/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>9585252
>falling for this anarcho-capitalist meme
capitalism is specifically designed to lead to concentration of wealth in the hands of the few. larger corporations benefit from economies of scale. so they can afford to under-cut ma and pa shops on prices. they can afford to pay their workers more.

Minimum wage laws and regulations can compound the problem even more for small businesses. That is not socialism though. This is social democracy.

socialism = worker or worker's republic state ownership of the means of production
social democracy = mixed economy. predominately private ownership of the means of production (capitalism) with state regulations like minimum wage, labour laws, regulations, etc. social democracy states might have some public ownership (ie. post office) but predominately private.

As a socialist, I am torn on the subject of minimum wage, labour laws, regulations, etc.
As a socialist, I believe the workers should own the means of production. Minimum wage, labour laws, regulations, etc. are just a band-aid "fix" for capitalism. Workers are still being exploited of their surplus labour value. If they were not, the corporation would go outta business. Extracting surplus labour value is absolutely mandatory in capitalism or else you are finished as a business.

People in the first world who are willing to work should be able to afford a decent minimum standard of living. And they should have a minimum guarantee of health and safety in the workplace. Stuff like that. So I can understand raising the minimum wage and having regulations.

However if minimum wage makes it harder for small businesses to keep people employed or they have to slash hours, there are unintended negative consequences that come with that. Is the government going to start subsidising struggling businesses in order to remain compliant with minimum wage and regulations? Maybe the government is going to start buying shares/points in struggling businesses in exchange for financial support?

If I were a socialist party politician or Bernie Sanders or something, I would actually consider the latter as a way to transition capitalism into socialism. If you have a struggling business that can't keep up with a decent minimum wage and can't meet regulations, I would have the government front you capital in exchange for ownership shares of your company. Hell if you let the company go outta business, the government can just pick up the pieces at a cut-rate and seize the means of production entirely.

Sometimes I wonder if Bernie Sanders and such are hiding their powerlevel and that's their end game all along. Raise the minimum wage and regulations in order to squeeze out small private businesses that can't hang. And then have the government jump in, seize means of production in bankruptcy

>>9585352
>There are socialists on biz
>Biz yells scamcoin at BTC when it's in a bear market

This place is hopeless

reminder there hasn't been a capitalist country on earth since the establishment of the US Federal reserve

currency debasement is the cause of every problem in existence

>>9585252

Bureaucrats don't do any of what you are stating. They enforce the law, they don't make the law. Blame your politicians.

>>9586223
>There are socialists on biz
A comrade gotsa eat. If you live in a capitalist society, you need to do capitalism to the best of your ability to survive. Or else what the hell you doing? You expect socialists to just voluntarily starve?

I have an idea
Total anarchy
No ancap
Just let people do whatever and go back to tribes

>>9585252

>>9585628
>>9585352
Youre fucking retarded. Its not capitalism thats the problem, its the bureaucracy embeded in todays capitalism. The problem is that happens with every system of government thats ever existed in the history of man. Look at the CPI over the past 100+ years in America. You can clearly see WHERE the problems arose. Capitalism isnt perfected, but its by far the best system weve figured out (ie takes the longest to reach genocidal corrupt government levels). I bet youd share your wife with your community you pathetic faggot

>>9585352
>capitalism is specifically designed to lead to concentration of wealth in the hands of the few.
But it doesn't do that in practice

>>9585628
>As a socialist
Workers taking over the means of production will not benefit them at all.

The working class consumes 99% of all consumer goods.

The capitalists consume almost none of the end stage products of production.
>BUT DEY HAVE DE MONEY
Money is fucking irrelevant, it's just pieces of paper or digits in a computer.
What really matters is what is consumed. If the workers stole of all the capitalists "wealth" it would just cause a massive amount of inflation and nobody would be better off.
Taking over the means of production gives you basically NOTHING.
Socialism is a scam.

Where do you go from here you fucking brainlet?

>>9586279
>You expect socialists to just voluntarily starve?
Yes,I hope they all starve and die.
Please make this happen.

>>9586252
R.r.real capitalism has n n never been tried before!

>>9586589
It was tried and it resulted in the greatest increase in human living standards.

Socialism was tried and it slaughtered millions.

:^)

>>9586523
>What matters is what's consumed!
>No labor is consumed
>No goods are consumed in the manufacturing process
>No surplus value is consumed by capitalists.

reminder to sage and hide all leftpol/ancap threads

>>9586601
Capitalism caused communism though.

>No one starved before communism

>>9586611
>>No labor is consumed
By consumption I'm speaking of actual physical resources, not labor.

>>No goods are consumed in the manufacturing process
I said consumption goods you fucking yuroturd brainlet.
Who gives a shit about capital goods?

The working class consumes 99% of the end stage products of production.
There's literally nothing else for the working class to consume if they took over the means of production.
If the workers took over, they would have to work JUST AS HARD AND JUST AS LONG to get the same amount of consumer goods.
There's no way around this.

Why are all socialists actually this fucking stupid?

>>9586641
People starved in areas with low economic freedom.
Feudalistic shitholes etc.

Economic result resulted in a massive abundance of food.

>>9586612
>being a socialist cuck
>biz
Pick only one, your gigantic faggot.

>>9586659
Why do capitalists care so much about controlling the means of production, if all it does is produce goods for filthy peasants.

Oh that's right. The value in excess if the cost goes to the owners. Which translates into economic, and political power.

>>9586692
>The value in excess if the cost goes to the owners. Which translates into economic, and political power.
They only have political power is the government is big.

That's why small governments are the best.

>>9586674
>It wasn't capitalism it was communism!
>It wasn't capitalism it was feudalism!
>It wasn't capitalism it was mercantilism!

Literally kill all capitlaists landlords and bourgie scum, it’s the only way. Really give the victims of communism memorial foundation something to cry about. Make stalin look like a liberal.

>>9585252
As a business owner I must agree.

Fuck you leftist cucks. You are literal cancer.

I would absolutely love to hire more people but I can't afford that and I must resort to cheaper solutions like all kinds of automation (we are looking into AI just recently actually).

>>9586714
The retarded socialist definition of capitalism is capitalist control over the means of production.
You could make that mean anything. Technically North Korea, Cuba and China is capitalist by that definition because they have some capitalist control.
A much more clear definition is free market vs unfree market.

We've had unfree markets for most of human existence, it's only recently we freed our markets to a considerable extent.
It lead to a massive increase in human living standards.

Socialism however caused massive poverty and death.

Socialists need to be hung from trees.

Does believing in National Socialism make me a socialist?

>>9586409
Fuck you. Capitalism is perfect. The government intervention is what's fucked it up. Capitalism is basically property rights, and contract enforcement, nothing else. However, the government likes to intervene on the behalf of the faggots that can't compete in the free market, and that's where capitalism starts to fail.

>>9586754
I can't wait until we get to throw you communist subhumans from helicopters.

Your ideology makes no sense lmao

>>9586777
It makes you a brainlet.

>>9586791
>Your ideology makes no sense lmao

It does if you are a woman and base your decisions solely on emotions tho.

>>9585252
communism has never been tried, comrade

>>9585628
>workers should own the means of production
To put it bluntly, the plebs are brainlets who will run everything into the ground. There’s are reason why all goods and services in the eastern bloc were utter shit. When it came to agriculture, the seizing of the means of production lead to the biggest famines in world history. Commies have a lot of blood on their hands.
You need to accept that nature is seemingly unfair. Some people are just better than others and they deserve to run shit and they deserve to be rewarded for that. They’re not just better than others, they are infinitely better than others. Read about Price’s Law. It applies to scientific papers as well as tree heights in the Amazon jungle.
The beautiful thing is that a rising tide lifts all boats. Look at what’s happening in China or Pajeetland. Just a little bit of free market captialism has already lifted countless millions of people out of abject poverty. Socialist should be applauding that, but as we all know, socialists don’t like poor people, they just hate the rich.

>>9586840
Leftists know this but deny it because they go with emotion over logic. They would rather see everyone (including themselves) equally poor than have 1 person rewarded for their talent, because again that tinkles their feefees.

>>9585252
I agree with the comic but anarchocapitalism can never sustain itself, there will always be someone who gains enough power in the vacuum to eventually impose rules on everyone else. Both that and communism can go directly to the trash bin. Realistically the only way a society can stand the test of time is strong nationalism, mildly regulated capitalism to impose penalties on scammers and monopolies and socialism that incentivizes unity, morality and overall benefits producers instead of takers.

>>9586791

>muh helicopters

Nice larp too bad you are a retarded neet who will never have a helicopter and your mom is going to sue to kick out out of the house soon

>>9586886
>They would rather see everyone (including themselves) equally poor than have 1 person rewarded for their talent,
That's not the definition of socialism.
In socialism, workers receive the full fruit of their labour because they own the means of production. In capitalism, the shareholders extract profit off the backs of their workers. Socialism literally rewards labouring more than capitalism does. Capitalism rewards "entrepreneurship", which is a nice way of saying exploiting workers.

>>9586886
It’s also indoctrination from media and government schools. A friend of my recently graduated from a European government run university with an MBA. I couldn’t believe when he said that he doesn’t know about Prices Law or the Pareto Distribution. How you’re supposed to run a business if you don’t even know that the square root of all your workers produce half the output and that your job as a manager is to identify and reward those people. Instead he learned about muh diversity and how unregulated capitalism is evil because of Oliver Twist. Universities are cancer.

>>9587017
An excellent example of a retarded leftie in its (un)natural habitat.
Read the comment it wrote carefully and observe how it does not use any logic but responds exclusively with emotion.

>>9587017
>you in the next decade

>>9586776
Not-true-socialism is just a state of governance that exists after the failure of socialism, a state of governance that according to leftist theory must be analyzed by future revolutionaries so as to succeed next time.

>"it's not real capitalism" the post

>>9587144
It's funny how they keep saying "it's not real capitalism". But capitalism can't actually exist without the state enforcing private property laws.

In Ancapistan, you would be personally responsible for protecting your life, liberty and property. No Big Daddy Government to protect you. You might pay some protection money to a DRO, which will basically be the mafia all over again. Which is basically a defacto state anyways. When the Italian mafia was active, they would strong-man local businesses on their turf for "protection money" whether they wanted the protection or not.

>>9587044
Unironically curious: Do all the workers get an equal share of the pie? The manager gets as much as the cleaning lady? Probably not, right?
If not, who decides who gets how much of the pie? Is this slice of the pie going to be proportional to the contribution of the individual worker? That would be fair, right?
If yes, you’d have to reward the square root of your workers with half the pie. And then the square root of that square root gets half of the half, etc.
Voila you’ve just created a system where a few managers at the top get huge salaries while the ground floor workers get a very small ones. How unfair right?
But you see, because you’ve rewarded those few at the top, they will have an incentive and the capability (!) to make sure that the pie gets larger and larger, thus the everybody wins.
Now you might argue that the top workers shouldn’t be rewarded with a bigger piece of the pie but other forms of recognition. Like “Held der Arbeit” medals in East Germany. That worked out well, didn’t it? The Trabant was so much better than a Mercedes.

>>9587049

>You need to accept that nature is seemingly unfair. Some people are just better than others and they deserve to run shit and they deserve to be rewarded for that.

Yeah, let's give even more shit to those who are already doing well anyway. Reward those who don't actually need it and fuck the rest. Rich get even richer. Makes sense. That's literally law of the jungle except even more retarded. But hey that's the system that requires the least amount of brain power to implement(even animals can do it) so it's no wonder people gravitate towards it.

>>9585628
I'm socialist at heart too, brother.

>>9587227
But that’s not what happens in reality. There’s a lot of turnover at top. A large part of the people who reach the 1% of wealth don’t stay in the 1% for long. And even if they manage to hold on to their wealth during their lifetime, there’s a high chance that their children or grandchildren will squander it. Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in 3 generations. Read about the regression to the mean and how it applies to IQ. In a nutshell: children of very smart and productive people are most likely to be less smart and productive than their parents. That’s why the turnover happens.
There are very few examples where families manage to hold on to their wealth for more than a few generations (lords in England, nobility in Italy, the Rothschilds) and in almost all of these cases they use the corrupt power of the state to entrench their riches. We need less state, of we want to prevent that.

>>9585628
Have you ever dealt with a big corporation trying to stick its nose in small business infrastructure?

It's always frustrating and they're always sticking HTML and non-ascii characters where they don't belong. They outsource value away from the community. They disrupt the ingrained lines of communication.

I hope the entire thing is subverted by cryptocurrency and government control of finance becomes unnecessary.

>>9587338

You're gonna need some evidence for those claims though. The studies I've seen have found little to no correlation between IQ and wealth which suggests that it really isn't that hard for the rich to stay rich. People seem to always just assume there's a very high correlation between IQ and wealth but never seem to have any real evidence for that very high correlation. Also, you shouldn't confuse productivity with IQ.

>>9587338

And even if it was all about IQ it's still basically the same thing as law of the jungle, you just swapped strength(or physical fitness in general I guess) with intelligence.

>>9585628
>the government is going to start buying shares/points in struggling businesses in exchange for financial support
hmm what could go wrong

you are a fucking idiot

>>9587197
>what are smart contracts
What are you doing in biz?

>>9587227
>give
>reward
You are not giving shit, you are just refraining from stealing, your degenerate fuck.

>>9586279
>You expect socialists to just voluntarily starve?
Isn't that what socialism is all about?

