Is a man entitled to the sweat of his brow?

... Or do socialist programs have merit?

What's your vote? What's your argument?

apparently, a man is entitled to have his sweat bastardized and spread throughout the internet by people in no way related to the origins of said sweat.

😉

Why would I want another dude's sweat? Gross.

Originally posted by Andrew Ryan
... Or do socialist programs have merit?

What's your vote? What's your argument?

Originally posted by Andrew Ryan
... Or do socialist programs have merit?

What's your vote? What's your argument?

Stupid, stupid. I only need enough sweat to cool me down. Take the rest, please.

I just want servants.

No one is entitled to anything that others are able to take from them.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
I just want servants.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
I just want servants.

Originally posted by Andrew Ryan
... Or do socialist programs have merit?

What's your vote? What's your argument?

Socialism criticizes what it views as the illegitimate apropriation of the sweat of a worker's brow by capitalists, not the use or property of the product of one's labour by the worker himself. Furthermore, most lines of socialism diferentiate between private property = property of the means of production and personal property = people's earnings, personal residence, etc. In theory, only the former is to be socialized.

Proudhon and several others further diferentiate private property of the means of production between property that is directly used by a working person to produce a livelyhood, called possesion or usufruct, such as a family farm; and property that is explored through the work of people who do not own it and are not entitled to the entirety of the fruits of their labour, but are paid salaries, like a corporate plantation. The latter is viewed as exploitation and theft while the former is viewed as rightfull guarantee of survival.