How Capitalism Exploits Us | Richard Wolff

Support the creation of more videos like this: / sustainablehuman
“Exploitation is a simple mathematical equation. If a worker during the time he or she works produces more value for the employer than the employer pays them in wages, that is all exploitation means.” ~ Dr. Richard Wolff
Sustainable Human is a 501c3 non-profit started by a husband and wife team (Chris and Dawn Agnos) whose mission is to examine the underlying stories that give rise to the environmental, social, and economic crises of our time and offer new stories that help humanity to live in harmony with each other and the biosphere. Learn more: sustainablehum...
Here are some additional ways you can get involved and/or support this important mission:
Support us monthly: / sustainablehuman
One-time donation: sustainablehum...
Volunteer with us: sustainablehum...
Sponsor a video that aligns with your organization’s values: chrisagnos.com...
Hire us to tell your story or the story of your organization: chrisagnos.com...
We also help organizations that need help envisioning how to tell their story: chrisagnos.com...
Buy some of Dawn’s hand-made energetic jewelry: dawnagnos.com/
FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the US Copyright Law.
#Capitalism #RichardWolff #WorkerCoop

[@rogerroth9536]

I never understood why capping corporate and individual wealth is the taboo it is. Why do so few have so much and so many have so little? Why is that acceptable?

[@Poisonedblade]

People want to be rewarded for success. If you cap their rewards, your most productive members of society will stop working hard when they can no longer be rewarded.

[@rogerroth9536]

What is the point of amassing obscene wealth? How much does one person or one family need? Why? For what? I don't buy it. Productive? That's what we're here for? To make a mess of Earth and make society chaotic? And to own the most? I don't buy it. And it's not working. Not for most world citizens. So many have so little; so few, so much. Define "success," please. I live in a city on the west coast. It is choking with expensive cars and homeless people and getting worse every year. Fewer and fewer working people can afford to rent here and fewer yet, afford to own housing. What's the point? Who wins? Who's being "productive?" What are they producing?

[@Poisonedblade]

The rich invest their money into other businesses. Those businesses grow and hire more people. This creates innovation and a better economy. Steve Jobs invested in Pixar. Without him, there would not be Pixar, or apple. With the creation of Uber, people with limited skills are able to make a good living. One of my friends and her husband made over 100k combined last year driving for Uber. They were immigrants from Brazil and now they are US citizens who are doing well. Anyone who can drive is making decent money. Normally, they'd be working in retail or at restaurants. When I walk by the shops and restaurants downtown, most have HELP WANTED signs in the windows, so there are plenty of jobs for people who want to do them. I don't care about "world citizens." If the communist (N. Korea) and socialist governments (Venezuela) screw their own people, that is their problem for buying into an inferior economic strategy. Nobody in the USA is starving, unless they are spending all of their welfare money on drugs, booze, or gambling. My mom worked for a charity organization for 22 years. They send millions of aid to foreign countries. The money builds hospitals, farms, sends food, clean water, and medical supplies. In Africa, the warlords come in, steal everything, and burn the hospital to the ground. You just sound like a communist who is jealous of other people who work hard, and cannot comprehend the benefits of working hard because you never have. If you want to help the homeless, there is nothing stopping YOU from helping them.

[@rogerroth9536]

The goal of business ownership and management is to increase profit and driving down employee compensation is one way they do this. They outsource labor to people who are willing to work for less. This, after owners and investors have fully exploited the benefits to their businesses made possible by America's working people. You don't know me. I did very well in life in the public sector. I'm not rich. Never aspired to be, mainly because I saw no real need. "I don't care about world citizens" says it all. You must not be a corp. exec. who exploits third world citizens to make you rich.

[@substance90]

@@Poisonedbladeexcept the most productive and innovative people in society are financially motivated only up to a certain extent (covering their basic living cost). Look into Daniel Pink's research on motivation and drive.

[@catosicariuspictures7553]

Comrade Lenin has shown us the way and our business, what will we do about it.

[@mozambique9113]

We are not that pure to achieve that level yet. Full of corrupted people being born and taking the chairs then and now. Sad.

[@Raoul_187]

POV: your teacher wanted you to watch this

[@angelchavez1213]

well this is quite akward

[@Ringozo]

@Sustainable Human Whose speech is this ? Is this from a lecture ? tx.

[@SustainableHuman]

It's from a combination of five or six lectures by Dr. Richard Wolff. Check out democracyatwork.org

[@Drakeyuro]

Changing who gains the profit from a business is not getting rid of capitalism its making it better. The issue is in order to share the profit you must also share in the risk or someone must take all the risk and then give up the sole right to the profit. We don't need a better system we need better people.

[@michaelwindsor939]

Workers are greedy too...

[@kageedit354]

Cool argument

[@TropicalArtPaganCorporation]

Wow so no wonder the saying “The rich gets more rich and the poor gets more poor.” Well this is a huge gap of one percent of the population well this is known as greed. I say the people should have a say..

[@soundofcommunism9527]

Sorry, u can’t say the people should have a say, you don’t have a say bc u are part of the people

[@TropicalArtPaganCorporation]

@@soundofcommunism9527 exactly so how can we change this??

[@soundofcommunism9527]

@@TropicalArtPaganCorporation idk demonstration or smth

[@lochnessmunster1189]

'the poor gets more poor'- please show me somewhere in the world, where the poor are poorer than they were 100 years ago. Anywhere at all.

[@adelMN2]

@@lochnessmunster1189 if worse exist then it becomes acceptable, using other people misery to minimize yours it's a logical fallacy, it's not because it's better than a 100 years ago that the problem isn't there.

[@profoundpronoun4712]

Cooperatives, yay! Corporations, nay!

[@bridge4]

Solid analysis

[@greenleafyman1028]

I just cant understand automation in capitalism. If all jobs will replaced by robots to maximize profit who are going to buy their products?? The robots???

[@Reach3DPrinters]

People will still buy products. People will have more time to do creative works, instead of the mundane labor. When cars were invented, they did replace horse drawn buggies... but did that diminish the quality of life for the population??? There will always be jobs because... there will always be human needs to be met. If there is a need, there will be a job to fill that need. Technological advancements have only improved the conditions of human lives, once the byproducts are determined and offset, such as lead in gasoline. Sure, there are growing pains, but Im guessing you drive a car these days, and don't take a horse to work, right?

[@JNM578]

Technological advancements liberate people from doing mundane jobs that almost nobody likes. Robots will hardly replace human creativity, innovation, and good organization that takes into account personal lives.

[@Reach3DPrinters]

@@JNM578 Well said, very concise. Technology improves our lives.... I cant fathom how people see it as problematic, while simultaneously lavishing themselves with it. People are just scared of change, unsure about their own value in society. This is because, imo, they seek easy or quick money, instead of finding work they enjoy doing that takes skill, and just allowing the money to come. So they get stuck in a crappy job that was convenient to get, and realize it only pays so much, but haven't developed skills, and are aware their job is replaceable by a 16 year old... because they haven't built anything. Once you build something, that business has value. Its sad that so many people are employees, and never try to start their own businesses. I literally have 4 businesses, my first was a tattoo shop when I was 21. Not only build, but diversify, and listen to what society wants so you can offer something valuable in exchange for money. Its pretty simple. Not easy to get rich, but the rich often exchange their freedom for constant work to build those empires. I don't think bill gates was a party animal in college... that guy was studying constantly and designing and building... not getting hammered and screwing chicks all night.

