https://twitter.com/shaun_vids/status/1446396109945987099?t=hVxfiI91ddUdiC25E9cUQw&s=19

  • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    There's a difference between earning money and literally being in the top 0.1% of income earners in the USA for just sitting in front of a camera lol

    No one is saying that leftists with money must live like monks and take a vow of poverty, but buying a manision and literally being part of the top 0.1% is another thing entirely

    • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I think focus needs to be on the structures of exploitation, not on individual wealth. The Hasan discourse is unproductive and a lot of the time concedes the ancap argument about communism requiring individuals to give up their wealth. Hasan could donate 90% of his income to FNB or PSL and it wouldn’t do shit. He could be leveraging his community to encourage people to organize, but I don’t watch him enough or participate in his community, so I don’t know if they do that already.

      All that said, people who have to struggle every fucking day to get food on their tables have every right to be pissed about seeing money wasted on that fucking house by someone who is nominally on our team. My truck just broke down so I’m going to be walking everywhere or bumming rides for at least two weeks. It could be fixed tomorrow for what Hasan pays a month to have his pool cleaned (or however often people with mansions clean a pool idc). I’m regularly eating at soup kitchens and have had several days where all I ate were these nasty bags of dried fruit that they give us. I’m not jealous of a mansion. I’m jealous of not having to do eat shitty food and spend several hours of my day to walking around an area designed for people with cars. I’m jealous of having healthcare. Like low key fuck Hasan a little bit.

      But nothing I can do about that so I just gotta deal because it’s not productive. I’m done now. Hope some can PMC folks here can understand this isn’t a purely abstract principled discussion for everyone.

      • Dingdangdog [he/him,comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        The only good post in this thread. Solidarity.

        The only reason I'm not in your situation right now is a fucking lucky circumstance involving cheap rent and a very non judgemental girlfriend.

        Also, can you apply for EBT/Foodstamps? They've been making it pretty easy to apply since the pandemic and the money is a fucking godsend.

        • KermitTheFraud [they/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          I make over the threshold and they just ended the pandemic relief stuff. My partner and I struggle moreso because we financially support our parents. When we don’t, their utilities get shut off every other month. Last winter I found my mother in law unconscious in their house while it was ~0°F out. Fun fact: they’re not allowed to shut your heat off in the winter, but if your heat is already off when winter hits, they don’t have to turn it back on

          Solidarity, comrade. Glad to hear about your good fortune. I’m very thankful for my partner as well.

    • FidelCashflow [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      No, he is still a worker.

      He is a well paid worker. And that morally obligates him to help his fellow wprkers in was he might ot migbt not have been. He is however not bourgeois.

      When he uses his stream money to pay others to stream for him, then underpays him then he is part of thr bourgeois doespite bwing s small one and potentially helping smaller leftist streamers

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        There is an argument to be made that he's petit bourgeois, as he buys others labour (video editors, moderators, social media managers, etc), while not owning the means of production

        • FidelCashflow [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          If twitch says so his career is gone. If I was a brave. Man I would look up the stuff about pesants and small free holders and the relations between them for the most direxrly aplicable analogy Howeevr I don't think I have the strngth in me to be that online today

          • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            If twitch says so his career is gone.

            Well yeah. Same for anyone that does not own the means of production. That's why I specified petit bourgeois.

            • FidelCashflow [he/him]
              ·
              3 years ago

              I see him as being more a peasant class wise. The troublesomw french kind that made organization difficult. I however do nor have it in em to show my work on this one. I can't remember what work discusses it and ai cant be bothered to look it up.

      • knipexcrunch [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        True! People need to understand money is not class. Even those athletes making $100,000,000 are still, technically, workers because they sell their labor. Now if they go open a clothing brand and make most of their money from owning that then they're no longer a worker. The highly paid athlete, while rich, stops getting paid if they stop working, where as the owner cutting their checks gets paid regardless of if they wake up that day.

        Class is determined by ownership, not income.

        And lastly, bourgeoisie can be class traitors and advocate for socialism, see Engels. Though they need to be scrutinized much more closely, it is still technically possible.

        • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          This is a bit oversimplified though. Those that do earn a lot of money, like athletes, are able to purchase other people's labour due to earning so much money, even if they don't own the means of production. Hasan for instance, will employ people like video editors and moderators. Athletes will employ trainers, physiotherapists, etc. Due to their high income, and ability to use other's labour to further benefit them, their class interests are more likely to align with the people that own the means of production, even though they do not own it themselves.