>>9587495
>Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research. T Strenze - Intelligence, 2007 - Elsevier
The correlation is of course not 1 but it’s pretty damn strong. IQ is a predictor of success no matter how you slice and dice it.
There are two footnotes though:
First there’s seems to be sweet spot for IQ around 130, which is why the richest people don’t necessarily have the highest IQs. The genius level IQs often suffer from mental health issues and from my anecdotal evidence, they’re simply not interested in wealth accumulation.
Second, IQ is not the only predictor of success. There’s also the big 5 personality traits which are somewhat less heritable than intelligence.

>>9587219
>Do all the workers get an equal share of the pie?
No absolutely not. There are far less people who have the skills to be a doctor than there are people who have the skills to be a janitor. And health care is pretty damn important. So you need to give doctors, nurses, engineers, teachers, welders, plumbers, carpenters, etc. enough money to entice them to stick around and not fuck off to another jurisdiction (brain drain).

>The manager gets as much as the cleaning lady?
A manager would get more sure. Assuming you need to offer more money to get competent managers than competent cleaning ladies.

>who decides who gets how much of the pie?
The state (worker's republic). Obviously El Presidente is not going to decide the salaries for everyone. No one has all the answers. That's why we have delegates. I don't know exactly how much we need to pay doctors in order to keep them happy. I would hire subject-matter experts to figure that shit out for me.

>Is this slice of the pie going to be proportional to the contribution of the individual worker?
Everyone gets a living wage guarantee. I would implement incentive pay for performance metrics. For base salary, I would pay the worker whatever I would need to to make sure they don't walk (leave the country). I don't want a situation where doctors, engineers, etc. are leaving.

>Voila you’ve just created a system where a few managers at the top get huge salaries while the ground floor workers get a very small ones.
Managers are nothing without their worker ants. The worker ants are the ones doing the work. The managers offer direction. Managers are over-glorified in capitalism. Particularly senior managers like CEOs. Mark Zuckerberg is worth $70 billion. His engineers get paid like $100k/year. Is he really worth almost a million times more than his engineers? No. You could probably hire someone competent to be a CEO of a state-run IT firm for $200,000/year.

Hey faggots
Fuck off biz
No one cares about politics because it doesn't change based on YOUR so*y opinion

Pussies, take comfort in the fact that your tax dollars goes to my free groceries. And i spend it on useless stuff like $10 for a slice of high quality pumpkin pie

KYS

>>9587044
Surplus value meme was literally debunked here:
>>9586523


Workers will NOT benefit from taking over the means of production
You people are fucking stupid

>>9587017
LMAO
We own all of the guns in the country.
I can't fucking wait for you people to die.

>>9587513
>law of the jungle
Bad example mate. The law of the jungle is not what you think it is.
Take our closest relatives, the chimps for example. The alphas in chimp tribes are not to the strongest and most brutal ones. Primatologist have observed that if an alpha chimp becomes a brutal tyrant, weaker males will sooner or later gang up on him and tear him to shreds. The alphas that stay on the top are usually strong in a sense that they don’t allow anyone to push them around, but they’re also smart and social and participate in mutual grooming, etc.

>>9585252
this is so flawed in soo many levels i have to question your intelligence, seriously.

>>9587144
>its not real socialism
Every fucking time
Just kill yourself you brainlet
Also we debunked the marxist idea of"capitalism" in this thread here:
>>9586776


>>9587197
Top Kek
Enforcement of property rights has existed in countless stateless societies.
You people are absolutely clueless.

>>9587668
This anon has addressed your point
>>>9586659
>Why do capitalists care so much about controlling the means of production, if all it does is produce goods for filthy peasants.
>Oh that's right. The value in excess if the cost goes to the owners. Which translates into economic, and political power.

If owning the means of production didn't provide the ownership class with greater material comfort, they wouldn't be fucking owning businesses. Owning the means of production is ultimately a better gig than being a wage cuck or a NEET (unless you are a wealthy NEET). Otherwise they'd be outta business.

>>9587044
I still can't believe the entire socialist ideology depends on this surplus value garbage which can be debunked so incredibly easily and makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

Surplus value is NOTHING
I would get NOTHING from taking over the means of production.
I would get literal inflation and shortages.

>>9587668
Fuck I quoted the wrong anon.
>>9586692
>Why do capitalists care so much about controlling the means of production, if all it does is produce goods for filthy peasants.
>Oh that's right. The value in excess if the cost goes to the owners. Which translates into economic, and political power.

>this fucking thread

>>9587601

>The correlation is of course not 1 but it’s pretty damn strong. IQ is a predictor of success no matter how you slice and dice it.

Yeah but what is the actual number(correlation between IQ and wealth NOT income NOT "success")? I'm sensing a strong bias but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

>>9587716
>Surplus value is NOTHING
I would get NOTHING from taking over the means of production.
I would get literal inflation and shortages.
Then why do rich people strive to own the means of production then? Why don't they just sell off their shares?

>>9587607
>subject matter experts
This has been tried before again and again in socialist/communist countries and it always fails. The pricing mechanism that a free market provides is wastly superior in determining prices of goods/services and also of wages. Instead of relying on a few potentially corrupt “experts”, the free market is like a huge, constantly self-adjusting hive mind.
>managers are overrated
Nope, Price’s Law is pretty clear on that. You cannot fathom how much more productive the people at the very top are compared to the rest. The difference is staggering and quite frankly unsettling. But most people don’t know that because A) schools don’t teach about the IQ distribution and prices law B) plebs like us don’t get to interact with the very top and C) Dunning Kruger effect (we are too stupid to know how stupid we are)

>>9587607
This entire post is pathetic.
You probably worship the Chinese model don't you?

People there live like slaves compared to economically free countries.
Everything is owned by the state through so I guess they have their "surplus value" back.

Fucking idiot.

>>9585252
Poor Franky

>>9587672

Ok, maybe it was the wrong phrase to use there I guess. But also you clearly got the point and it doesn't change the point in anyway. Guess you have to start arguing semantics when you are on shaky grounds ;).

>there people in this thread actually using the labour theory of value

I sometimes forget where I am, if I don't become a millionaire investing in the same markets as these people I should honestly kill myself.

The sad part is that there are some lucky socialists in this board who have made considerable wealth without understanding the most basic things about the economy..

>>9587778
>You probably worship the Chinese model don't you?
>People there live like slaves compared to economically free countries.
>Everything is owned by the state through so I guess they have their "surplus value" back.
Last I checked, China does have private enterprise. And their workers are exploited like crazy. Fucking children at Foxconn factories making Apple products.

>Fucking idiot
that would be you

>>9587762
>Then why do rich people strive to own the means of production then? Why don't they just sell off their shares?
Because it increases their living standards?
There is an extremely small amount of them.
They live of an extremely tiny portion of the profits they get from planning the emergent structure of production.
They consume almost nothing compared to what the working class consumes.
The entire fucking economy produces goods for the working class.

Debunk this, you literally can't.
The working class getting their "surplus value" back would amount to them getting virtually nothing back.

They consume 99% of consumer goods.
What more could you get back than virtually everything. There's nothing else.

>>9585252

>>9587808
>The sad part is that there are some lucky socialists in this board who have made considerable wealth without understanding the most basic things about the economy..
Oh I understand how I made my money from crypto already. Financially cuckolding the late adopters who bought my bags. Gambling is degenerate. But I was a fucking NEET before I got into crypto so desperate times called for desperate measures. Capitalism is a fucking gong-show. I made all of this money buying and selling memecoins while hard-working people are getting cuckolded every single day. If I make a couple million, I'm going to retire from day trading and do something pro-social and fulfilling with my life without having to worry about money ever again. In capitalism if you want to win, you have to fuck people over. That is the name of the game. Whether you are cuckolding your employees or cuckolding your clients. Or cuckolding someone you are trading against.

>>9587822
>China does have private enterprise.
A little bit, yes.
But a large portion of firms there are state run.

Counties where most things are not state run(Japan and taiwan for example) have much higher living standards than the Chinese slaves you worship so much.

The state run market model of China is what you desire, just with less private enterprise and freedom.
Please gas yourself.

>>9587790
On a superficial level I was arguing semantics but read my chimp example again. What goes for chimps also goes for humans. There’s a common perception that the people at the top are all ruthless sociopaths when in reality those sociopaths never stay at the top for long. The most successful people are in most cases those that bring a net benefit to society. The evidence for that seems pretty clear if you look at the trajectory of human development.

>>9585352
>capitalism is specifically designed to lead to concentration of wealth
>capitalism is designed

>>9587868

You're doing it again. Still waiting for that correlation(the number) between IQ and wealth bro.

>>9587871
They're projecting.
Their system is designed.
Our system is emergent and natural.

>>9585252

>>9587885
Didn’t you read my post? >>9587601
Maybe you missed the research paper because I greentexted it

>>9587862
And there you have it, a hypocrite socialist, just like 99.9% of all socialist that have ever lived. Nothing to see here.

I'm not gonna waste my time explaining to this brainlet how capital markets are the most efficient way for assigning resources needed for production, it would be like teaching algebra to a chimp.

>>9587891
>natural
>needs a goverment otherwise will envolve to feudalism
>created a monster called rockfeller

Kek.

I read the abstract but can't get the full text. Did you read my post? >>9587738

>>9587864
>A little bit, yes.
>But a large portion of firms there are state run.
>Counties where most things are not state run(Japan and taiwan for example) have much higher living standards than the Chinese slaves you worship so much.
>The state run market model of China is what you desire, just with less private enterprise and freedom.
You are either a liar or blatantly ignorant
http://www.australiachinarelations.org/content/china%E2%80%99s-economy-state-versus-private
In 2014 China’s economy created 13.2 million new jobs. More than 90 percent were in the private sector.[10]

6. The public sector, including SOEs, employs 11 percent of China’s labour force.[11] This compares with:[12]

>Please gas yourself.
Take your own advice idiot.

>>9587911
>>9587940

>>9587920
How am I a hypocrite for doing capitalism to the best of my ability in a capitalist system? If I have the opportunity to escape wagecuck slavery, you can't expect me to not take it just because most people don't have that opportunity.

>>9587920
>I'm not gonna waste my time explaining to this brainlet how capital markets are the most efficient way for assigning resources needed for production, it would be like teaching algebra to a chimp.
Yes giving (((Mark Zuckerberg))) $70 billion in shares for creating a social media site for Chads and Staceys to meet and fuck is totally an efficient and productive way to make use of capital. Kys

>>9587921
exactly. capitalism is not natural. you need an actual state to enforce private property laws and intellectual property laws and whatever other bullshit.

If you want to take your chances with Ancapistan, go right ahead. I'll put up an ethereum smart contract taking bets right now for
Tyrone vs. 4chan neckbeard no-holds barred street fight

>>9587940
I’ll give you that, I couldn’t find any studies specifically on wealth in correlation to IQ. Most of them focus on income. But does this change my fundamental assertion that more productive people should be paid more in relation to their productivity?

>>9587921
John Rockefeller was massive boom to the working class and got oil prices down dramatically.


David Rockefeller was the scumbag.

Also feudalism is what happens when there is too much government you fucking brainlet.
Holy shit you people are fucking retarded.
Stateless property norms means homesteading and polycentric law.

Gas yourself

>>9587945
Interesting.
My point about countries with less state owned garbage having higher living standards still stands though.

Look at Switzerland, look at Canada.
Compare that to the shithole Yugoslavia was.
It was everything you wanted.
Kill yourself

>>9588018
>you need an actual state to enforce private property laws
Empirically false.

Stateless medieval Ireland
Stateless medieval iceland
Stateless American Midwest in 1800s(homesteading and polycentric law)
Neutral moresnet

You people are so hilariously wrong yet you keep repeating your bullshit.

You actually DESIRE your own enslavement.

Reminder that these socialist manchildren LOVE central banking.

They actually that brainwashed.

>>9587991
The other day my gf created a Facebook page for a non profit she runs. Out of curiosity I’ve tested the “promote” feature for paid advertising. I couldnt believe how slick and efficient the process is. Their audience targeting algorithm is incredible.
I hate (((Zuck))) as much as the next guy but it’s undeniable that he has created a very impressive advertising platform that allows thousands of small businesses to reach their customers in a very efficient manner. I still want to see that spy operation burned to the ground but I won’t deny that Zuck is an impressive CEO.

>>9588076
The Eastern Bloc was rural at the time that they adopted socialism. Canada, Switzerland, etc. were already industrial by then. They had a long head start.

Yugoslavia under Tito was actually pretty prosperous. And then the US fucked it over with their economic terrorism. Bred ethnic resentment within Yugoslavia after Tito was gone. And then we had the ethnic cleansing shit after Yugoslavia adopted capitalism. The ethnic cleansing in the balkans happened under capitalism.

>>9585252
Artist couldn't resist spilling spaghetti and turned comic into infographic. Sad. I wanted to see Johnny murdered and everyone starve.

>>9588139
Yugoslavia was prosperous only compared to other socialist countries because they had somewhat of a free market (you were allowed to run small businesses) and they had trade access to the western markets. It was still a disfunctional, unsustainable economy that fell apart during the oil crisis. Capitalist Mediterranean countries did much better in the post WW2 period. Get your facts straight.

