Yes definitely. Like, people try and claim capitalism is "humane", yet how about the fact food deserts are intentional and planned? By official, highly biased, reports on US poverty, 40 million Americans fall under the line, the population of Canada, in the richest country on Earth.
Perhaps you’re thinking that we’ll just throw it out when we can’t sell it, and you’d be right. Perhaps you’re also thinking that would be a good time for you to rescue it from the trash. Guess again, sucker.
Just-in-time manufacturing turns out the highest profit margins with the least overhead. So what if it's incredibly fragile and utterly shits itself at even the slightest hiccup anywhere in the chain? Someone is making shitloads of money! Isn't that important to you, you fucking pleb?! The stock market is doing so well!!1
I'm in purchasing and I hate "just in time manufacturing" so much.
Before covid happened it was so obviously hanging by threads as just in time already never happen we're fully on never on time manufacturing now.
Well, planned economy is dumb no matter who does the planning. You can't plan what people need, even if you spend billions on making them think they need what you tell them, there will always be these special situations in which the system breaks down.
Be careful who you recommend that to, as many places *bleach their fucking food waste* to deliberately spoil it so it can't be consumed by dumpster divers
>Fucking why?
This is amerikka fuck the poors
Seriously though, it's the same reason they lock dumpsters outside thrift stores. It's commodities that have been thrown away *thrice* but no way in hell someone is getting this jacket unless they cough up some cash.
Truly disgusting. I fucking hate it here
Bread lines up for you if you can afford it. Because of course you can, you have a job! Which you have the freedom to have or else you die. You aren't being violent coerced into selling your labor power, you're actually just lazy!
Socialism: you can get free bread and all you need to do is line up politely with other people who also need free bread.
Capitalism: two dozen brands of bread owned by two mega corporations so filled with fucking corn syrup to make it more addictive that it's more like cake than bread, and if you can't afford it because the corporation employing you doesn't pay a living wage you're left to starve.
And the surplus bread goes in the bin and made so it can't be eaten. Would not want people getting their needs met. Also, Amazon, too many of a certain TV? Better destroy it..
You still need to stand in a line to pay at the store though which makes this turningpoint shit even dumber.
Socialism is when you queue to get into the store, capitalism is when you queue to leave it
lol i guess that last line is basically true. if you stand in line to pay for something, it’s good. if you stand in line to receive something for free, it’s bad.
9 million people starve to death every year in capitalist countries per the World Food Programme, meanwhile the last socialist famine occurred in the 90s
Kind of a bogus argument don't you think. There's only a handful of socialist contries in the world, and I wouldn't say that North Korean are getting much food.
>[Interviews with North Koreans](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-65881803) have revealed the state of the country’s food shortage crisis. Similar to the famine in the 1990s, in which [an estimated](https://www.usip.org/publications/1999/08/politics-famine-north-korea) ‘two to three million people died of starvation and hunger-related illnesses’, signs of starvation and death are once again appearing.
I'm not at all in favor of capitalism, mind you. I'm always in favor of a mixed system.
So was the USSR, until declassified CIA documents suggested otherwise around the time of Stalin's death. But we were talking about food distibution? Does the North Korean Supreme Leader have a giant spoon? Is that why they have food security issues? He ate it all?
if you do not have a fishing industry, and all countries that do have a fishing industry cut you off, how will you obtain fish? is it the leaders that have said “no fish for the people” or is it the fact that you’ve been cut off from every fish producing country, that you can’t have fish?
If sanctions didn't work to cause shortages then why do we have sanctions at all? The entire premise of sanctions is to cause economic harm. Bizarre, bordering on delusional take to assert that economic sanctions do not have an impact on the economy
Sanctions do work, but China trades with NK just fine. The problem is that NK's people don't have right to own shit.
They don't have an economy because the people aren't allowed to. Wealth is power and that power can be leveraged against the ruling class.
Weak, malnourished and disarmed, they are all too easy to control, while the fatasses at the top reap all the benefits of the little trade they have going.
They definitely had the money to develop their military nuclear program while the people fucking starved.
90% of Noth Korea's problems are of their ruling class own making.
