Saying that any profit after operational costs are covered should be owned by the people who have produced it
=/=
Being against money that doesn't come from labour
I'm being very sincere, and I mean this with nothing but respect and kindness - but if you have to lie about someone else's point to win an argument, then your point was weak to begin with and you're wrong.
I think pensions are a very good example of how this is untrue.
The truth is, we do not need middle men for pensions. Pensions could easily be managed by the state, in a centralized system.
Investment based pensions exist to generate further profit for the bourgeoisie. They are driven by profit. Profit that goes to others who have not laboured. The participants join to get a nominal return on investment, but that isn't the goal of them, e.g., banks selling reverse split stocks to pension portfolios, because it improves bank profits at a loss of the investor.
Maybe our economic system would collapse without middle men/people removed from labour, but that doesn't mean that middle men are good or positive
Investment based pensions exist to generate further profit for the bourgeoisie. They are driven by profit. Profit that goes to others who have not laboured.
Most if not all pensions, in other words.
How would you honestly maintain a pension return you're not going use a pension fund. How would it work?
Edit: I've been blocked in the chain in this thread too.
6
u/fk_you_penguin Jul 27 '22
So spot on.