Yeah kinda. Soycialists believe that currency as we know it be abolished and replaced with punch card credits, essentially a "Truck Wage", except instead of payment in the form of gift cards to the local corporate outlet they're to the government which similarly greatly restricts what you're allowed to own.
There's a reason soycialists and communists always use a tooth brush or clothing articles as their first instinctual examples of what items fit their arbitrary "personal property" designation [what you're allowed to have as a working person unaffiliated with the state], because they're some of the few things you can own you couldn't conceivably turn into "private property" and capitalize on with or without the state's express written permission.
The system as we know its' imminent collapse if anything apart from importation of its enemies (a relatively recent phenomenon that's not intrinsic to it) has come from its unerring support of the higher education system no matter how corrupt and foreign it'd clearly gotten and remained since the mid-to-late 20th century. At this point each and every institution is staffed from top to bottom with pedantic, psuedo-intellectual communist retards who have, despite their charitable rhetoric, incidentally driven all their students into decades worth of debt ("whoops").
From this arrangement which we find ourselves in, with over 1.75 trillion dollars in collective debt and many billions in annual interest obligations, greater wages across the board are demanded by under skilled, over-credentialed and greatly burdened graduates, and subsequently greater costs are borne by consumers at all levels. College should have seen mass boycott and cultural rejection many years ago and the consequences of our continued faith in it despite its open hostility is far worse than what you denigrate as "sharecropping".
>shares of the company
You take two stores or service providers that do the same thing more or less, for whatever reason, one of them is substantially more successful than the other despite having the same number of employees. Do the employees of the less successful store make less credit stamps than their peers at the other store, and are they then considered to be oppressed by the employees of the other store? Does the state step in at this point and what do they do? How does any of this work atPost too long. Click here to view the full text.