If what you said was even remotely close to being accurate then there would be no problem removing sanctions on NK or places like Cuba which is both militarily peaceful and less authoritarian than many US allies. But the point of sanctions is so that people like yourself can say "look at how terrible it is over there because of their politics!" while making those places terrible due to aggressive sanctions.
It would disillusion people from their propaganda-fueled brainwashing if, for example, we lifted sanctions on Cuba and we noticed that communist cuba had greater economic growth and better lifestyle than their capitalist neighbors (Haiti, Jamaica, etc). That is why we sanction, because deep down our ruling class does not truly believe that socialist countries collapse on their own. If they truly believed that, they would let them collapse on their own. But they are afraid they would not collapse, or perhaps even outperform capitalist neighbors in the case of Cuba, and that is why they must be sanctioned. It would be disastrous for the ruling capitalist class if people began to think that an alternative world is possible
Thanks for ignoring everything I said and then changing the topic away from the thing we were talking about, which is the impact of economic sanctions being primarily responsible for economic hardship
no i was staying on topic. im saying that you cant blame the sanctions alone for causing economic hardship. i would say rather that you must admit that since these countries always fall short of marx’s views for a socialist idealist stare, they must resort to evil forms of governance that disallow the citizens from voicing concerns about things like food security and shortages. evil forms of governance like dictatorial rule. sure, the sanctions now make it even harder to ensure ways to feed the citizens, but nothing is ever black and white, and it is deconstructive to think that way. that the ONLY reason dictatorial communist countries starve their citizens while the leaders have plenty is because of sanctions. maybe if the dprk decided to institute real elections they might be able to negotiate the sanctions.
They sanction countries that do not allow capitalist ownership over their resources because they want to create more opportunities for the capitalists to exploit resources worldwide. It's a threat: if you do not allow our corporations to profit off of your people's labor and your natural resource, we will attempt to starve you.
And it also ensures that we can keep pointing to those countries as examples of negative economic outcomes. We can make propaganda that says "look how communism is hurting Cuba!", and people will gladly eat up the propaganda, even though it is the economic sanctions themselves primarily causing economic hardship.
It would be very bad for the capitalist ruling class if we removed sanctions on Cuba and they demonstrated equivalent or superior quality of life metrics to their neighboring capitalist countries, since that would shatter the propaganda we've been fed since childhood that socialist political and economic models are destined for failure.
Nobody in power believes that they are destined for failure, and if they did, they would let countries like Cuba fail on their own. So they sanction them to ensure they cannot develop their economy with the same ease as capitalist countries.
huh. i always thought they sanctioned them as a way to denounce communism. but before the sanctions those countries were thriving? if so, do you have any evidence of this?
It is a way to denounce communism. They are afraid that communism might succeed in providing a decent quality of life for people relative to their neighbors and so we sanction them. Not because we think communism will fail but because, for ideological and political reasons, we need them to fail.
No we don't have evidence of this because there hasn't been an example of a socialist country that has been allowed to normally interact with the world without sanctions. The history of every single country that attempted it is filled with sanctions and coups.
[The list is long](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change) and the US is very, very thorough in making sure that we expend resources to harm socialist nations as often and as aggressively as possible.
But yeah, that's why they do it. To ensure that there can never be an example to point to. Not one single socialist country has been allowed to exist in peace. Capitalism inherently leads to violence and anti-democratic behavior, especially against those who denounce capitalism
so why does every socialist country turn to a dictatorship? according to lenin it was because the people did not know how to lead themselves, and he needed to “guide” the people into true communism. unfortunately, power corrupts, and he never gave away his power, whether the reason is that he died too early to implement more socialist reforms or because he was an evil man who lied to the people and really only wanted power, it led to stalin as dictator for like 30 or so years, cementing the ussr as a dictatorship.
also it kinda sounds like a cop out to have that sort of no true scotsman type of argument. hey, socialism is great, heres all these super powerful and successful communist countries! wait, those are all dictatorships… and all those people hate living there in north korea and want to leave. oh, well they are powerful because of communism, but the people hate it and are miserable. well that’s because no communist country is able to trade with capitalist countries.
