As long as keeping them around doesn't mean not taxing the shit out of their extant assets, I think a few are probably worth being spared.
Lower on the list, but still on the list.
Discussion not worth having tbh
Not a single fucking one
Management is a skill. You can collectivize property relations and keep the positions of Capital Managers. Moreover, in underdeveloped sectors, Markets are a good way to rapidly develop a framework that can then be folded into the public sector and centrally planned by the degree to which it has developed.
Do we need Capital Owners? No, we don't need any. We will still need managers and directors of Capital, even within Communism, ie Central Planners. If the question is how many Capitalists do we need, the answer is 0. If the question is how many Capital managers and planners do we need, the number is much higher than 0.
Only the ones who relinquish all of their wealth and offer to become a rank and file worker.
Ah yes, so that they will be replaced with someone much worse. Great plan.
Where are the CEO's that lead with fair income distribution and implement company policies that follow the Danish, Norwegian, Swedish or Finnish labor laws and lifestyles?
Crickets...
Shane Te Pou maybe ? (from mega.nz)
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