>>9588139
>The Eastern Bloc was rural at the time that they adopted socialism. Canada, Switzerland, etc. were already industrial by then. They had a long head start.
KEK
They still had some industry.
You're admitting that semi-industrialized socialism provides worse living standards that normal industrialized capitalism?
I thought tasking over the means of production and getting your "surplus value back" would result in a massive boom to workers living standards regardless.

>Yugoslavia under Tito was actually pretty prosperous. And then the US fucked it over with their economic terrorism.
Top Kek they were a poverty ridden shithole compared to capitalist counties.
Anyone would rather live in Canada for example than that place.
Also why can't socialist countries stand on their fucking own?
It's always BAAAAAWWWW muh US imperialism.
You guys controlled HALF THE FUCKING WORLD and you're still blaming capitalism for your miserable failures.

Lol reevaluate your life.

>>9588035

>Read about the regression to the mean and how it applies to IQ. In a nutshell: children of very smart and productive people are most likely to be less smart and productive than their parents. That’s why the turnover happens.

This is what I found.

>The Pearson correlation between
IQ score and net worth is roughly half (0.156, pb0.01) the
correlation between IQ score and income (0.297, pb0.01).
This reveals a weaker relationship between IQ scores and
wealth than between IQ scores and income.

IQ doesn't seem to matter that much when it comes to wealth was my point. It is definitely possible for the rich to stay rich even if they aren't very smart. Don't know about productivity. How do you even measure that? But I don't agree that the few should have everything while the rest have nothing regardless of what the trait is.

>>9588192
>I thought tasking over the means of production and getting your "surplus value back" would result in a massive boom to workers living standards regardless.
You need to develop your fucking economy regardless of what economic system you use. A semi-industrialised country is going to have lower living standards than an industrialised one. Every country that tried socialism was poor to start with (Note: Sweden is not socialist, that's social democracy). Which makes fucking sense because your citizens need to be pretty fucking pissed off in order to be motivated to violently seize the means of production. As we saw with the Russian and Cuban revolutions. America, Canada, etc. did a good job of bribing the working class to be compliant with social democratic reforms. The capitalist class used to actually be afraid that America, Canada, etc. would become socialist. They bribed the working class by letting them keep more of their money among other things. And what we saw Post-WWII was the fucking golden age for the working class in the west.

>>9588192
Once again, Canada, Switzerland, etc. had an enormous headstart on Yugoslavia.

And the US imperialists had trade embargos and other bullshit placed on Yugoslavia. If you're not allowed to sell your fucking exports, you can't buy imports. Without international trade, your standard of living is going to suffer. US imperialism was indeed very brutal. Yugoslavia from my understanding was reliant on exports to the United States. The US cut them off. They had to find other trade partners. The US was encouraging allies to black-ball Yugoslavia from trading. That has a devastating impact on the economy.

>>9588186
>It was still a disfunctional, unsustainable economy that fell apart during the oil crisis.
Yugoslavia should have diversified their economy more instead of focusing too much on oil. Canada has the same problem right now. Just not to the same extent. Canada is heavily dependent on oil exports. Once the price of oil tanked, the Canadian dollar went down a lot. Canada's import-to-export ratio increased. Which leads to problems like devaluing the dollar and can lead to inflation (I definitely think it caused inflation in Canada. What with the prices going up so often.)

>>9586714
Well, actually what ended the famines in europe was the birth of capitalism.

>>9588203
This is an argument against inheritance but not against higher income.
Regarding inter-generational wealth, there are studies that show that there is some truth to the saying “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations”. In a free market system, wealth tends to be accumulated at the top but it never stays in the same family for long. The only examples where wealth has stayed over generations in the same family are former aristocracies (large coercive states) like England.

>>9588296
I’m a former Yugoslav citizen. My mom was a high ranking member of the communist party. Yugoslavias economy had much larger problems than a mere lack of diversification. Bre bolje čuti ako ne znaš o čemu pričaš. Nemogu da vjerujem da ameri hoće socijalizam. Jebo vas Berni Sanders u dupe.

>>9588275
>You need to develop your fucking economy regardless of what economic system you use. A semi-industrialised country is going to have lower living standards than an industrialised one
This is absolutely fucking hilarious.
If what you say is true then the workers taking over the means of production will NOT BENEFIT THEM WHATSOEVER.

If Yugoslavia back then was totally capitalist they would have had higher living standards regardless of their industrial status.
If socialism helped people you would think the people that would be well if even if they were semi industrial.

>Which makes fucking sense because your citizens need to be pretty fucking pissed off in order to be motivated to violently seize the means of production. As we saw with the Russian and Cuban revolutions. America, Canada, etc. did a good job of bribing the working class to be compliant with social democratic reforms.

Kek, these social democratic reforms actually make the working class WORSE OFF.
Switzerland and Singapore have very few of these things and they have very free economies.
Why are their living standards so fucking high compared to social democracies like Greece and Spain?

>The capitalist class used to actually be afraid that America, Canada, etc. would become socialist. They bribed the working class by letting them keep more of their money among other things. And what we saw Post-WWII was the fucking golden age for the working class in the west.
The post world was 2 boom was caused by economic freedom and somewhat sound money.

It's hilarious you cannot even refute my argument that surplus value is impossible.
Let's watch you squirm about it more and refuse to talk about it.
Kill yourself
Kill all socialists.

>>9588275
>Once again, Canada, Switzerland, etc. had an enormous headstart on Yugoslavia.
So?
Shouldn't workers controlling the means of production have resulted in them having decently high living standards even though they weren't as industrialized as Canada?
Why did Canadian citizens back then have high living standards while they were "exploited" by the capitalists?

Why does capitalism result in high living standards for the working class?

Don't say social democratic reforms because real wages that capitalists paid to their workers were high in Canada resulting in Canada's high living standards back then.

>And the US imperialists had trade embargos and other bullshit placed on Yugoslavia
>BAAAAAAAAAWWWWW MUH US IMPERIALISM
Socialists controlled HALF THE WORLD and had controlled it for quite some time.
Why didn't they trade with each other?
Certainly they shouldn't have to rely on capitalist countries?
The usa didn't rely on the ussr for their economic well being.

What a fucking joke.

You people are a religious cult that want to be enslaved.

>>9588667
If your economy is one where people are still living in mud huts, they aren't going to magically achieve prosperity overnight if they adopt socialism. lmao. You have to develop your economy regardless of what economic system you use.

The west is very rich. We have lots of resources, developed human capital, etc. No reason why we can't provide a decent life for everyone. Instead of having a society where (((Mark Zuckerberg))) has $70 billion and people in America are fucking dying because they can't afford health insurance.

>>9586279
most of the deaths from socialist countries are from famines, so actually yes, we expect you to fucking starve to death, faggot.

>>9588716
>Don't say social democratic reforms because real wages that capitalists paid to their workers were high in Canada resulting in Canada's high living standards back then.
Are you fucking kidding me dude? Income inequality in the 1920s is about what it is now and the system came crashing down. It wasn't until after World War II before there was a golden age for the US "middle class". After the New Deal reforms were implemented.

>>9588722
>If your economy is one where people are still living in mud huts
They had industry, the USSR had industry.
Both of these countries had terrible living standards.

>they aren't going to magically achieve prosperity overnight if they adopt socialism. lmao.
Nobody is talking about mud huts lmao why are you people so stupid?

>You have to develop your economy regardless of what economic system you use.
But the workers get their surplus value back?
Shouldn't this have added dramatically to their living standards even though they weren't as industrialized?

>No reason why we can't provide a decent life for everyone.
Yes, that reason is scarcity.

>Instead of having a society where (((Mark Zuckerberg))) has $70 billion and people in America are fucking dying because they can't afford health insurance.
TOP KEK
I already explained how taking their money won't result in the working class being able to buy more stuff(including healthcare).

Why did you give a fuck about the money the rich have?
Taking it and giving it to the working class will just cause mass inflation.
The rich consume very little actual consumer goods. It's a drop in the bucket.
Clearly the rich aren't the problem here.
Debunk me, you literally can not.

Please realize how retarded your ideology is.

>>9588782
>TOP KEK
>I already explained how taking their money won't result in the working class being able to buy more stuff(including healthcare).
>Why did you give a fuck about the money the rich have?
>Taking it and giving it to the working class will just cause mass inflation.
>The rich consume very little actual consumer goods. It's a drop in the bucket.
>Clearly the rich aren't the problem here.
Then why the fuck do rich people want to hold onto their shares in companies? Why don't they just fucking sell the shares? BECAUSE BEING PART OF THE OWNERSHIP CLASS BEATS BEING A WAGE KEK. FFS. You're literally arguing that they don't have any material benefit from owning the means of production. You are peak classcuck.

>>9588777
>Are you fucking kidding me dude? Income inequality in the 1920s is about what it is now and the system came crashing down.
Income inequality is an irrelevant, deceptive statistic.
The economy collapsed because the federal reserve pumped a fuckton money into the stock market, which resulted in mass economic distortions, which crashed.
Instead of letting the economy repair itself, Hoover and FDR heavily intervened in the economy causing the depression.
They literally paid farmers to destroy their own crops lmao

>It wasn't until after World War II before there was a golden age for the US "middle class". After the New Deal reforms were implemented.
Kek, you're wrong, these new deal reforms were mostly abolished after WW2 when spending, taxes and regulations were cut resulting in the most economically productive year in American history.
The post war boom was a mostly free market period. We are still on a semi gold standard and taxes were relatively low.

Also we were taking about Canada you fucking idiot.

>>9588792
>Then why the fuck do rich people want to hold onto their shares in companies? Why don't they just fucking sell the shares? BECAUSE BEING PART OF THE OWNERSHIP CLASS BEATS BEING A WAGE KEK. FFS.
HAHAHAHA
I ALREADY EXPLAINED THIS EARLIER IN THE THREAD AND YOU IGNORED ME LMAO
Of course it benefits them personally you gigantic moron.
All I was saying is the total amount of resources they consume in the economy is incredibly low compared to what the working class consumes.
This is an objective fact.
Please explain where the consumer goods needed to justify this "surplus value" is supposed to come from of the working class already consumes 99% of the end products of what they produce.

>You're literally arguing that they don't have any material benefit from owning the means of production.
I never once said that.

>You are peak classcuck.
>YOU'RE A KEK BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE ENSLAVING YOU AND TAKING ALL OF YOUR RESOURCES
Holy shit lmao you wastes of life unironically want to be enslaved.

>>9588782
>But the workers get their surplus value back?
>Shouldn't this have added dramatically to their living standards even though they weren't as industrialized?

The strength of your economy is determined by three factors
- Natural resources
- "Human capital" (skill set of the labour force)
- International trade

If you don't have natural resources, if you don't have a developed workforce and you don't have international trade (preferably balanced international trade or else this causes problems for your economy), you're not going to have a strong economy. Period. The USSR's human capital was less developed than the west when they adopted capitalism. It was mostly a peasant rural society. With some industrialisation. You need a skilled labourforce in order to have prosperity. Period.

Yea. The majority of commies don't know how business really operates. Big business pushes for costly regulation, because it wipes out startups and competitors. Commies think reading Marx teaches them the inner workings of business. They are fucking clueless.

>>9587044
first of all, taxes arent a small piece like in your pic in most western countries. in gayrope, i get taxed ~70% of my income (when accounting to employer taxes, social security, vat, etc).
second of all, i voluntarily agree to work for my employer, understanding that the value i create is larger than what he pays me (it wouldnt make any sense to hire me otherwise), but i have no choice in paying taxes. if one day i decide that my employer pays me too little compared to my created value, i can leave. otoh, if i one day decide that the beuro rats take too much of my income in taxes, i will get thrown in jail.

>>9588849
USSR was already decently industrialized at this point.
These seem like incredibly pathetic excuses.
Why did they have much lower living standards than let's say finland which had about the same amount of industry as USSR?

>>9588836
>HAHAHAHA
>I ALREADY EXPLAINED THIS EARLIER IN THE THREAD AND YOU IGNORED ME LMAO
Of course it benefits them personally you gigantic moron.
>All I was saying is the total amount of resources they consume in the economy is incredibly low compared to what the working class consumes.
>This is an objective fact.
>Please explain where the consumer goods needed to justify this "surplus value" is supposed to come from of the working class already consumes 99% of the end products of what they produce.

Oh so you're telling me that rich people don't consume a lot of resources with the dividends they get from the billions and billions of dollars of shares they own? They just literally sit on their wealth? GTFO here.

>>9588875
I'm already debunking this kid on surplus value so the surplus value part of that image is bullshit too.

>>9588881
Decently industrialised? What are you talking about? Russia was a fucking aristocratic peasant shithole when the Russian Revolution happened.

>>9588875
Well I'm sorry that you live in a cuckold country to be paying 70% on taxes. That's not what socialism is about. that's social democracy.

>>9588884
>Oh so you're telling me that rich people don't consume a lot of resources with the dividends they get from the billions and billions of dollars of shares they own?
They don't actually.
After they bought their mansions, cars and yachts the rest is saved or invested.
These goods are expensive, yes, but there's such an astronomically small amount of super rich people that the amount of consumer goods actually consumed is a drop in the bucket.
>They just literally sit on their wealth?
Actually yeah, they do that or they reinvest it.
How is your iq that low that you don't know this?

>GTFO here.
This isn't your board you socialist faggot.
Get the fuck out, we throw you animals from helicopters here.

>>9588893
I was talking about in the 70s brainlet.
We were talking about Yugoslavia then switched to ussr.

