areyouevenreal

If you know which jobs are bullshit then you don't need to lower wages, you just eliminate the roles or at least stop hiring new people for them. None of this argument makes sense. I think you wanted to punish workers that did something you didn't like and then got called out on it.

Also changing wages to encourage people into certain jobs is a capitalist economic technique. My idea of paying people for harder work (physical or intellectual work) is much closer to the socialist statement of "to each according to their labour". Studying is a form of labour performed for free or even at cost to the person doing the labour. Higher wages for the educated are partially there to reflect this.

Essential workers would be paid vastly more while the vast quantity of bullshit jobs(read theory) would be paid the bullshit rates they deserve.

Denial isn't going to get you anywhere

So why do you want to punish the workers with lower wages if it's not their fault?

I can't believe you actually think bullshit jobs are the fault of the workers. The whole point of bullshit jobs is that they are created by the inefficiencies of capitalism - not workers.

You don't even know my age. I could be older than you for all you know.

No. If you have to resort to that it shows you lost. How old even are you to be telling me to grow up? You're edgy enough still to support a dictators that killed real leftists. That's why everyone calls you tankies. You can't deal with the fact that your leaders come from middle class backgrounds either.

I've actually had enough of this now. Thanks for reminding me why people hate tankies.

That's rich coming from someone who will likely kill other communists if a revolution is successful. That's what MLs always do. Time and time again.

Also Lenin was born upper middle class. So clearly what you are saying is false if you actually follow Lenin.

Well that's good news at least. Still dosen't make sense why you would support a guy that killed Anarchist and Marxist comrades just because they disagreed with him

In all fairness you could fit a small helicopter in their if you wanted too. The 747 Freighters are used to move plane parts and they even based the dreamlifter off of it!

Mate your from a regime that failed every single time it was tried. You're existence makes the whole cause look bad and is why the left has recruiting problems.

The best thing I could possibly do for socialism is get rid of Stalinists and Maoists. These leaders were about as bad as Churchil. There are plenty of anarchists that want rid of you too, who I am still considering joining. The anarchists were the ones that invented the term tankie to begin with!

Nobody will take the far-left seriously until we come up with something that isn't Marxist-Leninism. Even Trotskists have some clue about this problem, and Trotsky was more radical than Stalin by some accounts.

Honestly I don't know why I bother. As you have pointed out my parents are petty-burgeoise. I could probably become a petty-burgeoise or at least a high earning member of the proletariat if I put my mind to it. I have more chance of that happening than you guys actually causing a revolution and not have it collapse afterwards. I mean I already have a Master's degree, it's really not that difficult to move up in the world provided your not starving to begin with and you're not an idiot.

Then why are you trying to call out "champagne socialists"? There are parts of the working class that have more than enough money to buy champagne and generally live a comfortable (or even affluent) lifestyle. There are even people who have made millions through labor alone, more rich than the petty-burgeoise. You've talked yourself into a contradiction.

I've also literally made the arguement that you are now making about working class not being how much you earn. I had to do this when someone tried to claim that programmers and police officers are not working class cause they earn too much. The difference is I don't go around accusing people who work full time of being "champagne socialists" whatever that term means.

Not sure I'd agree with any study saying it is physically addictive, habitually I'd agree. So you're willing to ignore science... that's sounds like a river in Egypt to me mate.

Habit forming and addictive mean the same thing in medical terms. Cannabis has observed withdrawal symptoms like sleeplessness, appetite changes, and nausea that classify it as physically addictive. You're ignoring these because it dosen't suit your narrative and beliefs.

My point on the sugar though is it certainly does create addiction. I agree with this provided your talking about refined sugars. The point is though it's not a drug. Sugars are a natural part of the human diet. They literally make up your DNA. Refined sugars are not natural though.