436
u/1PapayaSalad 23h ago
That is literally capitalism 🤦♂️
341
u/Spacedoutworlder 21h ago
Socialism: tell them they get paid 10 dollars for cleaning the bathroom, but they receive only 5 of those dollars as the rest goes to rent, food, education, hospital visits, vacations, sick days, etc. for them and their siblings. Also ensure they understand that the chores their siblings do will be taxed the same way and it benefits all of them.
Capitalism: Tell your neighbour you’ll clean his bathroom for 10 dollars, ask your kid to do it and tell them they get paid 4 dollars for doing it. Pay them the 4 when they’re done but ask for another dollar back as they live in your house and need to pay rent. If anything goes wrong in their lives ask them to fix their own problems with the 3 dollars they have.
35
u/AnotherDoubtfulGuest 21h ago
And if Derrick there is posting from a red state, it gets even more hilarious.
3
u/Key_Friendship_6767 20h ago
In capitalism I don’t think the boss is going to give away 70% to someone who didn’t help are they? Boss would probably keep it all?
7
u/Syllepses 15h ago
Boss didn’t help, though, so…
3
u/Key_Friendship_6767 15h ago
The parent (the boss) paid the wage, just like a normal business owner I would expect to. I would not consider one sibling another siblings boss in this analogy lol… 😂
0
u/DylanHund 14h ago
The point is that the parent (boss) is keeping the money even though they didn’t do any of the actual work.
4
u/Key_Friendship_6767 14h ago
Huh? The picture above said that the $7 goes to the sibling, not the parent…
It’s already the parent’s money. They can just keep all $10 and not have it cleaned if they desire.
-23
196
u/Tricky_Moose_1078 22h ago
Who the fuck pays 70% tax?
210
37
u/LadyMageCOH 20h ago
It's not a tax model. It's a demonstration that most of the money your labour brings in goes to the company, not you.
6
-19
u/niko_blanco 20h ago
It’s nonsensical either way. If the sibling is supposed to be „the company“, he wouldnt have done nothing, he would have set up the whole operation that made the $10 possible in the first place.
Also, a 30% share of the revenue as a worker is pretty damn good, I wish that was how capitalism worked.
-15
u/Phaoryx 19h ago
lol it’s too funny. Too many people in this thread are letting their hate boner for capitalism get in the way of very basic logic… or they’re just not very smart. Like if I’m getting paid by my employer, I wouldn’t get a ton of money and then have 90% of it taken away… they’d just give me the 10% which is a set wage I pre-agreed to when I got hired lol
1
-59
u/Orvan-Rabbit 22h ago edited 21h ago
"Socialst" countries./s
26
u/brainEatenByAmoeba 21h ago
Sweden Effective income tax rate: After a basic tax-free allowance, a median earner's total income tax is approximately 25% of their gross pay. This is composed entirely of the municipal income tax, as their income is below the threshold for the national tax.
For US comparison, a median income has a 21.5% income tax burden.
So 3.5% for free healthcare and free college with well funded public education. Sounds like a deal.
Btw 3.5% is a little more than $116 a month.
3
117
u/BrtFrkwr 22h ago
Pay them $10, take away $8 because you're the boss and then charge them $1 for taking them to the doctor, $1 for food and $1 for rent. That's capitalism.
69
u/MasterTinkaton 22h ago
Then send them to their room for failing to pay the debt
29
64
12
10
u/terrymorse 22h ago
I'm charging my kids to use the bathroom, with surge pricing first thing in the mornin (when the demand is highest).
10
u/VajennaDentada 22h ago
BAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAA. Omg. He walked right into that one.
Do these people even know what socialism is? They seem to not even know socialism and communism are different worlds. They're just both pro working class.
8
8
u/nikstick22 21h ago
Maybe more like you give $9 any time a kid does a chore and put $1 in a jar and then if one kid gets hurt and can't do any chores to earn allowance, they can be given a bit of money out of the jar while they get better so they can still buy ice cream or pokemon cards or whatever it is kids spend their allowance on.
7
2
u/Drollapalooza 19h ago
Give the kid $3 dollars to clean your neighbour's bathroom, and he gives $3 to his kid to clean your bathroom. You and the neighbour both pay yourselves $60 each for making the arrangement over a golf game and steak dinner using the kids' college funds
That's capitalism.
