely be disposed of

you're struggling with the language barrier here Hanz

or instead
>there's seven billion of you, ok your wage will be $1, no more

I'll take the beardman's version pls

work sucks

>I'd say 200-300% of that
how do you do your calculation for that
a demonstration would help make your case

Indeed. Logisticians carry economies on their shoulders and should get at least an above average wage. If you're wondering who should finance that wage, the answer is rich people

Because it implies forced repossession.
The benevolent state of the people's dictatorship (that can do no wrong), naturally.

It means give all their money to brown invaders, stupid cuck commie faggot.

>or instead
aren't there more alternatives you're leaving out there

yeah because he was a jew, nobody hates jews more than someone who has to live life as a jew
just look at Yas Forums

dilate

Attached: leftypo.jpg (951x599, 105.03K)

I compare the profits of Amazon to the amount of money they spend on labor wages.

>Because it implies forced repossession
Why is that bad? The state already forces people to die so it’s not the “force” part that seems to be a problem.

>each according to his need
I need your sister's pussy. Should I be able to rape her? No?
Then you can fuck off with your commie bullshit. Commies get the bullet in the head.

What the fuck doea that even mean.

Is in society benefiting more from us essential workers than from you sports cars or stock Brokers or Bankers right now? Doesn't that mean we McDonald's employees storekeepers, medical assistants should be getting paid a lot more, a lot lot more

/nu-pol/ strikes again