It isn’t immediately obvious to libs that want healthcare though. They much prefer blindly defending a process they have only one data point on.
At the end of day, even if you assume this is the most efficiently run business in existence with everyone being fairly and equitably compensated for their skill, time, risk, and effort, he would still be owed 4 instead simply by elimination of the capitalist’s unearned share.
None of what you said, made any sense to me. Your sentence structure sucks, you seem to be using new and unheard of short hand for common words that don’t need to be shortened, and you seem to be taking a political stance on something that’s not inherently a political issue.
It isn’t immediately obvious to libs that want healthcare though. They much prefer blindly defending a process they have only one data point on.
At the end of day, even if you assume this is the most efficiently run business in existence with everyone being fairly and equitably compensated for their skill, time, risk, and effort, he would still be owed 4 instead simply by elimination of the capitalist’s unearned share.
None of what you said, made any sense to me. Your sentence structure sucks, you seem to be using new and unheard of short hand for common words that don’t need to be shortened, and you seem to be taking a political stance on something that’s not inherently a political issue.
So I say good day to you sir.
How is the distribution of wealth not a political issue? Do you consider yourself a socialist?