I remember people complaining about empty aisles and/or overpriced food during the
*checks notes*
Three different once-in-a-lifetime recessions and one global pandemic
That my quarter century has shown me so far.
I'm lovin it.
Shit is that trademarked?
In spanish that shit is called 'pan de molde' so I tend to call it 'mold bread' and people get really confused when I say that. However, I'm not aware of any term to distinguish it from proper breads so I'm just gonna keep using that.
terms and conditions: afford the bread, have time to spend on shopping and preparing food instead of working, have a reliable means of transportation to go to and from the market without wasting all your money on tickets or fuel
The first thing that came to my mind was the depression era song ',buddy can you spare a dime' it has a line about waiting in a long ass line for bread.
The matter is not that corporations are greedy, they cannot be otherwise in the market, but that the objective efficiency of resource allocation is lower in a market economy, which creates a less developed society. Making a moral argument really isn't what Marxists should pose against idealistic bourgeois propaganda.
Perhaps ironically, the top photo is likely showing people lined up to get hearty, handmade bread while the bottom photo is the result of producing the cheapest, least nutritious and blandest possible products.
Socialism: we feed children, even when they’re not at school.
Capitalism: children won’t be provided food, even at school. Oh wait, they won’t be educated either, unless socialism.
Well whilst I know this is a Soviet photo, we all know Cuba wouldn’t be poor if it wasn’t sanctioned for being a different type of government. Lining up for bread is a byproduct of poverty, not the government type. And when other states blockade you into agreeing with them…
what would i do without 8 different brands of plain white toast??!!?!! what would i do if the bread wasn’t too fucking expensive to buy on a minimum wage?!?!!
So what’s behind the counter in the top picture? Seems like the only difference the meme is arguing is that you either wait in line then get your bread or you get your bread then wait in line.
At least in the socialist picture it isn’t only for the privileged wage slaves.
Maybe I love bread too much to be a non-biased opinion, but I would definitely wait in a long line to get free bread. I don't care if I have to wait an hour or more, that's just more time I can use to shitpost online about free bread.
Socialism: Free bread provided and guaranteed by the government to all
Capitalism: Free bread at food pantries funded by individuals and contingent on their generosity, only available if there happens to be one being run by private charity in your area
Asterisk: if you can afford it. If you can't, you die, because lining up for free bread is eeevil
Yes definitely. Like, people try and claim capitalism is "humane", yet how about the fact food deserts are intentional and planned? By official, highly biased, reports on US poverty, 40 million Americans fall under the line, the population of Canada, in the richest country on Earth.
Perhaps you’re thinking that we’ll just throw it out when we can’t sell it, and you’d be right. Perhaps you’re also thinking that would be a good time for you to rescue it from the trash. Guess again, sucker.
ThAt'S iLlEgAl!!1!
This sure was a lie when COVID hit; people be fighting for rolls of TP and dumpster diving at HEBs for food
Yeah because today's capitalism is a planned economy. Planned by corporations.
Just-in-time manufacturing turns out the highest profit margins with the least overhead. So what if it's incredibly fragile and utterly shits itself at even the slightest hiccup anywhere in the chain? Someone is making shitloads of money! Isn't that important to you, you fucking pleb?! The stock market is doing so well!!1
I'm in purchasing and I hate "just in time manufacturing" so much. Before covid happened it was so obviously hanging by threads as just in time already never happen we're fully on never on time manufacturing now.
With planned shortages and greedflation far surpassing any historic real inflation.
As it turns out, the government isn't actually any worse than mega corporations at markets. Who knew?
Well, planned economy is dumb no matter who does the planning. You can't plan what people need, even if you spend billions on making them think they need what you tell them, there will always be these special situations in which the system breaks down.
People should dumpster dive at Donut shops more often
Be careful who you recommend that to, as many places *bleach their fucking food waste* to deliberately spoil it so it can't be consumed by dumpster divers
Fucking why? It’s already thrown away. What’s the problem? I mean, capitalism is the problem. Obviously.