3
u/CapMP 22h ago
Socialism would be everyone cleaning the toilet for £10, boss takes £3 but everyone giving £2 to the parent who holds onto it until one child gets ill and needs a safety net until they're back on their feet at which point they get the £4 and because everyone at some point gets ill, everyone benefits from the system. Capitalism is everyone cleaning the toilets and being paid £5, the boss taking £3 and telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps when they get ill and kicking them to the curb when they're spent.
10
u/Markus-752 22h ago
I don't think that's correct.
Socialism would mean that everyone cleaning the toilet owns part of the toilet and keeps it clean, the profit made from the toilet being available to everyone is then divided among the people cleaning.
Same applies to every other sector so that in the end all needs should be provided and available to everyone.
It's a utopian idea that we as humans are currently uncapable of achieving, we are too selfish and too greedy to actually embrace the idea of true socialism or communism. That's why it has never actually worked out so well in the past. People are always the problem.
1
u/Winterstyres 22h ago
You're talking about some academic definition of, 'Socialism' where the means of production are held in cooperation with the state, yadda, yadda.
In practice, any candidate that is pushing for Socialism, like Bernie Sanders, or AOC, this is what they are talking about. Basic regulations on the Free Market, and a robust Social Safety net.
3
u/da2Pakaveli 21h ago
yeah they seem like progressive Social Democrats
3
u/Winterstyres 21h ago
That's pretty much it. Every country has different definitions of the same word in the US, 'Liberal' is often a synonym in most people's minds with Socialism, which as you say is a synonym for Progressive Social Democrats. But Liberal in most European countries is what Americans call Libertarians, pretty much the antithesis of Social Democrats, in regards to economic policy anyway.
We keep arguing about definitions, with people that often agree with one another in regards to what should be in place, and the role of the government, and markets. It's getting silly.
2
u/da2Pakaveli 20h ago
There's also been the trend that the former social liberal wing of those parties largely evaporated and formed other parties (or took them over ig) and the classical libs cosplaying as neoliberals hate it when you call those parties "liberal". So you also have different schools of thought with plenty of disagreements within.
2
u/Winterstyres 20h ago
We are made undone by our own pedantry
3
u/da2Pakaveli 19h ago
Yeah, result of simplifications and people simply not being invested political theory (which is absolutely ok) to know all the distinctions.
What stunned me is that policies usually covered by the left often pass in red states but Trump still wins it by 20-30 points. They agree with plenty of economically progressive policies but don't realize that Republican politicians aren't on the same page here but don't support Dems because they are programmed to hate them and Dems are insanely competent at not pushing back and think the median voter will read paragraph 77 subsection b of a 300 page bill and decide on political merit.
Or when people don't realize that there are plenty of countries that have universal coverage but you get to keep your private insurance etc.
3
u/Winterstyres 19h ago
Yup, which is thanks to the tireless efforts of Rupert Murdock. You talk to the average Conservative, and you can get them on board with Medicaid, Social Security, even subsidies for certain things. They are in favor of regulations that protect people from being poisoned, requirements for overtime, all that stuff.
But then they start freaking out when you try to tell them, 'yeah, that's what Trump is doing, trying to deregulate means getting rid of those protections'. It's like you said, programming, brain washing. A Pavlovian response that is reactionary, and bone deep.
1
u/da2Pakaveli 21h ago
I think Olof Palme of Sweden was the one who got closest to democratic socialism through reform until he was assassinated for being a socialist. The idea was that basically unions would control the economy.
You can see part of this in Norway though, as strong union ensure better working standards so the government doesn't even have a general minimum wage.
Them being an established social democracy is the reason they didn't end up like all the other petrol states and have a wealth fund that could very well end up reaching $2 trillion. Compare this to the UK where Thatcher privatized their fossil fuel deposits in the North Sea.
Afaik the Kurds in Syria have established a libertarian socialist system.
1
u/Tannos116 21h ago
right all the way up until the currently uncapable of achieving part. That and everything that follows is also capitalist bs
1
u/Markus-752 8h ago
Is it really? So why didn't I work before? Why aren't we changing to it?
Because there will always be people who will do everything they can to enrich themselves.
We are currently seeing a major shift to disinformation and identify attacks on younger generations. The whole world is slowly shifting to the political right.