[@glorbosbiggerfan9401]

Bruh did he just say mercantilism wasn’t capitalism

[@matthewleitch1]

The definition of 'exploitation' here is wrong. If I voluntarily agree to do some work for someone and they voluntarily agree to pay me for it then we are both getting an advantage, or we would not have agreed. I do this in my own life as both an independent consultant (i.e. not someone's employee) and as an employee. Apart from the tax treatment, I do not see these two relationships as being different. If I was not satisfied I would seek other clients. The general slant of this video, including the emotive words and delivery, is designed to make employees feel resentful, even if they don't already, or to make employees feel more resentful than they do already. It's just divisive and I don't know why the speaker is doing that.

[@kadenling3267]

I thought it would be something called "communism"

[@ErutaniaRose]

Nah, see the flaw with communism is its equality but not equity. That, and if everyone gets the same no matter what, nobody will have the motivation to work harder than another person since there will be no reward for them other than knowing they can do more or did do more. (No extrinsic motivation at all, and what is left is a dying intrinsic motivation that will soon snuff out or be brainwashed.) In all honestly, I personally think any ideology by itself or in its purest form is dystopian. We need a mix to balance power but allow for safety nets and basic levels for quality of life. From what I can tell, this video is describing a Socialist Democracy, in which the people and government work together and have an equal balance of power. For instance, the people get just as much say as any government official, but the government would be able to help export large amounts of resources across the country or abroad, while the people can do so at state and county levels with smaller government positions. I hope that makes sense. But, in all systems, in order to have ANY progression or wish to work, create, or invent harder, there have to be different ranks to live. Some people will want that big house with a car and kids, others could be just as happy working a janitor job they take pride in and living in a 1 bedroom. Everyone is different, and any economy has to balance it so they can work within the limitations and still be happy, or at least, survive. The US has failed poorly.

[@Reach3DPrinters]

Capitalism is NOT a means of government. Capitalism is simply allowing the public the right to decide what they want to buy. People make stuff, and if people want their products, then people buy them. If people don't want their products, then they fail. That is capitalism. Allowing ANYONE to make products and sell them to the public. I only got 42 seconds into this video, and can tell the creator doesn't understand the basic concept of capitalism. If you DONT want capitalism, that means you want a government to tell you what you can and cant buy or sell.

[@Reach3DPrinters]

@Twice is the Worst Girl Group If his premise of what capitalism even is, is incorrect, he cant speak of value toward it. The subject of the video suggests capitalism is at fault for exploiting the working class, when he doesn't seem to have a grasp on what capitalism is. If anything causes exploitation, its the greed of the law makers, allowing wealthy to influence their policy creating corruption. Because the wealthy put the lawmakers in place by supporting their campaign. The wealthy then create bias law to prevent a free market and competition. So the issue is with lawmakers. The LAST thing we want to do is remove power from the people, by taking their product voting rights away (capitalism), and allowing these lawmakers to decide what products are allowed to be built and sold (socialism). The corruption is with the lawmakers. DON'T give them more power.

[@rogerroth9536]

Who owns land and natural resources? Seems to me you can't get far until those two questions are answered.

[@cucumba5095]

the state which consists of workers which are elected by workers democratically.

[@FinalBoss429]

It belongs to the people who live on those resourceful lands! Not to globalist bloodsucking leeches of companies and governments!

[@zuverlassig2jl]

Right? That's the question. Good example where this is an important question (which it's an important question in general anyway no matter what the natural resource)...but the privatization of water sources. I would say that is a text book example of a desperate need to really look at this question and the whole systematic set up as a whole. Not to mention even in our our wealthy country water along with other added utilities and municipal services are not only often monopolized in any given county/ region, but the local government can als get involved because they can both benefit eachother, but in the meantime the customer gets screwed with no other competitors available. So you're stuck with whatever you get by way of quality of service or product delivery, repair whatever...oh and when ever one or both parties want to hike up the cost for whatever reason, like to build a new nuclear power plant you don't want in your county (that sometimes never even gets complicated and is a cancelled project, as with one where I live, and then where did all that added fee $$ from the customers go? We never see it back in our pockets🤬)...or for just general cost of service increase that come out of nowhere even though general wage/ salary pay raises aren't happening out of the blue to keep up with all these rising costs of living...the , of course you have no competitors to give your hard earned $$ too. It's the same a forced fee robbery to me I think it's BS....but the system fixes it so if you live in a populated place and you want water, power and not to live in a huge pile of trash for a yard you have to participate....but at least we have very convenient access to water here without having to pay a huge corporation fees we may or may not ne able to afford just for the luxury of walking 5 or 10 + miles to fill up some water jugs day after day. I mean, 3 days without this incredibly abundant natural resource in most places on the planet and you're a goner, maybe less if you're very young or old...and somehow it seems reasonably acceptable for people and agencies to make $$ of off such thing when they didn't create the product to begin with? Hey idiots, water was here before you came along with your $$ making ideas on how to exploit it....go back in time and try to collect from the trilobites you AHs.

[@nurulmaru]

The solution presented in this video is so innocent simply because they have never studied EGO in themselves.

[@BirdArvid]

If anyone is interested in these "utopian" "alternative" ideas, take a look at Catalonia in the 30's, before the world put Franco's fascists in charge of Spain, because the world's governments were more scared of "free" workers than fascism. It's enlightening and beautiful. And sad.

[@shubhamwr]

Exactly! And Paris commune! Bourgeoise never talks about these 2states, one to which marx himself called as communist while he would call Catalonia too communist if he was alive

[@vocaloidsrock6987]

this is a real good video!

[@ianedmonds9191]

While I agree with your point capitalism is not about the employee/ employer relationship instead it's about the investor/owner relationship. The investor says "Work your slaves/employees harder." The Owner says "Will do. I'm working them pretty hard already." The employer/owner says,"If you back off a bit I have a plan to increase productivity" investor "ok 1 quarter of a year" then I want to see some returns. Investor: "you promised 5% but you only made 4%" Owner "well yes but we have loads of good orders and we took on a bunch of people to ensure on time delivery, next quarter we're going to be golden." Owner: "We made 6% profit and we have doubled the order book for next quarter." Investor: That's great. Cut costs. You can surely do that with less people just pay them less or work them a little harder." Owner :"ok" Owner:"we cut 10% of the company but we found skills shortages in some key areas and we're recruiting again for those skills but it made us fail on on time delivery for a bunch of contracts." We made 6% again. Investor:"Well that's disappointing. 6% again. Investor's deserve their cut. Is their any part of the business you can sell to pump up the dividend. Owner: Well there's this division here we were developing to offset outsourcing all our Something Costly bills. Investor:Yeah sell that. Owner Well this year didn't go so well - No-one wants to work here because we layed off so many people last year so it's hard to get people. We've lost a bunch of contracts because we can't deliver on time and we're getting hit with massive bills Something Costly. We made 2%. Investor: "Sack the Board." Investor "Sell the company" Investor "Sack all employees" Investor "Reap capital investments" Begin again. Luv and Peace.

[@ianedmonds9191]

This just lays it all for everyone. It's simple. We're being exploited. We could be working 3 day weeks. The 0.1% needs to be overthrown not by guillotine but by withdrawal of the human resources. The only time they will take notice is with withdrawing the means of production. It's always been the same. I'm being made redundant this week. After 20 years. I'm joining a co-op instead. Luv and Peace.