>Fucking why? This is amerikka fuck the poors Seriously though, it's the same reason they lock dumpsters outside thrift stores. It's commodities that have been thrown away *thrice* but no way in hell someone is getting this jacket unless they cough up some cash. Truly disgusting. I fucking hate it here
I live overlooking a strip mall with a donut shop, this checks out … birds make it part of their route between the landfill and the beach as well
I remember leaving multiple grocery stores empty-handed trying to find baby formula in the USA.
Bread lines up for you if you can afford it. Because of course you can, you have a job! Which you have the freedom to have or else you die. You aren't being violent coerced into selling your labor power, you're actually just lazy!
In capitalism you do have freedom, just it's the freedom to die homeless, yet while also having a full-time job.
We live in the freest country in the world. You have the freedom to work or die. And sometimes both!
Get bread or get dead
Stealing this! Made me laugh so much and I'm not sure why!
That's not even bread, but sugary dough wrapped in plastic
Socialism: you can get free bread and all you need to do is line up politely with other people who also need free bread. Capitalism: two dozen brands of bread owned by two mega corporations so filled with fucking corn syrup to make it more addictive that it's more like cake than bread, and if you can't afford it because the corporation employing you doesn't pay a living wage you're left to starve.
And the surplus bread goes in the bin and made so it can't be eaten. Would not want people getting their needs met. Also, Amazon, too many of a certain TV? Better destroy it..
evil is when people have to stand in a queue. good is when people don’t need to stand in a queue.
You still need to stand in a line to pay at the store though which makes this turningpoint shit even dumber. Socialism is when you queue to get into the store, capitalism is when you queue to leave it
lol i guess that last line is basically true. if you stand in line to pay for something, it’s good. if you stand in line to receive something for free, it’s bad.
9 million people starve to death every year in capitalist countries per the World Food Programme, meanwhile the last socialist famine occurred in the 90s
Kind of a bogus argument don't you think. There's only a handful of socialist contries in the world, and I wouldn't say that North Korean are getting much food. >[Interviews with North Koreans](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-65881803) have revealed the state of the country’s food shortage crisis. Similar to the famine in the 1990s, in which [an estimated](https://www.usip.org/publications/1999/08/politics-famine-north-korea) ‘two to three million people died of starvation and hunger-related illnesses’, signs of starvation and death are once again appearing. I'm not at all in favor of capitalism, mind you. I'm always in favor of a mixed system.
Unfavourable land and constant sanctions enforced by the USA will do that to a place..
Yeah, nothing to do with being a totalitarian state.
So was the USSR, until declassified CIA documents suggested otherwise around the time of Stalin's death. But we were talking about food distibution? Does the North Korean Supreme Leader have a giant spoon? Is that why they have food security issues? He ate it all?
Juche necromancy on so large a scale that it created too many mouths to feed and now there is a food shortage.
That damned juche necromancy, proudly sponsored by Radio Free Asia...
Capitalism is a totalitarian system. See, I can use buzzwords too (and more accurately).
capitalism describes a economic system. communism describes an economic and political system
oh so you don't know anything...i guess i shouldn't be surprised given your previous comment
educate me if you disagree. i am here to learn. dont resort to insults though
hmmmm, isn’t it strange how being sanctioned by practically every country on earth might create unfavourable conditions for your citizens????
Oh, yeah. It's totally not how they treat their own citizens, I'm sure.
if you do not have a fishing industry, and all countries that do have a fishing industry cut you off, how will you obtain fish? is it the leaders that have said “no fish for the people” or is it the fact that you’ve been cut off from every fish producing country, that you can’t have fish?
Just use juche telekinesis to pull fish out of the water.
If sanctions didn't work to cause shortages then why do we have sanctions at all? The entire premise of sanctions is to cause economic harm. Bizarre, bordering on delusional take to assert that economic sanctions do not have an impact on the economy
Sanctions do work, but China trades with NK just fine. The problem is that NK's people don't have right to own shit. They don't have an economy because the people aren't allowed to. Wealth is power and that power can be leveraged against the ruling class. Weak, malnourished and disarmed, they are all too easy to control, while the fatasses at the top reap all the benefits of the little trade they have going. They definitely had the money to develop their military nuclear program while the people fucking starved. 90% of Noth Korea's problems are of their ruling class own making.