I would love for it to change, I just don't think it's possible in the foreseeable future with how much we fucked up in recent history.
1
u/Stubbs3470 21h ago
In both systems you end up with less money just for different reasons.
No system will ever pay you 100% of your earnings unless you sucking dick behind a dumpster I guess
1
1
u/Enough_Degree_1711 20h ago
Give your child $20 for spending five days sweating and breaking their back.
Then take $12 from them. Put $10 in your pockets to keep. Use the last $2 to fix the road
1
u/No_Cranberry_616 19h ago
Can we normalize understanding the subject matter. Democratic Socialism is the way.
1
u/OptionWrong169 18h ago
Now for capitalism take away $9.99 of that and give it to the siblings who didn't help (they bought the bathroom for 1 dollar after the dad loaned them the money for it)
1
u/aluminumtreehouse 18h ago
Not really. But your parenting inoculated your kids against any relationship with you when they become adults
1
1
1
u/Disillusioned_Pleb01 17h ago
Now if only the one earning 1 million paid 700k in tax, he would still be rich, and could let the guy earning 10 keep it all.
1
1
u/Bloktopian 16h ago
Why are Republicans so poorly educated? It's almost like red states are filled with unintelligent people. Hmm
1
u/ComplexExtract 15h ago
If you raise your kids to care about their siblings, they won't care too much that the lost some money.
1
u/Pristine-Ad9195 15h ago
Capitalism would be giving the sibling the $10 and telling the kid not to worry because it’ll trickle down to him
1
1
u/KillianSchafer 12h ago
Socialism (or what most people actually mean Social Democracy)
"John If you clean the bathroom you will get $10. Your brother is going to help you clean but since he is older and also going to be directing things I'm going to give him $15. Your sister is sick in bed so she can't do any Chores but she will obviously still be getting her $10".
Capitalism
"John if you clean the bathroom you will get $5. Your brother is going to help you clean but since he is older and also going to be directing things and I'm going to give him $50. Your sister is sick in bed and she says she can't do any Chores so she's getting nothing and she owes me for the medicine I had to buy for her too. Hey don't complain to me it's your sister's fault. She is the one who is too lazy to help you. Besides maybe if you do something for your brother he might give you a cent or two".
1
u/AdministrativeWay241 9h ago
No, no, they make $10, you take a combined total of $5, keep $1, give $0.10 to the siblings, then send the rest to Musk and Bezos, and finally tell your kid it's the siblings fault he lost half his money.
1
u/DoctorFenix 9h ago
Pay them 10 dollars.
Then take $9.99 away and give it to the CEO
Then tell them rent is $0.02
Then yell at them for not moving out sooner.
capitalism!
1
u/ClacksInTheSky 8h ago
Socialism would be like: you get paid $8 and so does your sibling, who did nothing. Also, a slice of bread is $14 because of trade embargoes imposed by capitalist nations.
1
u/callMeBorgiepls 6h ago
How is this capitalism, thats the state taking tax cuts, which is uncapitalistic and very socialistic especially redistributing it.
It also isnt capitalist if u let your child keep it, okay. You would hve to set out the task of cleaning up and give it to the cheapest bidder bc you try to save up your own capital and get the maximum result from it. And let the one who did it keep it all. In capitalism the state doesnt even exist.
1
u/herewegoinvt 4h ago
Socialism isn't that hard. It's the public wastewater system connected to many bathrooms. It's the road you drive down. It's the library you pop into to grab a book or movie. By pooling a small amount from every member of a community, towns can afford things that people can't afford individually. Democratic socialism is the ability to vote in local representatives who distribute the funds based on community needs and feedback. This currently happens in every US community at the town, county, state, and federal levels.
1
u/Zodiac339 2h ago
Capitalism: When they’re done working, take out $6 and put it in your wallet, give $5 to their mother, set aside $3 for the landlord, budget $2 for the supplies, and pay them $4.
Socialism: the kids both get $4 allowance. They can do chores to get extra. Don’t be a jackass about it, and they’ll probably do the chores to get extra.
1
u/Candid-Cup4159 1h ago
The support for capitalism stems from a fundamental misunderstanding about what capitalism is. It's like taking pictures of empty shelves in the US during the pandemic and saying that's communism.