          This isn't even considering the modern "PMC", I'm not mentioning it because there's a lot of disagreement there

          • knipexcrunch [he/him]
            ·
            3 years ago

            "they are able to..." Yes, but if they don't then they're still workers. If you get paid a wage contingent on your labor, you're a worker. If you make money from scalping other peoples' labor, you're petite or bourgeoisie.

            As for PMC, if one isn't a manager that manages people that they decide to hire/fire, then they're not PMC. That phrase has been so butchered online.

            • FidelCashflow [he/him]
              ·
              3 years ago

              People use it to mean professional media class and professional managerial class. Its stright iut the window now.

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yes. Anyone that earns over 1.6 million USD a year is in the top 0.1%. Hasan literally earns more than that lol.

        It's a fact

        • KenBonesWildRide [they/them]M
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          I’m about to remove Str8AroQueer’s response to this comment, not because it’s rule breaking in and of itself, but because they’re clearly shitstirring and this thread is a long trashfire of Um Aktually corrections that they purposefully dragged out

          To anyone reading further, I’m not cleaning up any replies beyond this. Enjoy your rage bait

                • hexaflexagonbear [he/him]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 years ago

                  Even with relatively low returns, and a high tax rate, $1.6 mil/year gives you enough cash to make a 6 figure income from it without touching the initial investment pretty quickly.

                    • hexaflexagonbear [he/him]
                      ·
                      edit-2
                      3 years ago

                      Because the interest accrued is probably less than half of what is realistic with historic trends. The tax rate assumed is unreasonably large for business as well, as he doesn't make a salary, he makes income.

                            • hexaflexagonbear [he/him]
                              ·
                              3 years ago

                              It often never has to! If my dad can save on his taxes with a trucker's income, I'm sure the million dollar a year business can figure it out.

                            • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                              hexagon
                              ·
                              3 years ago

                              Oh I know! It gets taxed (again, which is actually good btw, "double taxation" is fake news) at the individual rate!

                              • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                                ·
                                3 years ago

                                What actually happens is most of it doesn't. He probably pays himself a salary out of the business, but the money being invested (i.e. "wealth") likely never leaves the business side of things.

                                • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                                  hexagon
                                  ·
                                  3 years ago

                                  What actually happens is most of it doesn’t.

                                  An assumption on your part.

                                  This discussion exists in a vacuum of facts.

                                  • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                                    ·
                                    edit-2
                                    3 years ago

                                    Well, given that he makes well over a million a year, and therefore almost definitely has an accountant, what I said above is a virtual guarantee.

                                    Unless you think he told his accountant "please maximize the taxes I pay to the federal government". Like, I agree that the house discourse is pointless, but it's also ridiculous to say that that kind of income won't convert to wealth quickly and easily.

                                    This discussion exists in a vacuum of facts.

                                    Yeah, that's why people are making reasonable assumptions. That's why I use words like "probably" and "likely".

                                    • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                                      hexagon
                                      ·
                                      3 years ago

                                      ridiculous to say that that kind of income won’t convert to wealth quickly and easily.

                                      I never said that, so that's good

                                      • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                                        ·
                                        3 years ago

                                        This whole thread of argument started with you pointing out the distinction between income and wealth. The whole point of this argument is that with that much income, it easily becomes wealth.

                                        • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                                          hexagon
                                          ·
                                          edit-2
                                          3 years ago

                                          But it isn't yet. And saying he's in the 0.1% is pointless if you're not talking about wealth, because then you're (not YOU I know) putting the streamer in the same category as billionaire capitalists, which only obscures things further.

                                          • LeninWeave [none/use name]
                                            ·
                                            edit-2
                                            3 years ago

                                            But it isn’t yet.

                                            You don't know that, I don't know that, no one knows that. We can only make reasonable assumptions. And the reasonable assumption is that he'd act in his own interest, talk to an accountant, and invest the money, thereby making it wealth.

                                            This is like assuming that a soccer player who makes a few million doesn't invest the money. Of course he would, why wouldn't he?

                                            I certainly wouldn't put him in the same category as billionaire bourgeois though, and I'm sure the person who said "0.1%" wouldn't either. But he's clearly wealthy, and that's more likely than not to affect his behavior.

                                            • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                                              hexagon
                                              ·
                                              3 years ago

                                              and I’m sure the person who said “0.1%” wouldn’t either.

                                              Except that by saying that, they have done that. That's the crux of my issue here.

                          • Str8AroQueer [none/use name]
                            hexagon
                            ·
                            3 years ago

                            For the record, salary IS income. Both for tax purposes and just like generally.

                            Hexbear.net needs more people who understand how this works lmao