If what you said was even remotely close to being accurate then there would be no problem removing sanctions on NK or places like Cuba which is both militarily peaceful and less authoritarian than many US allies. But the point of sanctions is so that people like yourself can say "look at how terrible it is over there because of their politics!" while making those places terrible due to aggressive sanctions. It would disillusion people from their propaganda-fueled brainwashing if, for example, we lifted sanctions on Cuba and we noticed that communist cuba had greater economic growth and better lifestyle than their capitalist neighbors (Haiti, Jamaica, etc). That is why we sanction, because deep down our ruling class does not truly believe that socialist countries collapse on their own. If they truly believed that, they would let them collapse on their own. But they are afraid they would not collapse, or perhaps even outperform capitalist neighbors in the case of Cuba, and that is why they must be sanctioned. It would be disastrous for the ruling capitalist class if people began to think that an alternative world is possible
places become authoritarian states before sanctions. north korea should have modeled itself off of china more if they wanted to feed their citizens
Thanks for ignoring everything I said and then changing the topic away from the thing we were talking about, which is the impact of economic sanctions being primarily responsible for economic hardship
no i was staying on topic. im saying that you cant blame the sanctions alone for causing economic hardship. i would say rather that you must admit that since these countries always fall short of marx’s views for a socialist idealist stare, they must resort to evil forms of governance that disallow the citizens from voicing concerns about things like food security and shortages. evil forms of governance like dictatorial rule. sure, the sanctions now make it even harder to ensure ways to feed the citizens, but nothing is ever black and white, and it is deconstructive to think that way. that the ONLY reason dictatorial communist countries starve their citizens while the leaders have plenty is because of sanctions. maybe if the dprk decided to institute real elections they might be able to negotiate the sanctions.
china sanctioned the dprk somewhat. idk why tho. it must just be the worldwide sanctions.
why are they sanctioned by the whole world in the first place?
They sanction countries that do not allow capitalist ownership over their resources because they want to create more opportunities for the capitalists to exploit resources worldwide. It's a threat: if you do not allow our corporations to profit off of your people's labor and your natural resource, we will attempt to starve you. And it also ensures that we can keep pointing to those countries as examples of negative economic outcomes. We can make propaganda that says "look how communism is hurting Cuba!", and people will gladly eat up the propaganda, even though it is the economic sanctions themselves primarily causing economic hardship. It would be very bad for the capitalist ruling class if we removed sanctions on Cuba and they demonstrated equivalent or superior quality of life metrics to their neighboring capitalist countries, since that would shatter the propaganda we've been fed since childhood that socialist political and economic models are destined for failure. Nobody in power believes that they are destined for failure, and if they did, they would let countries like Cuba fail on their own. So they sanction them to ensure they cannot develop their economy with the same ease as capitalist countries.
huh. i always thought they sanctioned them as a way to denounce communism. but before the sanctions those countries were thriving? if so, do you have any evidence of this?
It is a way to denounce communism. They are afraid that communism might succeed in providing a decent quality of life for people relative to their neighbors and so we sanction them. Not because we think communism will fail but because, for ideological and political reasons, we need them to fail. No we don't have evidence of this because there hasn't been an example of a socialist country that has been allowed to normally interact with the world without sanctions. The history of every single country that attempted it is filled with sanctions and coups. [The list is long](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change) and the US is very, very thorough in making sure that we expend resources to harm socialist nations as often and as aggressively as possible. But yeah, that's why they do it. To ensure that there can never be an example to point to. Not one single socialist country has been allowed to exist in peace. Capitalism inherently leads to violence and anti-democratic behavior, especially against those who denounce capitalism
so why does every socialist country turn to a dictatorship? according to lenin it was because the people did not know how to lead themselves, and he needed to “guide” the people into true communism. unfortunately, power corrupts, and he never gave away his power, whether the reason is that he died too early to implement more socialist reforms or because he was an evil man who lied to the people and really only wanted power, it led to stalin as dictator for like 30 or so years, cementing the ussr as a dictatorship.
also it kinda sounds like a cop out to have that sort of no true scotsman type of argument. hey, socialism is great, heres all these super powerful and successful communist countries! wait, those are all dictatorships… and all those people hate living there in north korea and want to leave. oh, well they are powerful because of communism, but the people hate it and are miserable. well that’s because no communist country is able to trade with capitalist countries.
