Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Labor Created Man Himself

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 3:00

"Labor created man himself." Do you know who is the author of this statement? Friedrich Engels - the man, who did not work a single in his life. Why Engels came to such an absurd conclusion? The answer is simple: saying the phrase "labor created man himself", Engels, under the word "man", meant himself - Engels. We can rephrase it in a politically incorrect language: "The work of plebs has created a rich man, that is me, Engels." Marx pointed out the following: "All people live from labor, but not all from their own." Absolutely all the Marxists followed this rule like invariant - this is the communist morality.

In the evolutionary perspective, the labor could not have created man. Man was created by intellect. People have always tried to assume a position to guarantee them a minimum of physical labor. If we assume that "labor created man", the highest type should now be represent by porter, janitors, miners, grave-diggers and construction workers.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 5:28

Pretty sure he meant that hard work is a virtue, laying about never got anything done.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 5:53

>>2
You're welcome to do some hardwork, slave.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 7:12

Working hard is not necessarily due to the inability to work smart.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 12:12

I'd start a business if I knew how to do it without becoming a debt-slave. Rich people are debt-slaves. Those who are lucky enough to pay off their debts, lie to themselves about how it was built from their own hands. They didn't build that. The stupid consumers dumb enough to purchase that shitty product are the ones who paid off that debt. No one is special. Everyone is just at the correct location at the correct time for incorrect things to happen. By the way: it's happening.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-18 14:39

>>3
Okay, I'll work hard, get paid for my labour and exchange my pay for goods and services while you sponge off of your parents, spending your time denouncing that which keeps you alive.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-19 3:00

>>5
It is normal for a growing business to take on debt. I will illustrate this with a simple example.

2 bakeries, Alpha and Beta, both valued at $1 million, both growing at 10% per year.

Bakery Alpha does nothing, here are it's growth figures for the next 3 years.

0) $1. million
1) $1.1 million
2) $1.21 million
3) $1.33 million

Bakery Beta takes out a loan of $1 million with an interest rate of 5% and invests it in the business, the value of the business's assets are $1 million higher and growing at 10% while the amount owed to the bank (liabilities) is growing at 5%.

Beginning of year 1
Assets = $2 million
Liabilities = $1 million
Net worth = $1 million

Year 1
Assets = $2.2 million
Liabilities= $1.05 million
Net worth = $1.15 million

Year 2
Assets = $2.42 million
Liabilities = $1.1 million
Net worth = $1.32 million

Year 3
Assets = $2.66 million
Liabilities = $1.16 million
Net worth = $1.5 million

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-19 3:53

>>6
Go - scrub another toilet, slave.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-19 5:12

>>3
>>8
Shalom!

Name: Capt. Obvious 2012-11-19 11:09

>>7
And by year 3, the bank might start asking about those down-payments.
Those would have to be more than the interest, or else the debt will never be paid.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-20 5:40

>>10
Banks want to lend as much money as possible to whoever can pay the interest, they don't want borrowers to start paying off the debt unless they are at risk of default. It is not unusual for businesses to be in continual debt for decades, as long as the rate of growth exceeds interest rates it is better to invest in the business rather than pay off the loan.

Anyway, the bakery is earning at least 10% returns on invested capital, we have been assuming they re-invest all this in the business but they could easily use this money to pay off the loan if the bank demanded it.

10% growth rates, the bank manager is paranoid and wants interest to be paid each year and the loan to be paid back in full within 10 years.

Beginning of year 1
Assets = $2 million
Liabilities = $1 million
Net worth = $1 million

Already bakery Beta could pay off the loan (with interest) in 6 years, bakery Alpha would be worth 1.772 million.

Year 1
Returns = $0.2 million
Investments (returns - $50000 interest) = $0.15 million
Assets = $2.15 million

Year 2
Returns = $0.215 million
Investments = $0.165 million
Assets = $2.315 million

Beta could pay off the loan in 5 years, Alpha would be worth $1.949 million.

Year 3
Returns = $0.232 million
Investments = $0.182 million
Assets = $2.497 million

Year 4
Returns = $0.25 million
Investments = $0.2 million
Assets = $2.696 million

Year 5
Returns = $0.27 million
Investments = $0.22 million
Assets = $2.916 million

Beta could pay off the loan in 4 years, Alpha would be worth $2.358 million.

I don't know about you but I could do with $558000, I don't see why people hate capitalism so much.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-21 0:41

>>11
Don't forget, that there is a competition and if both bakeries take loans, then the only person who win would be a Jew.

Name: Anonymous 2012-11-21 0:42

>>12
I.e. the winning side would have the greatest debt.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List