>>9588905
Actual unironical socialism is much worse.

>>9588916
>They don't actually.
After they bought their mansions, cars and yachts the rest is saved or invested.
>These goods are expensive, yes, but there's such an astronomically small amount of super rich people that the amount of consumer goods actually consumed is a drop in the bucket.
So what's the whole fucking point of being a billionaire then if they don't enjoy their money? lmao. You say they reinvest and never get to enjoy all their money? Why? Why would anyone do that?

>Get the fuck out, we throw you animals from helicopters here.
Oh really? that's why you alt-right cucks get fired from employment and black-balled from employment after the antifa cucks doxx you guys right? lmao. Yeah you totally run shit. We're totally gonna return to the era of helicopter rides. I love it when antifa uses the power of the free market (getting your employer to fire your asses) to cuckold you guys. How ironic.

>>9588905
i have a close friend that lived under socialism is ussr. fyi, they were taxed basically 99% (that is everybody was forced to work, most without any compensation). all of the value created went to state for redistribution, but the people responsible for that were taking everything to themselves. thats how socialism always ends up, thats were "not true socialism" meme comes from, kid.
also, the value created was multiple times lower than it wouldve been under capitalism and free market. he told me how he worked in a shoe factory making the same ugly shoe model. they would receive order from government to produce a certain amount of pairs a month. nobody cared how many pairs were necessary, a corrupt beuro rat simply told them a number. what they ended up with was thousands of pairs of ugly shoes that nobody wanted that would rot or be thrown away.

>>9588978
>what they ended up with was thousands of pairs of ugly shoes that nobody wanted that would rot or be thrown away.
Then the leaders in that particular country were incompetent.

>but the people responsible for that were taking everything to themselves
and corrupt

Poor leadership leads to disaster regardless of the economic system used. I can show you examples of capitalist countries that are total shitholes. Like Haiti. Because the people running Haiti are retards with a sub-70 IQ probably.

>>9586601
Actually, the closest things to capitalism without laws holding it back led to slavery and the conditions far worse than slavery in England that resulted in several of the works that inspired Marx.

Every single one of capitalism's great leaps has led to conditions too horrible to imagine for the people actually doing the work.

>>9585252
Bureau Rat is not a rat, it's a gerbil

>>9588953
>So what's the whole fucking point of being a billionaire
personal benefit
why is this so confusing for you?

>then if they don't enjoy their money? lmao
HAHAHAHAH
HOLY FUCK
When did I ONCE say or imply this whatsoever?
You people truly are brainlets.

>You say they reinvest and never get to enjoy all their money?
I literally just said they buy a bunch of shit they want for themselves then they save the rest of the money or reinvest it.
Why is this so confusing for you?

There's no material benefit for the working class if they took over the means of production.
Why do you want to take over the means of production if you get ZERO benefit from it and all of the risks?

>Oh really?
YES
This is the business and finance board.
All things marxists want to destroy.
Everyone hates your guts here even MORE than they do on /pol/.

>that's why you alt-right cucks get fired from employment
I rarely hear this happening, but okay?

>after the antifa cucks doxx you
lmao antifa gets doxxed so incredibly hardcore.
Almost all youtube videos on antifa are videos some them getting absolutely BTFO.
You people always get rekt in the streets in USA.

>Yeah you totally run shit.
/pol/ does though, no need to get all butthurt over it.

>We're totally gonna return to the era of helicopter rides.
lmao wait for the next economic collapse buddy

>getting your employer to fire your asses
antifa doesnt even have jobs in the first place
and the ones they do, /pol/ finds a way to fire them

This is /biz/.
leftycucks need to leave.

>>9589000
>Then the leaders in that particular country were incompetent.
it's not incompetency, it's the entire system
when you enslave people and take away their will to live and make a life for themselves, they aren't going to want to create and innovate
no WONDER all of the shoes in USSR sucked

>I can show you examples of capitalist countries that are total shitholes. Like Haiti.
AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Haiti is one of the least economically free countries on EARTH.
NO SHIT they're poor as fuck.
https://www.heritage.org/index/country/haiti

Why do countries that embrace economic freedom have high living standards for their people?

WHY?
You people can't explain this.

>>9589117
>personal benefit
>why is this so confusing for you?
What personal benefit is it to them to own the means of production if apparently they're not consuming a lot of resources anyways?

>There's no material benefit for the working class if they took over the means of production.
Why do you want to take over the means of production if you get ZERO benefit from it and all of the risks?
Yes tell that to the tens of millions of Americans who die because they can't afford health insurance. Canada, Sweden, etc. are not even socialist, they are a mixed economy, and they managed to make health care fucking work. Why can't the US?

>>9589017
>Actually, the closest things to capitalism without laws holding it back
USA during the gilded age.
Greatest increase in human living standards in american history.
People came from all over europe to work in american factories which had high wages.
Capitalism freed these people.

>>9585352
>capitalism is specifically designed to lead to concentration of wealth in the hands of the few. larger corporations benefit from economies of scale. so they can afford to under-cut ma and pa shops on prices. they can afford to pay their workers more.
In practice this only happens when natural monopolies form, e.g. oil, water, etc. Otherwise, competition will always threaten even large companies and keep them in check.

>>9588953
You've never worked a day in your life or understood the importance of investments before have you?

>>9589208
>You've never worked a day in your life or understood the importance of investments before have you?
Yes you invest money with the goal that you or your kids are going to enjoy that money one day yes? So the wealthy do consume a shit load of resources then no? Considering that the wealthy do own a shit ton of the wealth in our society. And they're gonna have to consume that wealth eventually. Otherwise what's the point? Invest, invest, invest, what's the pay-off?

>>9589160
>What personal benefit is it to them to own the means of production if apparently they're not consuming a lot of resources anyways?
Son, listen, and listen carefully.
Take all of the consumer goods consumed by the capitalists in 10 years vs all of the consumer goods consumed by the working class in 10 years.
The capitalists would have consumed less than 1% of all goods produced in the economy.
A single capitalist consumes what looks like a lot of resources(big house, cars, yachts etc) so personally to that individual capitalist they are benefiting a lot. But when you take the total number of resources consumed by the capitalist class, vs the working class, it's incredibly small. There is such a small number of capitalists so in comparison to what the working class consumes it's a drop in the bucket.
How then is it possible to get "surplus value" back from the capitalists, if the working class consumes 99% of the end products of what they produce?
HOW?
They LITERALLY CANNOT.

>Yes tell that to the tens of millions of Americans who die because they can't afford health insurance.
LMAO WHAT THE FUCK DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING? HOLY SHIT YOU'RE DUMB
First of all USA healthcare system is expensive because it's a bureaucratic government mess. Healthcare used to be cheap as fuck in the USA in the 50s/60s back when it was much more of a free market.
Countries with government healthcare just ration their care leading to lack of care. Look at the NHS.
Switzerland and singapore have privatized healthcare but they have more of a market system than the USA so their healthcare is much cheaper.

This is an ENTIRELY different conversation though because the point is that the working class consumes 99% of all consumer goods, if you took rich people's wealth and gave it to the working class it would just cause massive inflation.
It doesn't matter the good, healthcare, food, clothing, the same thing applies.

The working class would get NOTHING from doing this.

>>9589253
>Considering that the wealthy do own a shit ton of the wealth in our society.
again, brainlet
you're not understanding this
they own MONEY

not consumer goods.
You WANT consumer goods
The working class consumes 99% of consumer goods.

>And they're gonna have to consume that wealth eventually.
Again, no.
Most of the money is saved or invested.

ALSO, if you took all of the capitalists money and divided it amounts the working class it would amount to like 2 thousand dollars or something. HOLY SHIT, it's NOTHING

>Invest, invest, invest, what's the pay-off?
some people like to invest for fun, ask warren buffet

>>9589253
>And they're gonna have to consume that wealth eventually.
no they wont
I thought you guys always whine about "capital accumulation".

>>9589253
another thing,

rich people saving money, only increases the value of all other money in the economy

rich people saving money means the working class gets to consume MORE resources because the money the working class uses to consume their goods goes up in value and they can buy more

>>9589287
>Switzerland and singapore have privatized healthcare but they have more of a market system than the USA so their healthcare is much cheaper.

dude, swiss healthcare is the second most expensive worldwide and get's worse each year. Each year you pay about 10% more and get less in return. It's fucked and for the poor people the state has to pay their healthcare expenses. It's FUBAR as it is right know. If anything you should compare it to France, which is completely state regulated and way cheaper.

>>9589342
>get's
What's up with you?

>>9589000
>Poor leadership leads to disaster regardless of the economic system used.
Communism puts leaders far away from the product.
The best leaders are walking beside the workers monitoring quality directly.
Communism puts leaders far removed from the product, leading to a poor feedback loop and middle-managers intercepting complaints.
Leadership has to be localized and responsive.

>>9589342
>swiss healthcare is the second most expensive worldwide
KEK
The Swiss have one of the strongest currencies on earth. Everything costs more over there because people think in terms of non swiss currencies.
To the average Swiss person, it's not that bad at all.

>It's fucked and for the poor people the state has to pay their healthcare expenses.
LOL There is hardly any poor people in Switzerland anyway.
The reason it's gone up in price is because the government is controlling it more now and pumping the price up.
Up until recently it was the envy of the world.

Their healthcare system has ZERO waiting lines as well. Compare that to UK.

>If anything you should compare it to France, which is completely state regulated and way cheaper.
France healthcare system is a fucking joke, same with UK. High taxes, waiting lines, denial of care and bureaucracy.

>>9587044
>surplus value
Oh boy. This is fake as fuck. The problem with this entire theory is people value shit different dependent on time preferences. Labors value money more now, while capitalists value it more in the future which makes surplus value evaporate because Marx is wrong about capital being valued in wage time. Its not. Someone's utility for an item is what makes it valuable, and because this isn't set in stone it can be affected by time preferences. Since the two value time differently the exchange in the free market is not only consensual, but un-exploitative.

>>9589368
>KEK
>LOL
Yea don't listen to the natives, you got dem keks and lols...

>>9587843
>Jeff Bezos only eats 2500 calories a day
>this is all the surplus value he extracts from the economy
Capitalists deserve better thinkers to defend them, you fucking idiot.

>>9589000
i totally agree. the problem with socialism and communism is that it prevents smart and competent leaders (bourgeoisie) from achieving positions of power and leading to corrupt retards making decisions. while there are plenty of corrupt retards in capital societies, the system itself does not encourage it. also, because of corrupt idiots its necessary to have as small of government as possible. im not full ancap, but i think governments only duties should be ensuring sovereignty of the country and protecting people and environment from unchecked businesses (this includes monopolies, intentionally lying and scamming people, etc.), but the whole social welfare bullcrap only leads to increased poverty.

>>9589408
>>this is all the surplus value he extracts from the economy
It objectively is though.
Prove to me it's not.
Money is irrelevant.

He personally consumes almost nothing yet the business he created produces countless jobs for the masses, lowers prices and makes things more convenient for people.

What "surplus" is he extracting?
If he gave all of that money to the working class, the working class would be just eating inflation.

ALSO, you need to kill yourself for being so retarded

>>9589411
>this includes monopolies,
impossible in a free market

>intentionally lying and scamming people, etc.
Literally PART of the free market.
It's called anti-fraud laws.
The problem is they aren't being enforced anymore.

>>9589310
>Again, no.
>Most of the money is saved or invested.
>ALSO, if you took all of the capitalists money and divided it amounts the working class it would amount to like 2 thousand dollars or something. HOLY SHIT, it's NOTHING
You fucking brainlet what is the fucking point of saving and investing that money indefinitely? What's the fucking point? They intend to consume their wealth eventually. Or their ancestors will.

What is the fucking point of having all that money just to save and re-invest?

You literally fucking believe that there aren't enough resources in the United States to provide food, shelter, clothing, health insurance, transportation to everyone? You gotta be fucking kidding me. Look at all the food that supermarkets and restaurants throw out. I talked to a dumpster diver on /r9k/ who said that he would go to the garbage bin of a Subway in order to get free thrown out cold cuts and bread.

>>9589442
wtf are you talking about, ofc monopolies can arise even in totally free market. one of the things encouraging monopolies is economies of scale: your operational expenses become smaller part of you total income the bigger you become, thus pushing smaller guys out of the market. in a totally free market theres also all kinds of immoral tactics a big business can use like price gauging, working at a loss short term to bankrupt your competitors, terrorizing them, etc.
as for anti-fraud laws, there wouldnt be any in a full ancap society. you need someone to enforce the laws, thats were the concept of government comes in handy.

>>9589499
>what is the fucking point of saving and investing that money indefinitely?
Who said this do this indefinitely?
They do it until they want to retire, then they keep a portion of their money in stocks etc so it still makes a return over time.
Some capitalists however just LIKE running businesses, I know it's hard for your small brain to understand.

>Or their ancestors will.
Maybe but most generational wealth gets destroyed because the son or grandson is incompetent or their business gets outcompeted.

>What is the fucking point of having all that money just to save and re-invest?
At a certain point, you already have everything you ever wanted so you don't even touch your money.

>You literally fucking believe that there aren't enough resources in the United States to provide food, shelter, clothing, health insurance, transportation to everyone?

>food
There is already an abundance of food in this country, some people go hungry because they're brainlets but there are still soup kitchens. But the main problem is inflation causing food prices to go up.