[@ianedmonds9191]

The big problem with raging against capitalism is it's so hard to see past it. It is Ubiquitous to the point of no-one ever having experienced any alternative. But it's not just capitalism it's the most extreme form of capitalism we have now the whole laissez faire capitalism. The mutant child of the original market paradigm. Not the thinking is any attempt to moderate the market is wrong and capital should be unbound and able to let market capitalism run unbounded is the best way to run society. It is the best way to run society but only for those in the society that live on their capital. If you don't have spare capital to invest this the worst form of society. Wages are driven down by the need to eat. Conditions are driven down by the same pressure. Technology continues to enrich only the rich and the working class are going after a continuously shrinking pot of jobs which they will all bid lower to do. This is the capitalist hellscape that is our future unless we stand up and say enough is enough. We want a share of the technical improvements we are all driving and producing. These machines were made by us and designed by us. They belong to the Human Race and not some small cabal of people we didn't elect and who probably have generations of wealth made through industries we are no long are willing to sanction like slavery. We need to rise again and tell those people who have been dodging taxes for years and paying off politicians that we the people will no longer make them richer. There has to be a re balancing of wealth among the people. We will not work anymore for them. They need to work for all of us. Once we find a more acceptable 21st century equilibrium we will go back to work but not before. They can shoot us they can beat us up but ultimate they still need us so they can't win without our consent. Luv and Peace?

[@bigogobibi]

Inspiring. Keep going.

[@coolioso808]

Good for you to realize this. Stephen Hawking said that we can all live a life of luxury if the wealth created by machines is shared. That is what capitalism has taken from us in its toxic need for cyclical consumption and growth. We don't need a growing economy, we need de-growth, sustainability and all our basic needs met, for free, local-as-possible. This isn't science-fiction, this is technically possible. But we will never get there in a money-market economy. So a resource-based economy is a viable alternative. Joining local co-ops could help, because they inspire the right ethic that a RBE does. However, we would need system change, where money and market are obsolete. When will people be ready for this change? I don't know. But I hope soon. Peter Joseph's podcast Revolution Now! is a great way to get some ideas and sane analysis of our world.

[@Gigachad-mc5qz]

How do you find a coop to join

[@truedemocracynowdotorg4792]

Economic systems, can be called capitalist, communist, or some other term. However, the people in charge of the political system determine how the wealth of a government is distributed to its citizens. It seems to make more sense to describe the system of government as the economic system on a Democratic/autocratic scale of wealth distribution.

[@ronaldreagan-ik6hz]

hey richard -- where is your example of this working anywhere in the world? LOL

[@andy0ne310]

You’re aloud to start, join and work in cooperatives if you want to….

[@letsgobrandon3007]

“The Master owns the Slave.” Hmmm… sounds much like the world we live in.

[@hecagamer]

Wait, isn't capital-ism rather the ideology of capital, meaning private property, and the ability to do whatever you want with it, including derive profit from that property? Isn't what you describe as capitalism called salariat?

[@williammiller402]

If you "own" a house do you have the ability to do whatever you want with it? Unless you are a billionaire it is unlikely that you can. Am I right?

[@hecagamer]

@@williammiller402 Depending on what you call "whatever you want". Even a modest landlord has adisproportionate ammount of power compared to a homeless person. Likewise, a millionaire has a disproprtionate ammount of power compared to that modest landlord. Indeed, within his means, a landlord has more or less the power to choose who will sleep in warmth and who will die in the cold. It's not because they don't have unlimited power that the power they do hold isn't harmful, unjust, and unjustified

[@dreamleaf4363]

1:45 I thought this was the scene from Willy Wonka, until I saw a dead chicken.

[@briancordero7674]

There must be an augmentation of capitalism with socialism as needed to balance the economic injustices that destroys the life quality of millions nationally and billions globally

[@marialuizasilvatelles4086]

How can I subtitle for Portuguese?

[@themaniac2448]

so the alternative is socialist market

[@alexandreassis.]

Capitalism is not employee and employee relationship, it's about private property.

[@Trexatron]

Thats why we need more jobs, to create incentives for companies to raise wages and give more to their employees. At that point they'd have the same freedom of choice, raise wages or destroy company.

[@julianjanetzk8912]

@@LucreBem You do realize that North America has quite a lot control of your own health, right?

[@fernandorobinson8272]

That's the same thing if you think about it-- when the workers own the means of production, (or private property) there's no need for an employer.

[@samkodi7465]

I love Richard wolf . I’ve always watched his lectures and a lot of his content . He sees the greed that’s run by the few. When the economy goes to shits because a few had their hands in the market Realize the mass of control they have over many

[@TacoMaster07]

Stupid commie, why not move to a shithole communist country like China or Venezuela then?

[@rashaadbrown175]

@@TacoMaster07 u str8 bro?

[@TacoMaster07]

@@rashaadbrown175 nah stupid commies want to complain about how corporate is fucking them yet they go buy a new iPhone and go into debt, maybe self accountability is the answer

[@coolioso808]

We will need to use that mass numbers control over the rich few, sooner or later. Capitalism is unsustainable and we are seeing already the devastating effects it has on the environment and our mental and physical well-being. Education and awareness are key. We don't have to live this way. There are other viable systems. A Natural Law Resource Based Economy, for instance, where local, self-sustaining regions are guided by science and mathematics to provide all basic needs to people, for free. And once basic needs are free, labor for income is no longer necessary. People can truly do what they are passionate about. Still work needs to be done, but work would be done. Most people don't just sit around their house all day, they rather get up and do things, read, think, play, create, sing, dance, exercise, whatever. We need that level of freedom once again. Technology in a RBE can do that for is. But technology in a market economy will only end in more inequality and devastation.

[@halohalo505]

You can thank the state for all the problems

[@nwnw604]

lol Workers Good! Bosses BAD!! Is what this analysis comes down to. There is no reason to believe that if the "workers" got the "surplus", that they would somehow be more generous or philanthropic than the current bosses of today. Its false to say that the workers do all the work. The idea that the boss just sits in his office and does nothing is ridiculous. The owner is also risking capital, has to provide all the buildings and machinery or whatever. The owner is taking a gamble, whereas he HAS to pay the workers no matter whether he makes a profit or a loss in a given month. That is part of the bargain between worker and owner. It is also not exploitation, because it is a freely negotiated contract between worker and owner. the owner offers X dollars in return for Y amount of work. The worker is free to ask for more, or look elsewhere, or start their own business, or whatever. If you say "yes, I accept that contract", then its not exploitation. You have decided that your time is worth that amount of money. People are free to make their own co-operatives, nothing stops you. Sometimes they work. Top down government co-operatives never work. You dont get to just take over an existing business though. Not saying theres nothing wrong with the current system. But this video doesnt talk about anything to do with reality.

[@god5535]

'If you say "yes, I accept that contract", then its not exploitation. You have decided that your time is worth that amount of money.' That's because the system is set up such way we have no other choice azz hat. People have to survive and thus dealt with Hobson's choice. Now go look that up.

[@nwnw604]

@@god5535 are you saying that theres no choice, that you cant leave your job and find another?

[@DC-wp6oj]

This is laughable. There are lazy workers and there are hard workers. The lazy ones couldn’t have it better. The lazy worker will call in sick, steal from the workplace, start a lawsuit if theres money in it even if the claim is fictitious. You cannot get a group to work together without issues. Without a head of command, the ability to hire and fire you create an extremely inefficient organisation that will self destruct given enough time. Humans are fickle, jealous, envious and only tough leadership ensures the well being of the organisation. If Amazon and its ilk exploit workers that is an issue for government to prevent it. Everyone is free to setup their own business and not be an employee. But running a business aint so easy is it.

[@god5535]

Okay let's hear how you through your hard work and sweat of balls reached from plinth to zenith of society becoming a multi-millionaire tycoon. Go! Do enlighten us.

[@DC-wp6oj]

@@god5535 read my post. Setup your own damn business if you dont like working for others. Otherwise shut up and do your job

[@akaniotevanos9861]

These videos are nothing but pipe dreams

[@vocaloidsrock6987]

I actually have to agree with the pipe dream part because the rich and powerful people who comtrol the world will never let this happen.

[@RayT70]

How about we get rid of money altogether?

[@paifu.]