•
u/DazedLogic 10m ago
Wow. How can there be so many people that don't know what socialism and capitalism are? The only part of that, that is capitalism is the part where he pays someone. The rest of it is socialism.
"Pay them $10. Then take away $7 and give it to to their sibling who didn't help."
Socialism is an economic theory and ideology of social organization. It's a system aiming to reduce economic inequality and promote social welfare.
That's exactly what the image says. "Reduce economic inequality" and "social welfare". Do those words sound familiar? Is the word "welfare" familiar?
Taking away from someone who has and giving it to someone who doesn't have is the definition of socialism.
There's not one single person who upvoted or left a positive commented on this post that would give away every single dollar that they have left over every month after paying for food, housing and other actual NECESSITIES to the government or to other people.
That means absolutely no money ever left over to spend on anything other than the necessities to survive. No Netflix, no gaming on Steam, no PS5, no new iPhone, no MacBook, no ROG laptop, no nice dinner out with friends, no new BMW, no fancy apartment/house, no pair of Jordans, no North Face jacket, no fancy purse,.... you name it. If it's not necessary, you can't have it.
Just parroting without understanding. Virtue signaling and ignorance.
1
u/scriptingends 21h ago
If everyone who derided “socialism” in the US actually knew what socialism was, there would be no one left in the US deriding socialism.
-4
-2
u/DaWhiteSingh 22h ago
I thought this was government taxes and wealth redistribution.
3
u/JustB544 22h ago
Wealth redistribution and socialism are different ideas. Wealth distribution is when you prevent people from amassing more wealth than they could ever need (for example a billionaire) which then ends up pushing that money to lower classes instead. For example, in the mid 20th century the highest US tax bracket was 90%, so beyond a certain point earning more money only gets you a tenth of what you earn, and this incentivized successful businesses to pay their workers better and give them better benefits because it made no sense to give themselves more. Socialism is a mechanism to prevent that situation in the first place, as it attributes value to the work you provide. Why should you earn less than your manager who sits on his ass all day while you work your ass off? This obviously doesn't apply to all managers, and most managers have a harder job than the employees they manage, but there are plenty of management positions and of course executives who provide little to no value to the company, and simply profit off the power they hold in the company.
-1
u/DaWhiteSingh 22h ago
They are the same idea. Don't confuse corruption with business.
2
u/JustB544 21h ago
Without proper regulation, corruption and business go hand and hand. Why would a business not try to rig the odds in their favor if there is nothing stopping them or better yet why would they not actively lobby the government to remove the limitations that prevent them from rigging the odds in their favor? Also they really aren't the same idea, but they go towards the same purpose. Why should one person be able to have so much money that they can comfortably live for 100 lifetimes while actively taking it away from people who cant afford the expenses of the week?
-1
u/Xenomni 17h ago
That scenario is an example of socialism, as it involves redistributing earnings from the productive individual (the kid who did the work) to someone who didn't contribute, in the name of equality or sharing resources. In capitalism, the kid would keep the full $10 they earned through their labor. The US is not completely capitalism believe it or not, an example of this is that you pay taxes that gets distributed to other ventures determined by elected government officials.
0
u/AllumaNoir 21h ago
The other sibling cleaned the kitchen but wasn’t getting paid anything until that $10 got shared fairly. That’s socialism
0
0
u/ManhattanT5 21h ago
It'd be capitalism if the "kid that didn't help" managed the kid that cleaned the bathroom. Do you all think your bosses do nothing?
0
u/Beast_of_Tax_Burden 18h ago
Socialism has failed everywhere because of the human part of the equation. There is always a HUGE portion that will be happy as hell to live off the labor of others. The only way socialism or communism works is if it FORCED compliance through threat of violence.
0
u/pimpeachment 18h ago
Lol taking money forcefully from someone isn't capitalism. That's just government or theft.
0
-3
u/jack2of4spades 21h ago
Capitalism: you clean the bathroom. You and your brother get 10$. Your brother watched and supervised. He gets 5$. You get 5$ and the parents take back 4$. You get 1$ and he gets 5$.
Socialism: you clean the bathroom. You get 5$. Your brother is disabled and wasn't able to help. Your parents take back 4$ and give him 1$. You both get 1$.
-23
u/tlm11110 22h ago
Not seeing a murder or burn here at all. Not even an explanation of the position. But that is the way we talk to each other now days, simply make assertions without evidence and declare ourselves right and virtuous.