>shelter
There is. Government boosts the price of houses with central banking so it's very difficult for poorer people to afford them.

>clothing
Literally everyone has clothes dude.

>health insurance
Everyone USED to have healthcare, back when there was a free market, see my previous post.

>I talked to a dumpster diver on /r9k/ who said that he would go to the garbage bin of a Subway in order to get free thrown out cold cuts and bread.
Why would restaurants throw out perfectly good food and WASTE MONEY on it?
They would get outcompeted by companies that were more conservative with their food.
That food that is wasted is most likely expired.
I worked in food service, I know.

Either way these are minor things really.
None of this has to do with "surplus value" anyway.
Taking over the means of production will not allow the working class to consume more things, it would just cause inflation.

>>9589532
Becoming bigger comes with huges downsides too.
You get stale, there is a lot of bereucracy involved in your company.
While small companies can change things drasticly if they think its needed you wont be able too.
The main reason why big companies are so powerful nowadays is because they can afford lobbiest that give them a huge lead and destroy their competition.
Ever notice that the more the government got involved in the economy (to "prevent) monopolies
The opposite happened?

>>9589532
>ofc monopolies can arise even in totally free market
NAME ONE
inb4 standard oil, they were never a monopoly, in fact they were a massive boom to mankind
>63% market share is a monopoly
AHAHAHHA

also inb4 debeers which was a government granted monopoly

also inb4 natural monopolies which is another debate altogether

>price gauging,
How dare those evil companies lower prices for the working class. GOD DAMN WALMART RREEEEEEEEE

It's just so funny that these "monopolistic practices" were mostly a myth and there are no real examples of monopolies in free markets without government intervention

>there wouldnt be any in a full ancap society
Yes there would you fucking idiot.
Anti-fraud laws is literally PART of the free market.
There would be polycentric law agencies and JUDGES to determine if fraud actually took place

>you need someone to enforce the laws
WAAIT LMAO
do you think ancap has NO LAWS or something?
read a book nigga
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycentric_law

>>9589532
>wtf are you talking about, ofc monopolies can arise even in totally free market.
You don't understand business.
Mature business can't innovate. Preserving profits from current customers is paramount.
Innovation is gambling for them. It's too risky.
Only startups innovate because they have nothing to lose.
Big businesses always buy startups to stay competitive.
Monopolies are paper tigers. Startups are always sprouting up to overthrow them.
Big business relies on heavy regulation to suppress startups and stay in power.
A quick example is New Yorks's Bitlicense. Only 4 companies can trade bitcoin in New York. 100s of brokers are kicked out. Now the entire state has 4 companies to choose from. That's how the rich stay on top in the 21st century.

>>9589728
price gauging is only good for consumers only in the very short term. guess what happens after a company reaches monopoly? the prices are increased several times over what would be offered if there was competition. this actually happened in my country: there were two big gas station companies and about a dozen small ones. the two big guys made and agreement to lower the price of gas in their stations below profit line (they were losing money in my county, but since they had gas stations in other ones they could sustain it). in my county they were actually stopped and fined by the governments competition council, while in the other county they did the same thing several years ago without intervention. the smaller competitors went bankrupt and the prices of gas increased dramatically in those two big companies (so much that people still go to my county, driving ~200km just to buy gas).
your polycentric law is currently just an idea. its and interesting one, but it has never been put to practice, so its retarded to use it as an argument for anything at the moment.
>>9589710
i agree, oftentimes the government is the one making the monopolies with their over regulation, but jumping from one extreme (over regulation) to another (no regulation) is simply retarded. a small, minimal government is necessary to ensure fair competition.

>>9585252
>Kevin's GIMP peppers
someone enjoys free software?

>>9589847
>after a company reaches monopoly
how can a company "reach" monopoly?

There is ALWAYS competition.
If a company dramatically raised prices it would result in a gigantic profit opportunity for another firm or NEW firms to lower their prices and take the market share.
also anti trust laws are fucking retarded and only fuck over consumers
abolish them

>>9589847
>the two big guys made and agreement to lower the price of gas in their stations below profit line
OH NO HOW HORRIBLE, PRICES FOR CONSUMERS HAVE BEEN REDUCED

HOW ARE WE GOING TO BE PRICE GOUGED NOW?

>the smaller competitors went bankrupt and the prices of gas increased dramatically in those two big companies
Create a massive profit opportunity for anyone to sell gas at a much lower price

>>9589686
>There is already an abundance of food in this country, some people go hungry because they're brainlets but there are still soup kitchens. But the main problem is inflation causing food prices to go up.
You do know that when there is inflation, that means that printed money is going somewhere and that someone is buying goods and services with that money right? Do you want a hint as to where that money is going? Worker wages have not kept pace with inflation. But the S&P500 has beat inflation. There is your answer. It's the bourgeoisie that is benefiting from this money printing. Not the workers. Follow the money. It works every time.

>There is. Government boosts the price of houses with central banking so it's very difficult for poorer people to afford them.
And who is benefiting from this money printing? The bourgeoisie. See a pattern? You ancaps say "but crony capitalism!" But the rich are actively bribing politicians in their favour. The bourgeoisie are our enemies. We should strip away their power not give them even more power.

>Everyone USED to have healthcare, back when there was a free market, see my previous post.
If health insurance in the US in the 50s/60s (which you considered the pinnacle) was so great, why was the life expectancy in the US for white males only 67.55 years in 1959-1961 (Mad Men era you love so much)? https://www.infoplease.com/us/mortality/life-expectancy-age-1850-2011

>>9589686
Forgot to add to my top:
Not only did the S&P500 beat inflation but the income of the top 1% also beat inflation. As you can see from the graph I posted above.

Inflation just doesn't come out of nowhere. Someone is benefiting from inflation. When you print money, it has to go somewhere for it to cause inflation.

>>9589896
>>9589910
are you actually retarded, or just a teenager who doesnt know shit about starting a business?
again, the price gauging is nice in the very short term. sure, you get cheap gas for like 6 months. after that youre going to pay through the roof for your gas or drive 200km just to fill your tank.
and you cant just instantly spin up a new business. in my example, the smaller gas stations were all bought by the duopoly. if you want to start a new gas station, you need starting capital to build it, to buy your first gas supply, etc., and you need to make a profit rather soon to recoup your initial investment. but what kind of idiot (well i guess you) would risk his capital to start a business in this environment, where the duopoly will lower their prices as soon as you open your doors? you will go bankrupt soon, they will buy out your station for pennies on a dollar and raise the prices again.
thats how the real world works, this actually happened and is happening around the world. this isnt some academics pondering bullshit in their free time, like your fantasy polycentric law idea.

>>9589728
There are natural monopolies in infrastructure Mike roads for example

>>9589978
>>9590011
only a brainlet would disagree with you. the worst part is that you do not understand were the problem is arising from: the problem is the government. the more power and influence the government has, the more corrupt it will be.
and your answer is "MOAR GUBERMENT!!!1!", which will only lead to more corruption, more incompetence, more suffering, more poverty.

>>9590045
>only a brainlet would disagree with you. the worst part is that you do not understand were the problem is arising from: the problem is the government. the more power and influence the government has, the more corrupt it will be.
>and your answer is "MOAR GUBERMENT!!!1!", which will only lead to more corruption, more incompetence, more suffering, more poverty.
The solution is good government, not no government. I would be afraid of my fucking life if we had no government. I'd just be going to Wal-Mart minding my own business and then I'd get jumped by a high-T low-inhibition BBC in the parking lot.

>>9586910
> someone will eventually attain enough power to impose rules on everyone else
> therefore let's appoint someone to impose rules on everyone else.
k

>>9589978
>pic
that graph looks extremely familiar
nixon got us off the gold standard in 1971, this allowed the central bank to print trillions of dollars and basically give it to rich people/wall street
NO fucking SHIT 1% incomes have risen while everyone else stagnated

>that means that printed money is going somewhere and that someone is buying goods and services with that money right?

>Do you want a hint as to where that money is going?
It's going throughout the entire economy. To think central bank inflation is pumping the price of food because capitalists are buying more food is fucking hilariously retarded. I mean how dumb can you possibly be?
Inflation goes throughout the entire economy.


>Worker wages have not kept pace with inflation. But the S&P500 has beat inflation.
Exactly. Libertarians have been warning about this for a very long time.

>It's the bourgeoisie that is benefiting from this money printing. Not the workers.
NO SHIT YOU FUCKING RETARD
Most marxists totally ignore the money printing aspect though and claim it's capital accumulation from their businesses.

If we had no central bank, the working class would a lot better off.
Socialists and keynesians cucks love central banking though.
You love central banking.

>You ancaps say "but crony capitalism!"
It's just government intervention benefiting the rich at the expense of the poor.
>But the rich are actively bribing politicians in their favour.
No fucking shit.
We've been fighting against this since forever.
If you shrink the size of government, then there is nothing to bribe.

>The bourgeoisie are our enemies.
Marxist class analysis is nonsensical.

>>9589978
>why was the life expectancy in the US for white males only 67.55 years in 1959-1961
>MUH LIFE EXPECTACY
IS this ACTUALLY your argument?
Life expectancy in most industrialized countries at the time was only slightly higher than this.
Either way, nobody went without healthcare. The system worked.
Technology is better now so obviously people are living longer.
Technology is better now so the price should be coming DOWN in price.

>>9590045
socialists are fucking brainlets, of course he would ask for more government to solve this problem

>>9590117
>The solution is good government, not no government
BULL FUCKING SHIT
Government CAUSED this problem in the first place with central banks and now you want the same institution that caused the problem to have even more power?
Clearly the market(which is voluntary) would be far superior to more government intervention.

>I would be afraid of my fucking life if we had no government.
I want a small government that protects life, liberty and property.

>>9588018
> implying autists won't get autistic about self defense if it's called for.
/k

hey brainlet here

i see you guys having all these deep political discussions and sheit

i wanna join in but i don't get anything your saying

any recommended books/videos to learn about the basics of politics? thanks

>>9590012
>after that youre going to pay through the roof for your gas or drive 200km just to fill your tank.
im pretty sure you read this in a leftist tabloid somewhere
I bet they only raised prices for a week or so then the government immediately put these antitrust laws in.

If there is a MASSIVE profit to be made, people are going to act on it immediately.

also what kind of shithole only has 2 gas station companies? lol

>and you need to make a profit rather soon to recoup your initial investment.
Larger companies have enough money to invest in this and would be brainlets to not take advantage.

>like your fantasy polycentric law idea.
How is it a fantasy if it ACTUALLY HAPPENED irl?

>>9585252
>He isnt a Natsoc or Fascist

>>9586409
>>9586783
Capitalism requires government intervention
Things such as copyright cannot exist without governments enforcing it.

>>9590152
>Socialists and keynesians cucks love central banking though.
So did Alexander Hamilton, was he a socialist?

>>9590117
there is no such thing as "good government". as the saying goes: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
im not advocating no government at all, as i mentioned multiple times, i think that small and minimal government is necessary. by small and minimal i mean we could easily slash ~90% of all public sector and benefit massively from it.
>>9590253
this actually fucking happened, retard. and the county that its still happening (for about two years now) is was lobbied to no end and there are still lawsuits between government (wanting to impose antitrust laws) and those two companies (who are price gauging).
again, nobody is willing to enter the market that is stupidly manipulated even if its theoretically possible to get massive profits. why would anyone risk their initial investment and capital just to be strong armed out without fair competition?
and it wasnt a shithole with 2 gas station companies before they started price gauging. there were dozens of smaller ones that went bankrupt during the price gauging.

Why do all commies sound like 16yo angry emo kids?

>>9585252
>being a brainlet

>>9590433
>Things such as copyright cannot exist without governments enforcing it.
Nonsense. If somebody steals your content, you can just go shoot them. That doesn't require government.
>>9590518
because they never matured mentally, or they are actual children
please note that nobody below the age of 30 has a valid opinion about politics or the economy, because they lack fundamental life experience and physical maturity of the brain

>>9590236
go on mises.org and read some shit

go on mises videos on youtube and read about american history

>>9590559
>please note that nobody below the age of 30 has a valid opinion about politics or the economy, because they lack fundamental life experience and physical maturity of the brain
Yeah ok boomer

>>9590433
Patents and copyright are violent government interventions in the free market.

>>9590475
>So did Alexander Hamilton, was he a socialist?
AH was literally a fascist piece of shit that wanted to set up a monarchy in the USA.
Fuck him.

>>9590495
>this actually fucking happened
source?

>>9590292
>>9590544
>not being a capitalist fascist

>>9590559
>nobody below the age of 30 has a valid opinion about politics or the economy
Narcissistic generalizing statement. 'Life experience' has nothing to do with one's philosophical advancements.

>>9590565
hearing a 20-something talk about politics is like listening to a grade school kid talk about sports
>>9590590
> 'Life experience' has nothing to do with one's philosophical advancements.
Yes it does, kiddo. Philosophy is meaningless vanity without practical application, and you simply have not had enough time to experience the true outcome of your lifestyle when you are in your early-mid 20's.