Money is usefull tho, the way we distribute is certainly wrong. You might be right, Im gonna think about it. You should search what is Anarchism, Anarcho-Communism (Libetarian-Socialist)

[@RayT70]

@@paifu. It divides people up into a few haves who become corrupt and many have nots. It puts a number on a person's worth. Money is infinite and so is greed. It's a toxic combination.

[@TheRichie213]

It should just be a moneyless society. Build your own house garden ect. The biggest scam in history is having to pay to be alive.

[@brmbrmcar]

I'm an ancom. This video was pretty good, but you didn't really explain very well what you thought the differences were between slavery, feudalism and capitalism. You should have used the basic capitalist idea of private ownership, wage labour and surplus value. You did touch on them, but it was a little weak in my opinion.

[@SustainableHuman]

Thanks for the constructive criticism. I was trying to create this video for people who aren't too familiar with the concepts you mentioned. Everyone is familiar with the feeling that comes from someone else profiting from your hard work. It can be difficult to explain all of it in a way that resonates. Its funny because I was working on a different version that addressed the topic more in the way you describe but I changed course because I felt it wasn't as compelling. Here is the radio edit for that other version if you are interested: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaO3nKOsbdxqd7s

[@brmbrmcar]

That radio edit looks very interesting. Thank you. I have watched into some of it.

[@KamikazeBunnyGames]

>ancom >anarcho-communism Whats next? libertarian-statist? If ancoms were not busy beating people with bike-locks a la Eric Clanton, maybe they would develop some common sense

[@brmbrmcar]

Anarcho-communism is the abolishment of state, money and social classes through direct force with no classes created to abolish it. Libertarianism is also a form of left anarchism, but I'll just let you keep that term for now, shall I?

[@Rocky183]

Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. Communism does not require a state. There really can be no dialogue until you can get this fundamental and very simple concept through your thick skulls.

[@SuperTonyony]

Wage slavery IS slavery.

[@sajfen]

Richard Wolff again. ITS ALWAYS THE SAME GUY!

[@Uraninite]

that's why im communist

[@tari7555]

thanks for the vid

[@livingdeadwolf]

Do you guys understand that this is at the core of what Karl Marx said?

[@pranayraju1538]

yes, and what Karl Marx has said has been an utter flop in the case of Venezuela, Cambodia, and many other socialist nations. @Sustainable Human should understand that capitalism is a system similar to a food chain in a wildlife system. Inequality does exist because every animal cannot occupy the top of the food or monetary chain. And who occupy the top control the entire web.

[@ObjectiveMedia]

Dont listen to Marxist socialists (establishment-funded disinformation) who try and make the issue about "workplace democracy" and not communal ownership of the earth's land, resources and technology. Capitalism is based on private ownership. Employment (wage slavery) is merely a by product of that.

[@CuttySobz]

@@pranayraju1538 people who use poor countrys as examples of why sicialism doesn't work ALWAYS IGNORE NORTHERN EUROPE

[@CuttySobz]

@Best4rtNiteClips Bless you sir.. Your are truly wise and I absolutely mean it.

[@chernovbrichtofen4767]

We need another Lenin

[@OriginalKarasu]

why dont big businesses offer to pay a part of employees salaries in the companies stock? cuz they dont give a fok about u.

[@claudio2304]

Why don’t you build your own company, invest your money, and then, give your employees the profit I’m sure you won’t

[@OriginalKarasu]

@@claudio2304 buddy when i say big business i mean big business... tell me something, why does someone in a personal level need more than 100 million dollars (let's say a big generous and nice round number) ??? i know why because these fuckers wanna play god!!! arrogance doesnt even begin to describe these fuckers!!!

[@claudio2304]

@@OriginalKarasu if he earned it, it’s none of your bussiness, why do you need your watch, let’s give it to someone else…

[@ikimus]

F*** the system

[@Zoza15]

How would you call that new system?, participation law?, freelancers?.

[@galibmahfuzullah6152]

he essentially repeated ideas of marshal Joseph Tito...... so you can call it titoism

[@nicadi2005]

@@galibmahfuzullah6152 "he essentially repeated ideas of marshal Joseph Tito..." - Are you sure?! Did Tito, a known dictator, also proposed democratic governance for the workplace? Can you forward the source references you've used to make that determination?

[@themaniac2448]

@@nicadi2005 he gave the works to own the means of production but use a market that is titoism

[@nicadi2005]

@@themaniac2448 "he gave the works to own the means of production" - (I assume you meant to say "workers", not "works"...) So did every single one of the former Socialist/Communist country from Eastern Europe; according to your definition, they were all following titoism - which is simply NOT true! Let me ask you this: under titoism, were the workers also deciding how to best use those 'means of production' they allegedly owned?

[@themaniac2448]

@@nicadi2005 yes and i fucking know it was only yugoslavia and sorry for the mistake m8

[@darleyt1]

I want this to happen but you would still have to factor in human greed, for example how would the pay structure work. What if I worked twice as long and invented the machine that saved hours of work, would i get paid extra or would my whole team benefit. What if i wanted to move to a more profitable company, how would companies/ startups stay in the game? Capitalism works so well because of greed and entitlement, ask a director why he should get 10 times more than the factory worker and he'll explain that he does so and so which provides the factory worker a job. I've never had a good answer for this other than: without the factory worker the director wouldn't have a job.

[@hecagamer]

Human greed is unnatural in humans. It has been cultivated by our system. Why would you deserve anything more for your machine than your peers? You're the one who thought of it? Wow, was a big effort. Did you build it? Did you make every part yourself, every metal sheet, every cog, every screw? Did you refine the materials to make it? Did you also extract them? Did you also make all the tools necesary to do all these things? Did you also invent all the tools and processes you used to make that machine? Did you feed yourself, educate yourself, raised yourself, built the house you live in yourself? No? Then why then would you get anything more than anyone else? You're not the only one to have made that machine: all of humanity was necesary to make it, and you were merely a part of it. Therefore, you should get an equal share of everything humanity made, according to your needs.

[@fernandorobinson8272]

The whole point is that you wouldn't be motivated by money in socialism/communism. You would innovate for the benefit of the whole, just as we innovate for our own benefits now. With equal opportunity, also, there would be more innovation than in capitalism, because those who would otherwise be marginalized, stuck working unskilled jobs all day because they couldn't afford to go to college, would have the opportunity to innovate as the few lucky and rich do in capitalism.

[@rubensdesateles108]

LULA ESTADISTA

[@zbynekcodykolacek]

Democratic donors, politicians live in gated communities as well as communist do! Someone has to take the risk and go with the idea to the bankers and ask for loan...! Not saying that capitalism is ideally perfect but so far it is the only what brought us to nowadays. Not communism or socialism!

[@q9wgyo73]

“Some seem to think that Capitalism is about buying and selling things” hmm... “ The wealth of those societies in which the capitalist mode of production prevails, presents itself as “an immense accumulation of commodities,” ”

[@suadela87]

One of the many things I hate about my job is some boss person will come in and change everything up without even asking what we the workers need. Most of the time, they don’t even know how to do our jobs, if they even know what our jobs are. They come in and tell us this new way will be more efficient, if they explain themselves at all. It rarely works out. Meanwhile, we, the workers, know what the job is and how to make it better. Many of us would happily explain to a leader what needs to be done. Without more knowledge than that, I can confidently say that most workers can run the business without a boss.

[@suadela87]

@@Craig121000I’m also not wrong

[@suadela87]

@@Craig121000 lol, okay. Enjoy the taste of leather.

[@Dimitrios_Efthymiadis]

Read Von Bohm Bawerk and you might understand where you are mistaken

[@mosesrodrigues1310]

+Sustainable Human Fantastic video but I do not see Richard Wolff's name anywhere... I know you linked democracyatwork.info at the end of the video but it'd be great for people to know the name of the speaker. It'd be quick and simple to add it somewhere in the video description section. Regardless, thanks for sharing this brilliant creation, as well as the other video with Peter Joseph. Cheers!

