>From the standpoint of a higher socio-economic formation, the private property of particular individuals in the earth will appear just as absurd as the private property of one man in other men. Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not the owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations, as boni patres familias.>the tremendous power this gives landed property when it is combined together with industrial capital in the same hands enables capital practically to exclude workers engaged in a struggle over wages from the very earth itself as their habitat. One section of society here demands a tribute from the other for the very right to live on the earth, just as landed property in general involves the right of the proprietors to exploit the earth’s surface, the bowels of the earth, the air and thereby the maintenance and development of life. The rise in population, and the consequent growing need for housing, is not the only factor that necessarily increases the rent on buildings. So too does the development of fixed capital, which is either incorporated into the earth or strikes root in it, like all industrial buildings, railways, factories, docks, etc., which rest on it.
i'm the last person who decides what it's like. so start there.
>>25255908>the private property of particular individuals in the earth will appear just as absurd as the private property of one man in other menLol, excuse moi?
>>25255918He is talking about landlords, not your toothbrush
>>25255991Why does that matter? Why the distinction?People have property and buy and sell things and come to transactions and arrangements. Why is this ok for some things but not others
>>25255908I wonder how much of vol2 and 3 are pure Engels fan fiction
yeah we tried public housing projects in the 60s. it ... didn't go well.
>>25255998So should sunlight and air be privatized?
>>25255991I was referring to the last part.
>>25256013What a ridiculous question
>>25256024Yet we're born on a planet owned by a relative handful who charge for its inhabitation
>>25256013wow i didn't realize apartments with running water and air conditioning and fire alarms were naturally occurring resources like light and air! i foolishly thought someone had to invest a lot of material and labor to build and maintain them. u've truly opened my eyes!
>>25256031lmao i guess ur parents weren't home owners, huh? bummer. i had a dad with a job so he bought a house for us to live in.
>>25256064Real estate is almost entirely location. The people who manufacture the material and build the apartments are not the owners anyway>>25256068My parents owned three houses including a duplex.
>>25256075Don't respond to the guy who talks in all lowercase and bad spelling. He's pretty infamous for being a dipshit
>>25256019It means owning other people
>>25256075>The people who manufacture the material and build the apartments are not the owners anywaywow so they just travel around building houses for landlords for free? i had no idea. i thought someone had to pay for all that stuff!
>>25255908Vol 1 sections on primitive accumulation are vitally eye opening and its obvious that most anti marxists havent read them and understand the complete societal rupture private property caused.
>>25256167I thought it was because Marx found homosexuality bizarre or something. checks out though. Many prominent socialist leaders condemned it.
>>25256187he was talking about agricultural landlords not some guy who has a residential property with six units in queens.
>>25256197Clueless.
>>25255908
>>25256204did u read it? not to mention it's all about medieval england. what does that have to do with ameri
>>25256179The landlords or the like refund some of the value that labor creates, in the form of money; they are moneychangers of the temple, so to speak
>>25255918It's slavery dumb dumb. He's saying in the past the concept of property extended to other human beings.
>>25256206Based brother in AWOO! *sAWOOtes you with Orange Paw*
>>25255908>they're not the owners, they're the possessors
>>25256211well if they didn't they would not have any incentive to deploy capital to build dwellings and so the workers would be idle and the tenants unhoused. it's almost like england's banking system that allowed swift and efficient distribution of risk capital is why england became wealthy af raising the standard of living above anything known previously in human history.
>>25256228Marx agrees capitalism advanced society and was necessary. But he believes the same about ancient slave states, they were required to accumulate surplus wealth beyond subsistence. Each though persisted past usefulness due to class interests>>25256225Own as in have a right to, but also own as in a personal quality defined by what you use. Like Marx says in the communist manifesto, communism is not to abolish property, just bourgeois property, property as capital
Nice fantasy but the economic calculation problem remains unbeatable
>>25256301>Proposed by Friedrick HayekLmao imagine taking anything coming out of his ass seriously. Propaganda masquerading as science
>>25255908Another fucking marxoid thread. The same kind of post as well, act like you're just creating discussion when in reality you're just a Marxist shill.
>>25256522>you pretend to want to discuss Marx yet you refuse to condemn and denounce him. Hypocritical, much?
>>25256608The point is there is no good faith discussion, you are just a shill for marxism. You are like that guenonag, I wouldn't even be surprised if you act like you're not a marxist just so you can have some kind of false pretense of good faith because that is something the guenonfag did. In fact you already kind of do that by acting like you're just interested in other people's thoughts about marxism when the entire point of these threads is to shill.
>>25255908Refuted by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, states which are intensely capitalist but which doesn’t have the tensions over wages your quotes discuss.
>>25256301Read Cockshott.>>25256685Doesn't this apply to any discussion? Is it substantially different from reading Pynchon and starting a thread to discuss his work?
>>25256694>refuted by imported seasonal or permanent non citizen wage labor treated like garbageVery powerful, Dr. Prager. Unfortunately, equally stupid
>>25256701Are you intentionally ignoring the fact that Marx was a Jew?
>>25256211They provide value. Some people need a place to live, the landlords rent them a place for an agreed upon sum. Why is this such a crime? If this weren't allowed, what would people who want a temporary place to live have to do? Buy a house? Live in a hotel? What do you propose?
>>25256839I believe that housing is a right which the state must guarantee.
>>25256839Nobody needs to own more residential properties than the one they need to live in. >t. Inheritor of rented properties
>>25255908On this reading of capital:volume iii marx is writing about the intentionality of causal commodity as much as anything else or something like that
>>25257080>causal commodity
>>25256891>>25256906These are vague platitudes, not actual grown up, fleshed out ideas. Deal in the real world. You are suggesting the government physically prevent people from acquiring more than one property? What if someone has a bigger house than they need, can they be allowed to let someone live in one of the rooms in return for money? How about labor? No? Then you're practicing pure tyranny. Yes? Then they're practicing landlordism.How about you fucking misguided busybody RETARDS just acknowledge that you suck at running other people's lives for them and stay the fuck out of everyone else's business until you have at least spent some time in the real world and worked with your hands some? Can you do that much?