>>9590152
>that graph looks extremely familiar
>nixon got us off the gold standard in 1971, this allowed the central bank to print trillions of dollars and basically give it to rich people/wall street
>NO fucking SHIT 1% incomes have risen while everyone else stagnated
Yes exactly. Where we differ is in our suggested solutions. I wish to replace the government we have now with a Marxist-Leninist government. One that is loyal to the working class. And have a centrally planned economy. Ideally I would be El Presidente. But politics is a very dirty game. I truly feel that the far-left is dead in the west. It's over-taken by SJWs. There aren't any real old-school Marxist-Leninist's left. On /leftypol/ I have been called a Nazi (National Socialist) and Nazbol (National Bolshevik). I don't consider myself a nationalist. Let alone a WN. But anyone who doesn't tow the SJW line is a Nazi or Nazbol in their eyes. I want the SJW cancer to die. But the truth is, they are winning the culture war. Not the alt-right. When the antifa cucks have the power to get people fired, they are winning. It doesn't matter that Trump is in. Capitalists don't want to associate with anything politically incorrect because they don't want to tarnish their brand.

>If we had no central bank, the working class would a lot better off.
>Socialists and keynesians cucks love central banking though.
>You love central banking.
Nothing wrong with having a central bank if the right people are in charge and have the right agenda. The problem with a gold standard is that if the government needs to print more money for something that is beneficial to society, they can't. Like say investing more money into health care or nationalising private businesses so that the means of production is now owned by the worker's republic.

>>9590573
At least have the honesty to understand that "capitalist Fascist" is inherently a paradox due to Fascism's non-compliance with strictly materialist ideals.
>>9590236
Disregard the retarded nigger telling you to read mises. You want to get a grasp real nigga shit, read Decline of the West by Oswald Spengler but keep an open mind. Alternatively, here's a good list to start drinking off of
>pic related
You can disregard Mein Kampf if you'd like (bulky, often tiring and long wided book, there's other work that better transmit the principles behind National Socialism, ironically)
You can also trade The Jews and Their Lies by Culture of Critique which is 100x better, and absolutely leave any of Evola's works to the very end. You need to truly learn how to read before you tackle his shit.
>hearing a 20-something talk about politics is like listening to a grade school kid talk about sports
>Philosophy is meaningless vanity without practical application
I just found this thread's n1 brainlet and it isn't even a communist, incredible!

>>9590572
Patents and copyright incentivize advancements. E.g. no one will sink millions into a drug research if someone can copy it afterwards and sell it for production costs+profit margin. How do you solve this?
>>9590606
>Philosophy is meaningless vanity without practical application
Talk about mental immaturity, boomer. Whatever helps you cope.

>>9590572
not gonna start doxxing myself.
just google "price fixing" and "cartels". theres thousands of examples of private sector messing with free market fundamentals. thats why small and minimal (only with power to stop and fine companies from skewing free market, not with power to influence it as most governments have right now) government is necessary.

>>9590236
oh and START WITH THE GREEKS is a staple lit/ meme for a fucking reason, Platonism and Neoplatonism will serve you for the rest of your life and beyond >>9590630

pic related for fags who want to get into Evolian philosophy but haven't managed to break into it yet

>>9590630
I do know a about Fascism's non-compliance with strictly materialist ideals, but i don't see how fascist state wouldn't or couldn't facilitate a free-market.

>>9590679
Wasn't that achieved to the extent that the principles allow it, in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy?

>>9590646
>t. triggered millennial who thinks his word games, thought experiments, and self-identity matter because the internet told him so
>>9590673
>more books written before instantaneous verifiable global communication was invented and adopted
the human experience has changed at a fundamental level, everything written about it before the internet, smartphones, and a global economy and labor pool is irrelevant

>>9590608
there is no such thing as good government, you fucking brainlet. your idea would be ideal if it was possible to implement, but it is not. if were talking fantasies, i think the best political setup would be to have no government at all for 10 years and then an absolute power wielding, but benevolent dictator for 2 years to clean all the shit accumulated over the decade up. the problem is that there is no such a thing as benevolent dictator and you wouldnt be benevolent el presidente either. you would be just like all the other communist maniacal murderers have been.

>>9590694
You're the one who sounds triggered if anything. Are you sure you're not projecting?

Communists and Socialists are losers.

>>9590608
>I wish to replace the government we have now with a Marxist-Leninist government.
Yes and I wish to slaughter every single one of you brainwashed psychopaths and implement a free market.
It's unbelievable that people like you actually exist, it must be genetic for you to be this stupid, cultlike and evil.

>One that is loyal to the working class.
You mean an absolute dictatorship with zero accountability.
One that calls themselves "the working class" but fucks over working people every time it can.
Sounds exactly like every socialist country in history.

>centrally planned economy
failed every single time

>On /leftypol/
Go back to your low post count dying shithole board and never return.

I already explained and PROVED that the working class will not benefit from taking over the means of production and you simply ignore it.

Answer the question, how can the working class get MORE than what is virtually everything?
You're in a religious cult and you refuse to question your own ideology.

>Nothing wrong with having a central bank if the right people are in charge and have the right agenda.
There is EVERYTHING wrong with it.
You enslave everyday people trying to get ahead and SAVE money.
You reduce the purchasing power of their WAGES.
People want to be free to live their own lives.
You must have been beaten as a child and now want to enslave others.
You need to die.

>The problem with a gold standard is that if the government needs to print more money for something that is beneficial to society
Almost nothing government does is beneficial to society. They enslave people and destroy their wealth and wellbeing.

>health care
If we had a free market in healthcare the price would be incredibly cheap and would be mass produced, the government doesn't want that.

>or nationalising private businesses so that the means of production is now owned by the worker's republic.
Read: Enslaving people and taking their resources.

You people NEED to be slaughtered.

>>9590630
fascists are incredibly retarded and always get BTFO on debates about usury

>>9590646
>Patents and copyright incentivize advancements.
not really

>How do you solve this?
freedom of information and creation results in a much greater benefit to consumers

>>9590667
>not gonna start doxxing myself.
lol nobody is going to give a shit about what shithole country you're from

> theres thousands of examples of private sector messing with free market fundamentals
Yes and EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TIME the government had it's hand in messing things up and creating cartels

>>9590694
>the human experience has changed at a fundamental level, everything written about it before the internet, smartphones, and a global economy and labor pool is irrelevant
Maybe if you've read enough of those books you'd know how irreparably wrong you are.
We stand on the shoulders of colossal giants.

Principles are not slave to Time and Space, only the institutions that spring as an expression of those principles, which even then constitute not a perfect expression, but a physically/materially conditioned approximation. You're a gigantic brainlet, a blackhole of a mind, if you think knowledge and truth before the 90s is something to disregard.
I think some of the most interesting and revealing shit about the modern human condition actually came form 2000 and 3000 year old writers whose societies and civilization went through the exact same phase ours is experiencing. You're just the exact same monkey from 50'000 years ago, except you can have le epic laugh at le cat doing silly stuff on your smartphone, and your post pretty much proves how much of a silly cunt you are, at that.
>>9590765
>muh strawman

>>9590774
>>muh strawman
not really
you people are irrelevant losers
literally a meme ideology

interest rates are good and natural
economic production would grind to a hault without them

also hitler didnt even abolish usury lol

>>9590608

>Let’s employ a system where even if bad people are in charge, we minimise their damage by maximising individual autonomy. Maybe the benefits to the poorest and least fortunate will be slower than under benevolent totalitarianism, but at least their lives will improve in the long run and we prevent murderous genocides.
>Naaaah, trust me this time we’ll put the “right people” in charge and we can fix everything in ten years
*millions die*

This is how it plays out every time.

>>9590786
>more non arguments and blank statements
Epic
God only knows why you're even responding to me about usury
Enjoy your slavery, retard

>>9590794
I love the "right people" fallacy.

>>9586523

The 99% aren't consuming as much because they can't afford to. Capitalism absolutely falls apart when everyone is hoarding money because they're afraid of becoming homeless from 1 single accident or mishap in their lives. Big stores are all closing one by one, people cannot afford simple luxuries anymore. Capitalism had a good run but we've entered the late stage of it where wealth has concentrated at the top and there's no way to really fix it under a capitalistic system, it will just continue to get worse.

>>9590774
>We stand on the shoulders of colossal giants.
Evola is a clueless, pretentious faggot, and so are you. Enjoy your circlejerk, mental midget.

>>9590690
I would say it was achieved in Pinochet's Chili, though he wasn't a fascist.

>>9590732
>People want to be free to live their own lives.
I wonder about that. It seems that people innately seek enslavement, whether they realize it or not.
>>9590765
>not really
Why not? "not really" is no argument.
>freedom of information and creation results in a much greater benefit to consumers
That does not answer my question at all. It in no way incentivizes research and development.

The fact is, in an ancap society, the R&D would have to be incentivized by voluntary monetary contributions. Which basically relies on people not being short-sighted or greedy. It may work in an ethically advanced society.

>>9587495
>little to no correlation between IQ and wealth
You've got that completely wrong CHAP

>>9590802
>non arguments
I said the economy would grind to a hault without interest. Also hitler didn't even abolish usury.

>God only knows why you're even responding to me about usury
Literally one of the fascists main points.

>Enjoy your slavery, retard
But you're LITERALLY a fascist.
AHAHAHAHAHA

>>9590810
>The 99% aren't consuming as much because they can't afford to.
They're still consuming 99% of all consumer goods.
The problem is the amount of these goods has gone down.

>Capitalism absolutely falls apart when everyone is hoarding money
No, savings is the lifeblood of the economy.
Countries with high savings rates have increases in living standards and real economic growth.

>Big stores are all closing one by one, people cannot afford simple luxuries anymore.
Central banking is causing these problems.

>Capitalism had a good run but we've entered the late stage of it
>MUH LATE STAGE CAPITALISM
Imagine being THIS brainwashed by socialist propaganda.

Central banks have destroyed the economy and given trillions of dollars to super rich people.
Yet you somehow magically think "capitalism" caused this, and not central banking.

Enjoy your brainwashed circle jerk.
Go back to /r/LSC

>>9590841
>Literally one of the fascists main points.
You're a total simpleton and we're operating at different levels, you have a lot of hole to climb out of before we can have an exchange that is intellectually fair.
Hitler did not abolish usury for good reason.

>>9586223
btc IS the biggest shitcoin.
largest marketcap, no use case

>>9590832
>The fact is, in an ancap society, the R&D would have to be incentivized by voluntary monetary contributions. Which basically relies on people not being short-sighted or greedy.

Think about it this way.
In an ancap or minarchist society there is deflation due to an abundance of capital and consumer goods.

This results in lower prices and higher real wages.

People(including the super rich) would have an abundance of disposable income to donate to research firms, and the research firms themselves would benefit from cheaper capital good prices.

Think about it.

>>9590888
what do you want to accomplish with your version of "fascism"?

>>9590888
>888
Holy trips of BTFO

>>9585252

>>9586296
dumbfag doesnt know what anarchy is

>>9586674
why isnt feudalism free market? its ancap paradise.
everything is privately owned by a magnate, even other people. its pure capitalism.

>>9590918
>my version
It's more important to understand and internalize the so called Fascist worldview before talking about what one wants to accomplish. But the gist of any Fascist is generally to give new life to the dying tree of his people, outlive the dark of the night so bask in the dawn of the black sun, and survive the winter of his folk. I guess there is a specific expression of the Fascist worldview that I'd like to exert, but that wouldn't necessarily reveal the fundamentals.
The "dumb" Fascist is a Fascist at the bottom steps of the staircase, he only remains a knob head if he wants to. People who spend the rest of their lives worshipping dead institutions just don't get it (think of any specific past regime, pretty much, the Pinochetfags who aren't even proper fash, or the naziboos who specifically want nazibooshit when they aren't even German).

Read "Fascism Viewed from the Right", it's 20th century criticism of Fascist regimes (particularly Italy and Germany), made by someone who spent time in both countries and hung out with it's top figures. You might like the spin on the idea because Fascism Viewed from The Right is a criticism of Fash not being Fash enough, not being "right winged" enough, and it even tackles totalitarianism and other stuff. Might make you see it in another light.

>>9590963
>why isnt feudalism free market? its ancap paradise.
imagine being this stupid
the state created feudalism in the first place by destroying the emergent natural property norms

destroying the state's property norms would mean going back to homesteading, claims associations and polycentric law

You have ZERO idea what you're talking about.

>everything is privately owned by a magnate, even other people. its pure capitalism.
HOLY FUCK
I honestly cannot believe people this stupid actually exist.

>>9591015
>the state created feudalism
feudalism arose as a result of the COLLAPSE of the roman state dumbass

>>9591001
god damn tl;dr

enjoy being irrelevant

>>9591018
>feudalism arose as a result of the COLLAPSE of the roman state
YES AND OTHER STATES TOOK OVER INSTEAD
It's just statism. Holy shit.

Examples of ancap in history actually existed.

Stateless medieval Ireland
Stateless medieval iceland
Stateless American Midwest in 1800s(homesteading and polycentric law)
Neutral moresnet

You people are so hilariously wrong yet you keep repeating your bullshit.

>>9591015
bro he isn't really... that wrong... desu
Have a vintage /new/ meme

>>9590765
get the fuck over yourself. youre just as retarded as that communist retard, youre just on the other side of the horseshoe.
the private sector has been making price fixing deals and cartels without any help from the government for ages and unfortunately government is a necessary evil to stop that.
if we had small government thats unable to skew free market but has the power to stop private sector from doing the same, we would enter another golden age of prosperity.