[@Manj_J]

Right in the beginning it says "narrated by Richard Wolff" just below the title

[@byronmclaggan3443]

Samsara is a great film. I like how you worked the scenes into your video.

[@CristianKirk]

Where's this taken from?

[@rogbrogb7537]

I recommend Engels' "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific". Co-ops are workers' democracy, but if they are still operating under a capitalist SYSTEM...

[@greenleafyman1028]

But much better than pure capitalism.

[@beyond_modernity8554]

@@greenleafyman1028 Sure, but it should only be a transitional phase, not an endgoal.

[@shaykespeeer7040]

A dirt nap might be our only escape from economic slavery. Life tired. :(

[@jmantheman5595]

Very depressing that we are born into this crap and really have no choice but to work for some selfish prick at a company .. who doesnt give a shit about you.

[@leandro5l78]

Same shit everydays. I feel like a fool, there’s no choice , and The royalty makes it pretty obvious about how they control us, they laughing on our faces .

[@bnguyen812]

What jf the business is going under? Do you split the losses?

[@srikumarsethumadhavan8483]

Start to see putting money and obtaining losses as just a job. If losses are incurred till bankruptcy, expect some money back from the govt. as a waiver. If profits are obtained, govt. takes through taxes, right ? Why shouldn't the govt. provide when losses are incurred ? Shouldn't this common knowledge ?

[@bnguyen812]

@@srikumarsethumadhavan8483 if i start a bakery but im the worst baker. Would you like to cover my losses as a tax payer? So i can continue baking bread no one wants?

[@srikumarsethumadhavan8483]

@@bnguyen812 Pay an advance before you start, prove that you're the best before you start and prove that you've baking skills, but your skillset aren't being recognized. After all, you're going to pander to people's taste and health It's like saying that you pay a fee, prove that you've what it takes to go the next standard and only then you'll pass a standard, else you'll fail. How is this any different ? If you're a medical doctor/lawyer/engineer/financier, you don't get to start without proving that you've enough skillset before you ply your trade, isn't it ? Why should this be any different ? If it's not a skilled labor, then don't crib that you don't get to rich, it means you've not taken enough steps to take the next step. it's upto the govt. to make as much of labor as skilled labor If you don't have any money to gain a skillset, depend on the govt. to provide it for you. Isn't that what a govt. is for ?

[@wanglei91]

@@srikumarsethumadhavan8483 exactly!

[@Dan-xo9ly]

Yes

[@choppergirl]

For as long as I can remember, I've been unemployed. Everything I produce I get to keep. However, I don't benefit from mass production and economies of scale; everything I make is hand produced which is slow and laborious and time consuming. I do though get to keep it all. Oddly, as incredibly laborious, inefficient, and slow going as it is to hand create everything from scratch or fix things, I've grown richer and richer than those around me with jobs, because I have no bills to pay. I'd love to have a job, and make the kind of money the rest of you do, I'd grow rich so fast because I do not squander it on rubbish like the rest of you... but jobs do not exist in this country for people like me. So I live between the cracks like a weed, dodging and adapting, while society like a weird game of whack a mole keeps trying to crush me out of existence along with all the other poor.

[@datnguyenthe8300]

What is the song at 3:40 please? It's rather motivational :)

[@user-ce2kr6gp7b]

I can go to work and 💤 😴 .

[@jamescolpas]

Power-to-the-people

[@yourwholisticlife9371]

Nice video! It's amazing how many people are not actually aware of being slaves!

[@Poisonedblade]

Anyone can quit their job at any time and start their own business. Nobody is a slave.

[@yourwholisticlife9371]

Simplistic

[@brucewayne1025]

Raif Rachmaninoff A slave works without pay and is owned by someone else. Nobody in any first world country is either of these things.

[@brucewayne1025]

Your Wholistic Life Something can be simplistic and true at the same time.

[@-mwolf]

@@brucewayne1025 It's true *but* it is simplistic.

[@CapitanoGUC-gf6el]

Well - go and buy some shares of the factory :-/

[@CuttySobz]

How can we afford to buy shares of a company that doesn't pay us enough to make a decent living? Jackass.

[@gettingitin6341]

Well said

[@sheilastutz7804]

Right on

[@efmoraes2284]

Bancos, bancos e bancos ...

[@ilkeryoldas]

The music's too loud.. ruined the video imo

[@Trexatron]

The concept ruined it imo

[@adamchavez999]

You don't have to work for these companies,start your own company.

[@Rogdog692002]

Absolutely agree that unfettered capitalism is inherently exploitative, unbalanced, destructive and doomed to be replaced in the long run. But we've never found a more efficient or effective way to organize than through free markets. Demand and supply is very good (in many instances, not all) at supporting a relatively healthy means of allocating goods. But free markets are based on private ownership, and not an easy fit with worker driven coops. The idea that worker ownership will be some panacea is just not supported by current evidence. There have been some successful instances, at a small scale, but we've yet to see it employed successfully at any mass scale. We need to fully test various ownership structures to see if we can find a more equitable and successful structure, but we also need to stop relying on the work of Marx as the only key to a more equitable future. He was brilliant, but a theorist not a technician. Wealth distribution like we see in Northern Europe has a much better track record than attempts at building a communist economy.

[@god5535]

Great post!!

[@lochnessmunster1189]

'exploitative'- please explain what you mean.

[@aykunatural]

This is amazing. I have been working on a similar proposal.

[@ckanoria]

Thank you 🙏☺

[@lars.nordberg]

The workers also then need to take risks with their own money in the first place. You cant steal the workplace from somebody, so then the workers needs to go together and invest to create their own jobs...

[@williammiller402]

When corporations expect and get bailed out by the government every few years, then where is the risk? These days what is risky is producing value for an employer that can fire you on a whim. Am I right?

[@VinWhiteartistry]

He sounds exactly like Ed Wynn from Mary Poppins lmao!

[@FonsecaStatter]

A very nice promotion of Cooperativism, but a poor (even if in the right direction), critical analysis of Capitalism.

[@FromDaniel2Enzo]

I love the idea of co-operatives, but wouldn't having workers who have not studied business or economics make business decision be detrimental to the business itself? I am not actually sure of how important a career in business is in order to lead a company but it seems pretty fundamental... how would we get around this problem?

[@SustainableHuman]

Certainly, we would need more education, but the decisions in business really aren't that complicated. Most empowered workers can learn enough about various subjects to be able to make informed decisions. The key is giving them the required information. Today, workers typically only get information pertaining to their specific role.

[@StandingLeaf]

Beside, nothing prevent a few of them to get a special training on economics or business and still be on the same level as the other workers. Those specialists can give advice, information or even training on what to do but the final decision remain in the democratic voting of of everybody in the company.

[@FromDaniel2Enzo]

Mmm i don't know how practical this would be. Most people are not too good at listening to reasonable explanations... This sounds amazing but it seems that it only works under the assumption that humans are rational and always looking out for the group's best interests. In the country where I live, (Costa Rica) co-operatives are not that rare but idk if a whole economy formed of co-operatives is viable.

[@substance90]

You split the tasks. Obviously the ones who have most experience with business do the business part. Someone else does the accounting, someone else actually mops the floor. Yet everyone is equally an owner.

[@topple80]

Democratic Cooperatives, the education helps in being elected to those positions in a cooperative based on the profits/efficiencies the workers get out of electing those people into those leadership positions in the first place.

[@NathansHVAC]

Co-ops suck. They never have ambition.