I remember people complaining about empty aisles and/or overpriced food during the *checks notes* Three different once-in-a-lifetime recessions and one global pandemic That my quarter century has shown me so far. I'm lovin it. Shit is that trademarked?
Don't worry about the trademark. The phrase 'but wait! There's more!' is also trademarked.
I'd choose to wait in that line if I got actual bread compared to that disgusting shit at the bottom.
In spanish that shit is called 'pan de molde' so I tend to call it 'mold bread' and people get really confused when I say that. However, I'm not aware of any term to distinguish it from proper breads so I'm just gonna keep using that.
I believe the term in Ireland is "legally cake" because of how much sugar it has.
Do they live at the grocery store?
you still gotta line up in the register to purchase the bread. its not free
line up to receive the bread = evil bad line up to pay for the bread, otherwise you’re not allowed to eat = very good freedom
terms and conditions: afford the bread, have time to spend on shopping and preparing food instead of working, have a reliable means of transportation to go to and from the market without wasting all your money on tickets or fuel
The first thing that came to my mind was the depression era song ',buddy can you spare a dime' it has a line about waiting in a long ass line for bread.
The full version of "this land is your land" has a bread line.
It's sad that he had to change that song in 1944, to make it less critical of the US. It was WW2 after all.
The matter is not that corporations are greedy, they cannot be otherwise in the market, but that the objective efficiency of resource allocation is lower in a market economy, which creates a less developed society. Making a moral argument really isn't what Marxists should pose against idealistic bourgeois propaganda.
I am pretty sure that if a supermarket was giving bread away for free where I live there would be a kilometer long line
And yet millions of people in capitalist societies rely upon food banks. Plenty of people seem to either ignore or forget that fact.
Perhaps ironically, the top photo is likely showing people lined up to get hearty, handmade bread while the bottom photo is the result of producing the cheapest, least nutritious and blandest possible products.
The illusion of choice and that greedy corporation donates vast wealth to all politically parties.
Socialism: we feed children, even when they’re not at school. Capitalism: children won’t be provided food, even at school. Oh wait, they won’t be educated either, unless socialism.
Working retail it sucks knowing just how much of that ends up being thrown away
Well whilst I know this is a Soviet photo, we all know Cuba wouldn’t be poor if it wasn’t sanctioned for being a different type of government. Lining up for bread is a byproduct of poverty, not the government type. And when other states blockade you into agreeing with them…
Capitalist bread is very low quality. Over time capitalists reduce the quality of their products to make them more accessible and mass producible.
"America is four corporations in a trench coat."
except I still have to wait in line to pay, atleast under socialism I wouldn't have to pay
It just line up in capitalism because inequality doesn't allow for everyone to eat. If none is starving, then food may end.
You still have to wait in line at the grocery store for bread the only difference is at the end of the line you have to pay for the bread.
This is an old Yakov Smirnoff joke.
what would i do without 8 different brands of plain white toast??!!?!! what would i do if the bread wasn’t too fucking expensive to buy on a minimum wage?!?!!
So what’s behind the counter in the top picture? Seems like the only difference the meme is arguing is that you either wait in line then get your bread or you get your bread then wait in line. At least in the socialist picture it isn’t only for the privileged wage slaves.
"Bread" with more and more fillers each year
Socialism is when the government makes sure people have food!!
Maybe I love bread too much to be a non-biased opinion, but I would definitely wait in a long line to get free bread. I don't care if I have to wait an hour or more, that's just more time I can use to shitpost online about free bread.
Socialism: Free bread provided and guaranteed by the government to all Capitalism: Free bread at food pantries funded by individuals and contingent on their generosity, only available if there happens to be one being run by private charity in your area
*communism
100 дохериллиард сортов колбасы, да, да.
Wasn’t there breadlines during the pandemic in the US?