> > >That's a great way to evade the question. What threshold of stock
>> >ownership constitutes terming someone a capitalist?
>> >
>> >Ian
>>
>> Can you (and your dependents, if you have any) live on your privately
>> owned financial assets (= claims on surplus value produced by others)
>> alone, without work (for yourself or others) and without Social
>> Security (and the like that may be better called deferred solidarity
>> wages)? That's the question that excludes most people from the ranks
>> of the bourgeoisie. Most people have only their house, vehicle, & a
>> little savings (that can support them perhaps for some months) to
>> their names, if they have any assets at all.
>
>That would make a lot of retired workers capitalists. Anyone with a 401K
>who saves enough to retire would be a capitalist.
What is the proportion of retired workers who can live on their privately owned financial assets (= claims on surplus value produced by others) alone, without Social Security, Medicaid, and the like that may be better called "deferred solidarity wages"?
If you are actually better off with an "Individual Retirement Account" alone, without Social Security, Medicare, and other welfare state programs, you may very well be bourgeois. You should definitely vote Republican, cut taxes on income-producing assets, and privatize everything. :-> -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>