>>9591034
> OTHER STATES TOOK OVER INSTEAD
no, feudalism took over

>>9591034
>irrelevant
>most influential figures of the 20th century
>literally "the other side" of the clash between two New World Orders
ok
>irrelevant
>implying this century isn't just going to be a retry (and hopefully a success, this time) of the same shit from 100 years ago
Bro, have you looked at the absolute state of Western civ these days? and how the people are responding? Black shirts in mecha-suits soon.

>>9591040
>horseshoe
le horseshit theory
hello sargon


>the private sector has been making price fixing deals and cartels without any help from the government for ages
This is inaccurate because as long as there is competition cartels cannot exist.

see the gilded age in USA
inb4 you spew the "official" story of what happened then

>>9591047
states that supported feudalism took over, yes, you're getting it now

>>9591066
>he doesnt understand what feudalism is
what "states" took over the collapse of the western roman empire?

>>9591066
>states that supported feudalism took over, yes, you're getting it now
Alright it's official, this google is taking us for a rusecruise

>>9591064
>sperging out this bad
lmao yeah you're irrelevant

>>9591090

>>9591072
>>9591077
>states didn't form after the roman empire fell

>>9591110
you are not only a fascist but an extreme subset of fascists

you're the one projecting lmao
you ARE LITERALLY IRRELEVANT

>>9591115
go ahead, name them

>>9591124
X-TREME!
>>9591115
Define state

>>9591066
youre a retarded cuck. theres no point in discussing anything with you if youre not baiting when you say private companies never engage in price fixing, price gauging or forming cartels.
go fuck yourself, kiddo.

>>9591143
I never said they didn't engage in such practices, I just said that these things are either harmful to them in the long term or don't last very long

I always hear these just so stories about these things happening, without any concrete evidence.

>go fuck yourself, kiddo.
lmao ok kid

>>9591143
de beers and the oil cartels are a prime example

>>9591130
you name them
what do you think happened after the roman empire fell

as far as I can tell, new smaller states formed

feudalism can only come from statism so thats why there was feudalism in britian

>>9591166
>de beers and the oil cartels are a prime example
I fucking debunked this here.
>>9589728

I bet you believe whatever your cuck teachers told you about these "cartels"
fucking idiot

>>9591201
there were no "states" as such.
it was all privately owned. lords owned the land and served kings who owned more land.

>>9591166
https://mises.org/library/100-years-myths-about-standard-oil
https://mises.org/library/how-cartels-ensure-diamonds-last-forever

inb4 >mises
its well sourced

>>9591226
>it was all privately owned.
by states, yes, you're finally understanding my child

>and served kings
LMAO EXACTLY
Thanks for showing there were states.

>>9591201
>NO U!!!!
His argument is that those are not states. Visigoths are pre-Roman collapse. Were they ran by a state? I'll give you time to google them, don't worry kiddo.

>>9591226
If he regards those in the same way as modern states then he is just an anarcoprimitivist retard who thinks his dad having a family and house rules also constitute an evil civilizational development called... the state!

>>9591238
>he cant understand the concept of a privately owned (e)state
are you even a capiltalist?

>>9591244
>>9591262
>"I'm more fascist than the fascists" sperglord is actually trying to talk to me

LMAO

>>9586279
nigger it's literally impossible to starve in western countries. there's generous welfare in most of them, and even in the US you have food stamps and so on
you don't "gotta eat". what you "gotta do" is buy an iphone with an internet connection, which you somehow consider mandatory even though people in their thirties and above have lived most of their life without one. you "gotta have" a brand new car, even though a thousand dollar shitbox would get you from point A to point B just as well, provided you spent your free time learning aboutcars rather than reading marx. you "gotta" eat out, you "gotta" go to parties, you "gotta" dress, you "gotta" travel internationally. the list of your yearly needs somehow stretches endlessly
your college sophomore ass bitches about capitalism while spending lavishly, while half of the "capitalist pigs" you complain about live on a third of your budget
besides, if the best of your ability is getting on a taiwanese rice cooking forum to gamble shitcoins will make you rich, that's a sad tale you tell about yourself

>>9591262
hes not wrong, it is an estate. a sovereign individual with land holdings has literally, a state.

>>9591263
What do you mean by "privately owned"?

It's still a state, a small group of people with a monopoly on law, it's not capitalism whatsoever.

>>9591262
a state is a monopoly on law in a certain geographic region, you brainlet

Nearly all forms of governence and anarchy work when those with power are Good Men. However, power can always find a way to be abused. The entire argument over which would be superior is meaningless as both Ancap and Socialism fall apart when people look out entirely for their own self interests to the logical extreme.

The only viable long term solution is to remove the human element and have things run by AI

>>9591283
>What do you mean by "privately owned"
what the fuck.
do i need to argue the concept of private ownership now? it means ownership by a single individual

>>9590902
underestimating trust m8

>>9585252
You forgot to mention that the "lucky business" are coincidentally friends a with the bureau rat

>>9591308
>what the fuck.
whats the problem?
Are you unable to answer a simple question?
You seem to have a different definition than 99% of people.
When people say privatize they mean "get government out and let the market handle it"
you seem to think its the opposite

>do i need to argue the concept of private ownership now?
Your retarded definition, yes.

>it means ownership by a single individual
Wow, totally different from everyone else definition, but okay.

States after the roman empire were still states, call them "owned by one individual" or not.

This wasn't ancap at all.

I gave you examples of ancap.

>>9591282
Then the answer is Yes the collapse of the Roman Empire created more states ran by statists, which were just as much statists as his dad and his house rules.
>>9591296
and your dad has a monopoly on law inside his house
States develop organically, are you legitimately retarded?
>>9591274
Yeah, I know, I am lowering myself tremendously just to have an exchange with an organism of inferior caste, but that's me, humble, and willing to help an animal that would otherwise be roadkill.

>>9590572
>AH was literally a fascist piece of shit that wanted to set up a monarchy in the USA.
Are you one of those dumbass libertarians that thinks small government and democracy are compatible? I bet you support open borders and democracy too.

>>9591368
>yes the collapse of the Roman Empire created more states ran by statists
the point is that private ownership IS AN ESTATE, and that ancaps hate of the state is just absurd

>>9591370
>thinks small government and democracy are compatible
No, I want to strongly limit democracy.
I am a libertarian, yes.

>I bet you support open borders and democracy too.
No, both of these things are horrible.

>>9591368
>and your dad has a monopoly on law inside his house
No he doesn't. He's bound by the law of the land.
He has some autonomy in his house, not a lot.

>States develop organically
What's your definition of organically?

>with an organism of inferior caste
I'm pretty sure you don't even understand genetics and you have a bunch of shitty medical problems.
I bet you're part negro as well.

>>9591361
>When people say privatize they mean "get government out and let the market handle it"
>what is recognition of ownership
>ancap (((intellectuals)))
Go speed past an intersection's red light, that shit's statist oppression cranked to 5000!

>>9591298
Artificial Intelligence puts a new spin on the whole
>enlightened despotism is the best government

>>9591361
>private ownership isnt ownership by an individual

>>9591402
Democracy and Libertarianism are fundamentally incompatible because the mob will always vote for a bigger government. A small government can only exist in an autocracy.

>>9591390
>the point is that private ownership IS AN ESTATE

from wikipedia:
An estate, in common law, is the net worth of a person at any point in time alive or dead. It is the sum of a person's assets – legal rights, interests and entitlements to property of any kind – less all liabilities at that time.

Why would ancaps support a single person claiming a monopoly on law on a specific territory?
Are you actually this stupid?
We would kill this person for claiming a monopoly.
It doesn't matter that it's a single person or a group of people.
Who gives this faggot the right to own all of the land?
Land should be based on homesteading and polycentric law claims associations.

>>9591440
>Why would ancaps support a single person claiming a monopoly on law on a specific territory?
because its his territory.

>>9591403
>>what is recognition of ownership
something a state or polycentric legal organization does

LMAO HOLY FUCK THIS NIGGA IS AN ACTUAL BRAINLET

LOL AHAHAHAHA ANCAPS CAN FUCK EM SELVES. Capitalism works b/c humans are lazy ass shit unless they are paid. Humans are the rats, money is the cheese.

>>9591402
Organic development is sustained growth that obeys an order of all things. A man and a woman make a family, many families make a tribe, which then make a Nation. A group of men of the same tribe make a Mannerbünd, the primary block of the State. It's about Men establishing an agreed upon Order, often maintained by force, which is in itself a virtue of functioning and competitive models for collective arrangement.

>>9591414
Christ, you're a stupid motherfucker.
Nice picture of a pseudointellectual though.

>>private ownership isnt ownership by an individual
Point out where I said or implied this you dumb nigger lmao

>>9591422
nah, the USA had a small government with free markets for quite a while
its totally possible and actually happened

>>9591445
>because its his territory.
defined by who?
himself?
lmao
do you actually think it works like that?

>>9591457
money works though

>>9591448
>something a state or polycentric legal organization does
Exactly
With no "collective" recognising your ownership of something, you've got nothing. Ancap is a spook, there is no capitalism if there is no ownership of material character. There is no ownership without the implied recognition of such ownership.
Subhuman IQ pls go and stay go
Every ancap I ever knew ended up outgrowing this dumb shit sooner or later, there is still hope.

>>9591463
>Mannerbünd
Come live with me in the forest with Daddy.

>>9591488
>defined by who? himself?
good question. i would argue it comes from the ability to defend it.
what is private property to you?

>>9590732
>Yes and I wish to slaughter every single one of you brainwashed psychopaths and implement a free market.
>It's unbelievable that people like you actually exist, it must be genetic for you to be this stupid, cultlike and evil.
I always knew you libertarians were closet fascists. lol.

>You mean an absolute dictatorship with zero accountability.
>One that calls themselves "the working class" but fucks over working people every time it can.
>Sounds exactly like every socialist country in history.
>failed every single time
They just need to make me Supreme Leader. lol. You just need the right leadership.

>I already explained and PROVED that the working class will not benefit from taking over the means of production and you simply ignore it.
>Answer the question, how can the working class get MORE than what is virtually everything?
There are enough resources to go around for everyone. Food, housing, transportation, health care, clothing, water, electricity, petroleum (we need to move to renewable energy though), etc. The problem is the current distribution of money, which determines the allocation of said resources. Agriculture is so efficient these days, it's unbelievable. You can feed lots and lots of people with very little actual labour because of all the machines. It's incredible. Agribusiness receives lots of subsidies from the government as-is. So technically I don't see why agribusiness shouldn't just be owned by the government anyways since they are corporate welfare queens.

>You reduce the purchasing power of their WAGES.
Not if monetary policy is designed to benefit the working class. When the government spends money, it goes somewhere. I wouldn't feel bad about reducing the value of your savings to make sure that we have more doctors, nurses and hospitals. It's no different than Tesla issuing new shares in their corporation. It dilutes the value of the current shares. But they issue the new shares in order to raise funds to grow their company.

>>9591491
>With no "collective" recognising your ownership of something, you've got nothing.
I agree. That's why I'm ancap.
>Ancap is a spook
clearly not if it just btfo your shit

>There is no ownership without the implied recognition of such ownership.
When did I imply otherwise?

>Every ancap I ever knew ended up outgrowing this dumb shit sooner or later, there is still hope.
You're literally a 13 year old claiming you're more fascist than the fascists lmao
I can't stop laughing.

>>9591497
>i would argue it comes from the ability to defend it.
that's nice
in an polycentric legal order, it's the inter subjective consensus that determines such things

>>9591519
go on articulate your ideas.
how would consensus be reached?

>>9591494
>using foreign words to better access specific concepts which other languages fail to faithfully translate means I...
watch Varg...?
Oh yeah, stop watching porn, I guess.
>>9591506
>more projecting
>I'm laughing not crying i swear
t. 13 year old who thinks there can be capitalism without his poor concept of State
>anarcocapitalism in a nutshell

>>9591498
>posts an hour an a half later
lmao
>I always knew you libertarians were closet fascists. lol.
>ur a fascist because you want to kill those that want to kill you
How are we the fascists?
You people are the people enslaving others and destroying freedom, by killing you, we will free ourselves and create liberty.

>They just need to make me Supreme Leader. lol.
>IT WILL WORK THIS TIME, JUST MAKE ME, A SPERGY REDDITOR BECOME SUPREME LEADER
Go live in north korea and starve to death you absolute brainlet.

>There are enough resources to go around for everyone.
I already proved there isn't and you just ignore this.
Why can't you actually reply to my points?

>Food, housing, transportation, health care, clothing, water, electricity, petroleum (we need to move to renewable energy though), etc.
I replied to this here and you couldn't respond:
>>9589686

>The problem is the current distribution of money
I already explained that money is irrelevant and taking all of this money from the capitalists will just cause massive inflation because working class consumes 99% of consumer goods.
Why can't you actually refute what I'm saying instead of IGNORING IT?
AHAHAHAHA
IT's like you KNOW you're wrong.

>You can feed lots and lots of people with very little actual labour because of all the machines.
Yes and this is the reason why food is so cheap in capitalist countries.

>So technically I don't see why agribusiness shouldn't just be owned by the government
Because government is a monopoly which causes economic distortions, shortages etc. Happens every time.
We've created a massive abundance of food already.
Why does the government need to take over?
Please kill yourself if you can't think through these simple things.