[@riverwolf8532]

A 3 day week and 8 hours a day work is what it should be

[@MyChannel-eo8ic]

Okay, I have a few issues with this video. Up until the 1:45 mark, I agree with him. But after that, he says, "...and in that relationship lies a fundamental conflict. Tension. Anger. Resentment. Why?" Only to a bad boss would someone think that. But otherwise, that doesn't sound realistic, first off, most people get a job they want, or if they're just not happy, ask the employer to change that certain thing, or leave. I worked in retail for a while now, and all my co-workers (at least a majority of them) love my bosses. Let's continue. "Because some people are doing all the work and producing more than they get. A more that we nowadays call the surplus, the extra. And if you're a capitalist, an employer, what of coarse is your interest? To give the worker the least possible, while giving the most out of them because that's the biggest surplus they can get and the more surplus they'll have, the more secure they'll be." This is more or less true, but it's common fact that if an employee loves his/her job, they'll do better. And if you want to show that you are a great company to work for, it's basic business, and you need people to work for you instead of your opponents. So I could argue that it would make economic sense to give them the most money/conditions possible, to have a good reputation among consumers. "In capitalism it turns out we've got the same exact kind of system as we had in slavery and feudalism. Why? Because the worker has to produce more of a surplus than he gets. Just as the Master got the surplus. The slave produced or the Feudal Lords got the surplus that the Serf produced." Except that it's not for a number of reasons. 1. The employees don't get whipped or chained like the slaves, nor are they forced to work at their job. Maybe only a small minority of people are "forced" to work under the most extreme conditions, but even then I highly doubt that. 2. The employees have the right to minim pay, safe work spaces, and many others, links here. www.usa.gov/labor-laws www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3021.pdf 3. The only thing similar is the surplus, but pretty much, nothing else. "It's nobody's fault it's the way the system is set up. What's the alternative? When the people who produce the surplus. The workers are themselves the people who get the surplus. If all the workers together make a cooperative, then they aren't split between the employers, and the employees. But both positions are occupied by every person in the office. There is no split. How would that work?" These already exist. I don't know if anyone knew that or not, just saying. www.thenews.coop/122959/sector/usas-top-100-co-operatives-year-named-national-cooperative-bank/ "Take any factory. Take any office. Take any store. Change it as follows. No more board of Directors. Don't need it. Here's how we're going to do. You come to work, you sit around making the decisions. All the decisions that used to be made by the capitalists. Workers become their own board of directors or to say the same thing another way the Worker Capitalist Division resolves." Few things, YES! You need a board of directors, or some body, or group of persons overseeing everything. That's like saying you don't need a captain, the crew will be their own captain. The Group in charge needs to set standards, decide how much to make of it and when, and hundreds of other things to keep the company afloat. You need a captain. And then the question is asked, If workers were in charge... how might things change? How might they decide to distribute the wealth that they all helped create? "If you made all the workers democratically get together and decide how to distribute the wealth they've all together created they would never give a handful of people more money than they know what to do with while everybody else is worrying about their kids to collage because they can't afford it." In order for the "democracy" to work, the workers must buy the company, or start a new one in the first place. Second, people (at least smart ones) always know what to do with more money. Invest it wisely into the company, or other companies. Easy. You know, on advertising, R&D, wages, and so many other things. And what if everybody else isn't in a financial crisis about collage? What if a majority of the people are living normal happy lives? Which we can see is becoming a more common thing in the US, with GDP per capita rising, and poverty down. tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-per-capita www.statista.com/statistics/200463/us-poverty-rate-since-1990/ As for the collage bit being so expansive, you can thank Uncle Sam for that. And the question is asked, If workers were in charge, would they choose to pollute their own environment? "When you're discussing the new technology that might pollute or the water. The decision is made by the major shareholders and of the board of directors, a tiny group of people why typically live in gated communities in a lovely leafy residents living far away from the factory or the office or the store that pollutes, so they can make the investment in the new technology and reap the profits if the workers who live and work and depend on the enterprise made the decision. They wouldn't do it that often because they're the ones who breath the air, drink the water and they'd be much more sensitive to the real coarse." Yeah, renewable energy companies exist. You know, clean energy, and they're also recycling companies too, that also have a board of directors, and major share holders. And this is the amazing thing about capitalism. You can shop at those clean energy companies, the other companies will see they're losing money, and become more clean too. You vote with your dollar who provides what. And the clean energy industry is huge, almost at $1 trillion! www.forbes.com/sites/mikescott/2018/10/05/clean-energy-market-continues-strong-growth-as-costs-continue-to-fall/#88a0f3fc7f88 www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2018/07/11/top-renewable-energy-financiers-reveal-pathway-to-1-trillion-in-u-s-investment/#41c906d934b0 Even ordinary companies care about the environment, because they know if they use up all their resources, they won't have any left, or people won't shop there, and they'll go out of business somehow. I personally invest in Tesla, and will by investing in Brookfield Renewable Energy soon. If workers were to change what would they do when technology threatens to replace their job? "Every technological invention justified on on the grounds by this new machine, we could get more done with less effort but when those innovations are put in a capitalist economic system, the people who put the technology in want to make a profit out of it." I mean, yeah. That's why you innovate. And the more people buy it, the more it's improved, so you, the workers, the owners, everyone benefits. "For example, if a machine allows the workers to do twice as much as before, they fire half the work force. The remaining half works with the new machine produces as much as before. The company realizes a fantastic profit because it doesn't have to pay half the workers wages which they can keep for themselves." That's not how it works, and anyone who has done this doesn't know the basic fundamentals of capitalism. First, they don't fire half the work force that's stupid. Instead, they keep all the work force, and produce twice as much as before. So the company grows. This is how a company grows. And with the new profits they'll get not by firing, but by the more products they'll sell, hire even more people, which means more stuff gets made which means more profit which means more jobs created and so on. "Here's an alternative: Let every worker do half as much work as he or she did before. Let's run the working day four hours instead of eight. The workers will have engaged an enormous amount of leisure to pay to their own development, to their families, to their communities if we use technology that way. We would use it to help the mass of people a better life rather than a small percentage of the people enjoy a greater profit. The problem was not with technology. The problem was the system that decided how to use that technology." The leisure part will come automatically with the new tech. Same thing with the development of themselves, family community etc. Believe it or not, we live, even the most impoverished people you'll ever find, live better than cavemen. Why? TECHNOLOGY! If you're homeless, you don't have to worry about being killed by a warring tribe, you can get food at a soup kitchen. Or seak help from a charity, or church. And poverty is declining, and gdp per capita rising as I already stated. 0% of that would be possible without our current "system." And he asks, If the workers were in charge... "You're going to have to get rid of this capitalistic system where it lives. In the stores, factories, and the offices." What decision would you make? I would say this capitalists system is wonderful except the taxes are too high, and too much govt. regulation. Tone those down a bunch, and I'm good THX!

[@jamespollock11]

Yeah this guy's assertions are mainly based on erroneous generalizations.

[@white.dragon.222]

that's anarchy :)

[@halunkarecord]

nirvana or just kurt? I'm interested to know if you would still love nirvana if you knew they were all part of a big deception to control and profit from it? I guess one might call it capitalism, but what I am trying to get at is this. Have you ever heard of a man named Rivers Cuomo? Well all I can say is surprise you have been lied to by the one you love and support. If you haven't made the connection yet Kurt is Rivers. Enjoy the rest of your rabbit hole. Its all business nothing personal.

[@white.dragon.222]

@@halunkarecord yeah, i really love their music and i am aware of the fact, that they surely don't have a clean slate. But i am sure we don't have to be super conscience about everything all the time, for our mental health it's important to just have fun sometimes and music is a big hobby of mine.

