So someone, somewhere, has to decide for the individual who made his money off his labour _where_it is to be redistributed to...
So giving authority to someone, to decide how best to redistribute your stuff...if you had any stuff, cos property is theft.
Does that mean to take the product of you labor is morally ok, then - but somehow not theft?Because your labor isn't your property either of course... to do with as you wish...?
...mmmmm... more holes in this than a tea bag.
A very holey tea bag...
Not really, here's some excerpts from my essay about Mutualism.
"Since useful labor is what generates value, those who don't do useful labor, yet still profit, are exploitative. Incomes generated from loans, or just simple ownership of such and such thing are living off the backs of the working class. "
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@chamberpunk/arm-chair-anarchy-part-1-taoism-briefly-proudhon-and-market-socialism
"Now the material reality of exploitation stems from private ownership of the means of production.
Now capitalism and its' material wealth is created by commodities. Commodities are generated by the work of labor. When a commodity is sent to the market for exchange it generates an exchange value. Exchange value minus production cost(the cost of material goods needed to furnish commodities as well as the wages of the workers who actually furnish commodities) equals surplus value.
or
surplus value= exchange value-cost of production
exchange value=quantity of other commodities that the good will be exchanged for(doesn't necessarily mean the price in quantities of medium of exchange)
cost production= cost of material goods+the labor requirements
Surplus value is taken by the bourgeoisie, which is known as profiting."
Right, you're simply ignorant. Capitalism takes wealth from the working class because that's how private property operates. It's called the labor theory of value. Which was first popularized by Adam Smith.
Keep trying to think authority away, see how far that gets you bub.
So you don't have an argument, you hid behind this none sense? Kay.
So you don't have sense of humor, you hide behind quasi intellect as a shield for your own insecurity?. Kay..
You're not funny, and I'm being confrontational, not hiding.
I've never met someone insecure about thier intellect that has a sense of humor..
whats the most stupid funny thing you have ever done -where people laughed at you -, that you found funny?
Let's peel back some layers and find out, shall we...
(answering with anything except the story is evasion, and hiding.)
you're welcome.