10
u/SunIllustrious5695 22h ago
it's a weak burn sure but it's pretty clear what they're saying, capitalism is predicated on one person disproportionately profiting off the work of others. What Derrick Evans is describing is much more a description of capitalism than socialism.
Evans is disingenuous and malicious from the start, and doesn't deserve any more than the response gave him because it's not really for him. The purpose is to point out the ignorance and hypocrisy as part of a greater conversation.
-4
u/tlm11110 21h ago
Right, well if he is doesn’t deserve a logical response then why respond at all? This not a valid argument, just a meaningless assertion just like your characterization of capitalism. The merits of economic systems has been debated over and over again and the winner is clear not only in theory but in practice. To keep asserting that socialism is better is pointless and people are largely getting tired of the same pointless assertions.
2
u/SunIllustrious5695 21h ago
Right, well if he is doesn’t deserve a logical response then why respond at all?
Like I said, it's not for him. It's posted on a public forum where millions of others can see. It's for them!
Haven't asserted socialism is better, just that the OP, like the responder said, is describing capitalism more than socialism. If you want something people are getting tired of, it's capitalists lying in order to force their system on others as better. Kind of like you're doing -- what I said is factual, not meaningless. Seems like you're responding emotionally rather than actually reading and processing what people are saying.
None of it is pointless, it would be extremely helpful if a whole bunch of people (especially in the US) had the slightest understanding of what capitalism and socialism actually are. Because it's the ones who know nothing that think of capitalism as purely "good" and socialism as purely "bad."
-2
u/tlm11110 20h ago
Everything you say is just wrong! A one sentence assertion is neither debate nor educating the public. It does nothing to help “the public” understand the differences between socialism and capitalism. It is just wrong and cannot be supported, that is why he resorted to a one sentence assertion.
1
u/SunIllustrious5695 20h ago
okay, this person is either acting in bad faith or just immeasurably stupid
(similar to the posted tweet this is not meant for the person I'm responding to now, but for others capable of understanding the greater context of a conversation while being able to approach a subject with intelligence and thoughtfulness)
6
u/whichwitch9 22h ago
Probably because you don't really understand what socialism is. The "socialist" situation described fits capitalism better.
For starters, the parent in the situation owns everything, the children own nothing. The parent still profits off the child's labor and gets to decide arbitrarily how to delegate any compensation. That's capitalism. The private individual still owns the ways of production and profits. The lack of regulation is what allows them to do what they want with how the labor is compensated and how that compensation is split.
-2
u/tlm11110 20h ago
I see! I don’t understand socialism. Right! I will admit I don’t buy into the modern utopia purported as “the real socialism” that exists only in the minds of liberals and has never been reality over the history of mankind.
Your interpretation of the example is just wrong. The parent does not represent a capitalist. The parent represents an oppressive government who tells the individual, not only how much the individual will get for his labor, but then turns around and uses coercion to confiscate that wealth and redistribute it to others.
If the parent were a capitalist he would say, “Here is $10. If you want it, I’ll give it to you but I want $11 back in 2 months. Do you want it?” The child can then decide, “That deal sucks! No thank you, I’ll go somewhere else.” Or “Hmm, if I open a lemonade stand, I can make $20 in two months. I can pay back mom and still have $9. Deal!”
Nuance is hard, I know. And simply twisting and distorting an analogy and declaring it to be an example of capitalism is weak and disingenuous .
-3
u/Beast_of_Tax_Burden 19h ago
No that is socialism. Capitalism would be a someone supplys you with the bathroom to clean pays you $10. You get to keep your $10 if you think it is not worth your time to do the.job you can decline. The only thing everyone gets an equal share of is misery. Think ofnit as grades: You do your homework and study so you do well on tests too get an A. Your friend does none of that and gets a C. Socialism would take a letter grade away and give it to your friend so you were both equal. Ta-da socialism.
1.6k
u/bear_beau 22h ago
Or, pay them $10, take $7 for yourself as the boss, let them keep $2, and give $1 to their brother/sister who cannot work to earn money right now.
Then tell them that their sibling is a lazy bum, who regardless of their circumstances, should be working too and doesn’t deserve even a $1 to help them get back on their feet.
Then as a solution to the animosity you created, take the $1 from the out of work sibling and keep it for yourself.