[@reverse5461]

Unsubscribed, give channels password to someone who understands economics and sociology. Not even going to argue with people from here. These arguments are so vague and 19th century already solved ones. No branch of a socialistic-communistic collective monetary system would be able to change these statements, even if they did, they would’ve create bigger problems

[@katlehokomeke]

What this man wants is not aligned with reality. I highly doubt that he has ever run a successful business or has ever tried starting a company. His utterances are highly uninformed.

[@q9wgyo73]

Read antidühring + ratio

[@ricktalks7420]

Hit the nail on the head ...

[@Cherry-bq4oh]

so basically marxism! Good video, comrade.

[@FlnSkr]

2:42 Chateau de Bourscheid, Luxembourg ;)

[@GroguSlayer69]

Also, there are examples of good people in charge that take good decisions, I think this message is biased and does not account the biggest thief, the government, an entity that also destroys the environment, not because of the evilness of the job but for the evil that is within the human heart. When human beings reject God and make their own code of conduct it turn to evilness.

[@MegaphoneMan0]

ElvenSithLord woah there man, calm down with that shit. Every other belief system has had followers that tried to conquer the world. Just because the followers do something doesn't mean that thing is inherently bad. (Although it's also totally not necessary to be good, that last sentence of Yankee's paragraph really lost me)

[@MegaphoneMan0]

ElvenSithLord the jewish people were being beat into submission so often they never had time XD they also never really had a country of their own until the whole "taking over the world" thing was sort of taboo. Im just saying that christians aint the only ones. There have been dozens of Muslim Caliphates, and more than a few atheists. Im trying to get across that the common factor of people who want to take over the world just isn't the christian religion, or even religion in general. Its just too loose of a connection.

[@MegaphoneMan0]

ElvenSithLord okay, I suppose so. But again, others have done that too, trying to convert others to their frame of mind (whether that be their religion or their lack-there-of). I guess I just sort of consider religion a mute... moot? muut... wow Ive never had to write that word before, point. You cant use it to defend a nations actions by any means, but I dont really think you can use it to attack, or say that it was the motivation behind their actions either

[@MegaphoneMan0]

ElvenSithLord I've always seen it as more of an excuse than any real held belief. The crusades are a perfect example. The cover was that the pope wanted to re-take the holy land, but in reality it was the fueled by the ottomans convincing the pope to help weaken the turks, who just so happened to be right next to the holy land, and could be pillaged along the way. Whenever I learn about a conquest or something similar that is supposed to have had religion behind it, I rarely see a super holy dude leading that mission. In my own personal experience, I find that history tends to reveal them to be manipulators and aristocrats who use religion as a cover to work politics. The only "conquest" that I can even think of that had legitimate religious drive behind it is the colonization of the Americas by the quakers, but that was more running to avoid religious persecution than anything else

[@bpansky]

“Exploitation is a simple mathematical equation. If a worker during the time he or she works produces more value for the employer than the employer pays them in wages, that is all exploitation means.” ~ Dr. Richard Wolff Too bad he doesn't seem to know how to determine fair wages, so he basically just gives up. In this transcribed interview, his reasoning seems hopelessly circular, and he's not alone, I've seen many anti-capitalists talk about "surplus value" in this same circular way, weirdly never admitting that a boss could ever deserve any wage larger than $0: www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/23/a-summary-of-marxist-economics-with-richard-wolff/

[@simplace44]

Wow, this is so flawed it's almost unbelievable, you would have to be simple minded to not see all the holes. You say Capitalism = tension, well no matter what system tension will always be a factor. By nature humans are greedy (a good thing too), we compete for our food, our place in the ecosystem/ food chain, to own a house, to be heard, to be noticed, to be loved, we all want some - to live a more easier life, and simply survive. Socialism also creates tension, anger, resentment why? Because some people are doing all the work and others are not but are getting handed their wealth, and people all round get less money because they got to pay the people who are taking from some and giving to others (the board of directors). Of coarse the employer wants maximum surplus, but hey as an employee if you are not happy you ask for more, if you can't get it, you quit and offer your labour to their competition or better yet once you have learned the skills you go out and start a rival business, produce better quality product, pay your employees more and poach their workers putting them out of business. Competition in a free market will sort out any injustices. Of coarse the employee produces more surplus then he gets, if they didn't there would be no point in creating the job in the first place, the employee never took the risk, never had the idea to start the business, never created the jobs, never invested the capital. So whats the alternative... "when the workers who produce the surplus they themselves get the surplus". That's called starting your own business, self employment... and when you need to produce more than you are capable of you need to hire workers... Tension, you created the jobs, you took the risk, you put up the capital, you own the building/land, you think you should get more...Fair enough? Lets say you offer the workers to share in all of that so you all own it, a cooperative, therefore you all get paid the same amount... Tension, you work harder than others, you don't get sick as much, you don't have kids therefore have no other engagements to take care of but you all get paid the same. A lot of workers are just not capable of making all these decisions as owners, nor do they want to, nor want the pressure of, hence why everyone is not a capitalist. I agree with the introduction of machines we should be doing less work but it's not capitalism to blame its just progress fullstop, for starters people may lose their jobs but the market offers other jobs where the labour is more needed (designing/repairing/creating machines?). What happens to the extra profit the employee makes? They spend it... (creating jobs) or It goes into the bank, bank gives out loans to people who spend it (creating jobs) or start businesses (creating jobs). If machines and robots take all the jobs, well guess what capitalists will have to share their profits out to the public in some sort of income, why would they? Because it is in their interest for people to have money so they in turn spend it on their goods produced. There is no point in having machines producing goods if no one has money to buy them.

[@NmaM-it5yk]

simplace44 well put! This video is just a utopian view of socialist practices that are laughable. It’s trying to make people feel like they are treated so unfairly by greedy capitalists and need to rise up and change the system. It’s ironic because this video would never had a platform to express its view point if not for capitalism. Lol.

[@dr3adfulr3aper44]

Fuckin bootlicker

[@Daniel-pr4uk]

@Jasper Hilliard That was an excellent reply and discussion. Thank you.

[@Daniel-pr4uk]

@Jasper Hilliard Haha, yes. You write really really well. Please keep speaking up for sanity and for the more beautiful world we know is possible. You're doing an amazing service for humanity. Really grateful for that.

[@wapple4240]

What is the average surplus extracted from a worker? In like percent?

[@lochnessmunster1189]

There is no surplus extracted from a worker. This was disproven even while Marx was alive. An employee utilises their employee's additional inputs (an employer is often a worker too) such as land, materials, tools, electricity, water, knowledge and training to make themselves a higher wage than they would if their employer never existed.

[@wapple4240]

@@lochnessmunster1189 look up empirical evidence of ltv because there is a lot of it.

[@lochnessmunster1189]

@@wapple4240 So, something is valuable because labour has gone into it?

[@kenseitakesi4521]

We need goddamn stalinism!!

[@kelleyfisher6932]

This is fanciful. If this structure were so obviously workable why is there NOT at least a small % of businesses that run this way. Also, are you kidding me?...this relies on assumptions of virtue that simply does not exist.

[@shaheenshabudien5134]

Whats a better system?some people confuse capitalist of for corporatism, blame corrupt rotten governments,try this idea in South Africa monday will be babalaas thats hang over day no work monday.We have forgotten that half loaf is better than nothing.This world can never be perfect,lets try to work hard and help with charity forcing things on people makes them cold,if that doesnt work what next,let poor families move in your home?

[@CallMeSlavik]

I’ve never thought about any of this in this way. Very powerful. But I also think that at the end of the day, hierarchies are a natural thing in any society. In a perfect world this could work, but eventually the cycle repeats itself. New leaders would rise within the wide range of workers - someone would eventually be in charge. I’ve come to learn that within any and every economic structure, human greed will ALWAYS destroy it.

[@damienneimad6044]

Richard wolf is funny. "Donate to me on my capitalist laptop through my capitalist donation website and I'll tell you why capitalism is bad. A good joke wolf is.

[@bpansky]

Richard Wolff is hopelessly circular in his conclusion that bosses don't deserve their wages...but the meme you're repeating doesn't make sense.

[@damienneimad6044]

@@bpansky the socialist who tells people to donate to his patreon... it doesn't make sense and that's the point.

[@bpansky]

@@damienneimad6044 what don't you think makes sense about that? Can you articulate?

[@damienneimad6044]

@@bpansky it's a socialist asking his audience on his laptop he bought through capitalist means to participate in an aspect of capitalism and trade money in exchange for a service he provides. To tell them why capitalism, which is what he just made his audience participate in to fund himself, is bad.

[@bpansky]

@@damienneimad6044 That's not accurate. What he actually says is bad: individuals employing other people, and the employer owning the products that the employees make. And he is not asking these people to be his employees. So he's not being self-contradictory. The people who gave you these memes want you to talk a certain way, so that you never ask the questions that could reveal the truth to you. and, come on, no one says it's hypocritical to shoot someone who is on a shooting spree (for example). So never be so simplistic about what you think is "hypocrisy" or whatever.

[@neptune3569]

Slavery does not cope with Capitalism. Of course owning slaves won't hurt the owner to produce things but Slavery is not a part of Capitalism And if Capitalism is so bad, how come America was Capitalist for over 110 years and has managed to become so successful with people around the world coming there every day? My Father came to America and he lived The American Dream. Capitalism survived and will continue to. Change my mind.

[@SustainableHuman]

Well, it depends on how you define "successful". The US has 5% of the world's population but it consumes 25% of the world's resources. "Free trade" means goods can flow here but not all people can. So if you live in one of these countries that exports their resources to the US while your government and elites take most of the proceeds, you don't have much opportunity. Better to go to the "rich" country. The reason why capitalism won't survive is because it is based on growth and consumption which cannot grow forever on a finite planet. The need for continuous growth is the reason capitalism will fail. Notice this video does not advocate for the abolition of capitalism but the evolution of capitalism to be controlled by the masses of people instead of just a few owners.

[@neptune3569]

Sustainable Human LOL I just read the title and assumed it was against capitalism You have a point

[@SustainableHuman]

Man, you gotta watch the video! :)

[@VRMusic]

Let me ask you; what prevents you from doing this? Why don't you found a business (indeed with your own money), hire people, split the work and profits? The CAPITALISTIC free market allows you to do anything you want so go ahead, nothing is stopping you. On the other hand, you would most likely soon come across these few problems ie. We as people are all different, some of us work hard and some do not. Are you still going to pay equal amount of salary to the slacker compared to someone that contributes much more to the company? Secondly, you say we should all produce everything we need by ourselves so theres no separation between workers of the society? Ok let me ask; can you manufacture the microphone, computer and all of it's components that you used to make this video? I bet you cant. The people who have studied these expertities can, and the big bad manufacturing companies have provided the tools necessary. So WHAT can you do? Maybe you can start farming your food and so on but that will be all that you have in this utopistic world of yours. I'm willing to discuss these topics with anyone that actually would have a sound alternative for our MIXED economy (not just capitalistic). It is pointless to suggest removal of an economic backbone without providing an actual, executable replacement.

[@substance90]

No one's stopping any one. Co-operatives exist and are actually quite common here in Europe. I guess they just need popularizing in the US.

[@shaskies]

WRONG! In capitalism, wealth is distributed based on the risk you're taking. If a person risks 100k to start a company than they are more entitled to the reward. Otherwise, how is it fair?

[@m1lklizard934]

How did they get that 100k? Either it's generational wealth that they inherited, or they have exploited a work force to "earn" it. It's not fair, because not everyone is able to give it a go. No one can realistically save enough money to get off the ground because they are being charged to exist. Being charged for things that are basic human rights, like water, food and somewhere to live. You can only get rich, if you are already rich.

[@flooavenger]

@@m1lklizard934 so false dude, so many successful business people have been poor with no family help. You don't have a right to food, water, shelter, a college education, health care, etc. It's not the governments job or the job of the tax dollars to feed lazy people. Just because you're alive doesnt mean you get free stuff, necessities included, whatever you put into society you get out. Eligible to work but dont want to? then you go hungry. The only people that lose are those who are born in extremely unfortunate circumstances such as any genetic disorder, in this case they will either have family or a charitable group to assist them.

[@m1lklizard934]

@@flooavenger You don't have a right to food, water and shelter? Wow. Of course you do. I don't mean someone should build me a house and bring me food and water, I mean we should all have the right to build our own shelter and grow our own food. The problem is that all resources have been "claimed" and are being rented/sold back to us. If you don't see profiteering by selling people basic necessaties to live as morally wrong/evil, then you are truly heartless and brainwashed.

[@flooavenger]

@@m1lklizard934 It's hard arguing with a fool, where would all the progression and incentive to work go if everyone had their basic needs met? You see this with welfare and food stamps, being are lazy and live off them because they don't feel like working. There's only one way to earn money and that is to provide something someone wants, it's that simple. Everyone has something provide, it's called labor, and if you want more money than the necessities then you provide something a lot of people want by opening a business and employing people/selling products and services. So in that case you give to society jobs and products and services, along with the risk of opening that business, and in return you reap the benefits of that risk.

[@m1lklizard934]

@@flooavenger The incentive to work would still be there, but you would be labouring for the benefit of your family and community. If your needs were met, would you just sit around all day? Or would you work for things you were passionate about and just enjoy life? And I am only saying basic needs should be met, things that should be a human right. I am not advocating handing out Xboxs and cars. It's not like the resources are in short supply either, they are just hoarded by the rich. There would still be jobs and you could still start a business. People should work because they want to, not due to the threat of homelessness and starvation.

[@Trexatron]

You know a company needs money for other reasons than to shove in their pockets?

[@cucumba5095]

He talks about the surplus. The company produces enough to sustain itself but the capitalist needs more (otherwise it would'nt be profitable) to put it in his pocket.

[@TheKrouton]

5:28 I think this is a dishonest representation of innovation in a capitalist economy. First off, if a business can double the production of it workers, it will not necessarily fire half its workers, rather double its production to increase profits (i.e. take advantage of economy of scale, decrease fixed costs per unit). Although this is limited by demand in the market (that is what advertising is for), the end result of gradual innovation is more leisure time and a greater standard of living, as we've seen in our capitalist societies in the past century. This is not unique to socialist economies. In fact, I would argue the drive for innovation given increased profits in a capitalist economy makes socialism irrelevant to the betterment of workers. "Here's an alternative: Let every worker do half as much work as he or she did before". You do not have to think about this much to understand why this makes no sense. If you were to extrapolate this way of thinking to 19th century economy, we would still have a 19th century standard of living, albeit with much more leisure time. The reason most people in a modern capitalist society own a car, a house, or a smartphone, is because capitalist societies tend to produce to a ridiculous extent.

[@substance90]

Doesn't matter whether you fire half of the workers or just increase profit margins. In both scenarios humanity as a whole isn't reaping the rewards of said new innovation but rather just a small group of people.

[@brucewayne1025]

If there were no board of investors, the amount of investors would drop, thus killing small business in a single stroke. Good job. Also, if workers would in charge, they would simply become the new capitalists, and employ people under them. And yes, they would still pollute the environment.

[@brucewayne1025]

Clarification: People would still pollute the environment because even the lower class workers value money over some shenanigans their great grandchildren have to deal with. Now I sound like HK-47.

[@taiwoolaleye6333]

@@brucewayne1025 thats because of the system they live in, its better to have money than to slove problems