>this thread

Fuck all these commies. I need to go buy a rifle. Please crypto Jesus rain on me with those gains

>>9591498
>Not if monetary policy is designed to benefit the working class.
>When the government spends money, it goes somewhere.
When government spends money it goes to the capitalists.
What we need to do is abolish central banking, torture and kill all of the socialists and give monetary power back to the working class.

>I wouldn't feel bad about reducing the value of your savings
Yes, this is why countless people want to torture and kill you.
You want to enslave people, so they want to kill you.
This is very simple.

>to make sure that we have more doctors, nurses and hospitals
The market does that naturally.
There was an abundance of doctors and medicine before the government got involved in healthcare
Deal with it.

I can't believe you actually posted again after getting btfo.

Answer my fucking questions about surplus value.
You can't.
Socialism is horseshit and you know it, you compulsive liar.

>>9591554
>this "look how fascist I am mommy" manchild is still posting
DO HOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO

>t. 13 year old who thinks there can be capitalism without his poor concept of State
What were:
Stateless medieval Ireland
Stateless medieval iceland
Stateless American Midwest in 1800s(homesteading and polycentric law)
Neutral moresnet
????

????

>>9591601
KILL THEM ALL ANON

KILL THEM ALL

>>9591586
>How are we the fascists?
>You people are the people enslaving others and destroying freedom, by killing you, we will free ourselves and create liberty.
Well you're the one saying you want to kill us. lol.

>Go live in north korea and starve to death you absolute brainlet.
North Korea is not real socialism. Their leader is a fat piece of shit yet their people are starving. Does that sound like a worker's republic to you?

>I already proved there isn't and you just ignore this.
>Why can't you actually reply to my points?
>Food, housing, transportation, health care, clothing, water, electricity, petroleum (we need to move to renewable energy though), etc.
You didn't prove there was a shortage of resources. lol. Because there isn't. lol. You believe that some people have to live in poverty because there isn't enough of everything to go around. I call bullshit. Western countries are rich in resources. There's no reason why people shouldn't be given a fair wage to afford groceries, shelter, transportation, health insurance, electricity, natural gas, etc. We can provide all of these things to people.

>>9585628
>As a socialist
HEIL

>>9591642
>Stateless medieval Ireland
>Stateless medieval iceland
anarcho-primitivist most likely. which cultures are you talking about
>Stateless American Midwest
lol "stateless" homesteading law was a state law

>>9591642
By your definition those were not truly stateless, and did not maintain that anomalous form for long, because guess what kiddo, ancap doesn't create civilization.
I find it amusing out buttblasted you are this whole exchange and how hard you try to shift attention to things you yourself chose to project upon just another anonymous poster
>COPE

>>9591700
>Well you're the one saying you want to kill us. lol.
We want to kill you because you want to enslave us.
Collective self defense is perfectly justifiable.
Ahhh I love being a libertarian. lol

>North Korea is not real socialism.
>NOT REAL SOSHULISUM
LMAO
Really because you're literally saying you want to be the supreme leader of a totalitarian country.
North Korea is perfect for you.

>yet their people are starving
this is what happens when workers control the means of production.

>Does that sound like a worker's republic to you?
It sounds like a socialist republic, yes.

>You didn't prove there was a shortage of resources.
I showed that the working class consumes 99% of these resources.
There actually is a shortage of some of these resources, some other ones there is an abundance of(HOUSING) but central banks won't let the price of housing come down, they are literally restricting supply causing a shortage.

Either way 99% of the working class consume these resources. Taking over the means of production will not benefit the working class.

>Because there isn't
There is though, production of a lot of these goods has stagnated.

>You believe that some people have to live in poverty
No brainlet, I want to abolish central banks so poor people can actually consume these resources.

>Western countries are rich in resources.
only rich to a certain extent you fucking brainlet

do you think the capitalist class is consuming the rest?

Is >1% of resources "the rest"?
LOL

>There's no reason why people shouldn't be given a fair wage to afford groceries, shelter, transportation, health insurance, electricity, natural gas, etc.
There is a reason, it's called scarcity.
Take the capitalist's wealth and it will cause prices to rise.

>We can provide all of these things to people.
Yeah, in a free market.
We need to torture and kill all of you people, then we implement free markets and allow the price of goods to come down so we can all have prosperity.

>>9591744
>anarcho-primitivist most likely
no, they had buildings, some technology, medieval weapons etc

cry harder

>lol "stateless" homesteading law was a state law
lmao there was literally no state in the american midwest back then
it was actually polycentric law
http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?id=552

all communists need to move to a communist country and stop shitting up normal societies

move to fucking north korea you retards

why the fuck are you all crying on the internet about this? you're supposed to be rich from crypto by now.

>>9591754
>Get btfo by actual examples disproving your retarded theory
>sperg autistically

jokes on you I'm not even ancap, I just think it worked historically and defend it's history online, but I prefer a free market white nationalist republic

>>9591822
So all ancaps must move to Somalia?

>>9591820
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts
>
Norwegian settlers in 1898 North Dakota in front of their homestead, a sod hut
The Homestead Acts were several United States federal laws that gave an applicant ownership of land, typically called a "homestead"
state. law.

>>9591848
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts
This was literally a completely different thing than stateless polycentric legal orders in the american midwest.

Nice try though.

>>9591820
>The Homestead Acts were several United States FEDERAL laws that gave an applicant ownership of land, typically called a "homestead"
state. law.
>no, they had buildings, some technology, medieval weapons
oh noes, not buildings and some tech!

>>9585252
Idiots in this thread act like we're living in the middle ages instead of hyperconnected society where we already have neutral networks that can keep public property records and soon will be able to enforce automated contracts.

That's the only reason the state exists for, everything else can be done by the private sector.

>>9591842
why would ancaps move to a failed socialist state(like all socialist states) which is currently run by completing states and warlords?

>>9591842
Somalia has a government you DUMB fuck.

embarrassing....

>>9591872
see:
>>9591867
and please stop embarrassing yourself by posting

>oh noes, not buildings and some tech!
exactly, they weren't primitivist, nor were they against technology in any way

>>9591620
>When government spends money it goes to the capitalists.
>What we need to do is abolish central banking, torture and kill all of the socialists and give monetary power back to the working class.
Yeah under the present system it goes to capitalists. In a Marxist-Leninist government, the capitalist class would be no longer exist. Their businesses would be nationalised. The S&P 500, Wall Street, all of that shit wouldn't even exist anymore.

>The market does that naturally.
>There was an abundance of doctors and medicine before the government got involved in healthcare
>Deal with it.
Hospitals in the US to my knowledge are for-profit organisations making assloads of money. Pharmaceutical companies make assloads of money. Health insurance companies make assloads of money. These parasites will be no more in a Marxist-Leninist system as health care will be non-profit. We pay the doctors, nurses, pharmacists, hospital administrators, etc. what we need to. There are no (((shareholders))) skimming off the top. Canada has a non-profit system (some of our health care is private though). And our health care costs per capita are less than half the US. And the stuff that is privatised here in Canada like ambulance service, pharmaceutical drugs and dental care is expensive.

I love it when Americans talk about how our Canadian health care system is so terrible. No the difference is in Canada there is a percentage chance that a rich person could actually die while waiting for treatment. Whereas in the US rich people can skip the line while poor people inevitably die because they can't afford health insurance or their plan doesn't cover the treatment. What's better? A chance to live while you wait for treatment or 100% chance of death? And yes the Canadian system isn't perfect. Health care here is not as good as Sweden and some European countries. We need to invest more in health care and fully nationalise health care (pharmacare, dentalcare, etc).

>>9591867
it wasnt completely different you fag, they under the united states federal jurisdiction, being given public land.

>>9591840
>I was just pretending to be retarded
>white nationalist free market republic
Don't forget to roll your d20 for that check!
lmao thanks for the entertainment, I needed it

>>9591912
>In a Marxist-Leninist government, the capitalist class would be no longer exist.
Which would be much much worse as a violent government would monopolize all resources.
This is much worse than simple crony capitalism.

>Their businesses would be nationalised. The S&P 500, Wall Street, all of that shit wouldn't even exist anymore.
Yes, this sounds terrible and all examples of this in history were filled with poverty, slavery and misery.

This is why you people need to be cut open and killed.

>Hospitals in the US to my knowledge are for-profit organisations making assloads of money.
Yes, they are a GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY called the AMA.
They get special government privilidges to charge much more money than they would ever be able to charge in a free market.

>Pharmaceutical companies make assloads of money
Copyright and patents dont exist in free markets

>Health insurance companies
Product of government tax law and interventionism giving these people massive power.

>These parasites will be no more in a Marxist-Leninist system
and would be replaced by more sociopathic parasites like those that existed under the soviet medical system
http://www.jpands.org/vol16no2/maltsev.pdf

>There are no (((shareholders))) skimming off the top.
This isn't even the problem, nor is it the main reason healthcare is expensive.

>Canada has a non-profit system
I lived in Canada before. They have rationing, it's hard to find a family doctor and MANY Canadians go to the USA to get treated for serious diseases.
Canadians pay for this shit through their taxes, the working class gets cucked and has to pay much MORE than they would ever pay in a free market for their healthcare.

>No the difference is in Canada there is a percentage chance that a rich person could actually die while waiting for treatment.
Exactly, the solution is to PRIVATIZE usa's healthcare system

>>9591912
>And yes the Canadian system isn't perfect. Health care here is not as good as Sweden and some European countries.
LOL Switzerland has a PRIVATIZED SYSTEM and there are ZERO waiting lines. Healthcare doesn't even cost that much there.

>We need to invest more in health care and fully nationalise health care (pharmacare, dentalcare, etc).
Many counties like UK have fully government healthcare.
Their healthcare systems are FAR FAR worse.

You people NEED to be killed.

>>9590880

How is it propaganda if it's completely observable? How is capitalism supposed to function if consumerism goes down the toilet? You literally just said capitalism works BECAUSE OF CONSUMERISM. If people consume less and less isn't that a huge problem? Then we have the problem of sustaining high consumerism for centuries which is not viable unless we go outside of earth.

>>9591923
>it wasnt completely different you fag
yes
one was state run areas offering homesteading, while the others were polycentric legal orders
different areas of the country as well

>>9591999
How are you still posting after getting outed as a sperg.
>I'm more fascist than the fascists.
How GAY are you?

>>9592029
>How is capitalism supposed to function if consumerism goes down the toilet?
mass consumerism is purely the result of keynesianism and central banking

>You literally just said capitalism works BECAUSE OF CONSUMERISM
Where did I say that?
I said that savings(basically the opposite of consumerism) is the lifeblood of the economy.

>If people consume less and less
Nope, in the short run, it's a good thing, causes prices to decrease and companies to invest more money for future consumption.

>>9591912
Protip: A privatized healthcare system is superior and cheaper.
pic related

>>9592037
>different areas of the country as well
lol wut
homestead acts lasted until 1988. land could be claimed for literally 100 years

>>9592058

Except that is not what's happening. Prices are continuing to rise on everything. Simple foods like eggs have gone up drastically in price, housing is impossible to afford for the constantly squeezed middle class, and education costs have gone out of control (tbf this is the government's fault on that one). I haven't seen anything really go down in price, even when a company is literally going out of business like Toys R Us. They still refuse to lower prices any further than about 30% on most items. Turning a profit is MORE important and if it's still possible to do so even if people are squeezed, businesses will continue to do that. They can simply market to people who still have money to spend. Peasant markets like Walmart can go down the toilet and it wouldn't matter.

>>9592095
>homestead acts lasted until 1988
in specific parts of the country, you brainlet, not the literal no mans land that was polycentric legal orders

>>9592098
>Prices are continuing to rise on everything. Simple foods like eggs have gone up drastically in price, housing is impossible to afford for the constantly squeezed middle class
I totally agree and the problem is central banking and inflation.
If we didn't have these things prices would be COMING DOWN.
You have to realize the real enemy is central banking.

anyway guys it's 7:45 am and I need to sleep

really nice seeing socialists get their faces kicked in time and time again
bye

>>9592116
>no mans land
nope

>>9591912

>i don't understand ANYTHING about economics the post

As useless as you might think capitalists are, bureaucrats and politicians are 10 times worse

>>9591796
>this is what happens when workers control the means of production.
No this is what happens when you have a corrupt POS like Jim Kong-Un running the country.

>I showed that the working class consumes 99% of these resources.
I call bullshit on the working class consuming 99% of the resources. You also know that you could actually create more resources too right? (unless we're talking non-renewable natural resources). The employment rate is actually really low. Lots of NEETs need jobs and they can be used to create more resources. We can literally hire 30 year old NEETs to make chicken tendies and hot pockets in a factory.

As for housing being an issue because of the central banks, in a Marxist-Leninist society the banks would be publicly-owned. And renting out homes would be illegal in a Marxist-Leninist society so this would lead to a decrease in housing prices. Only the worker's republic would be able to rent units. And we would rent units at-cost because we don't have to deliver any profits to (((shareholders))).

>No brainlet, I want to abolish central banks so poor people can actually consume these resources.
But if the central bank is under Marxist-Leninist rule, the monetary policy would be for the working class.

If you have a gold standard, what happens is the late adopters (the millennials) are going to be financially cuckolded by the early adopters (boomers). Just like with crypto. lmao. People are going to hoard their money if its deflationary. Why on earth would you spend your money if it'll be worth more in the future? Why would you bother hiring people, giving people raises or investing your money when you can just hodl and make more money that way?

>>9592003
>Canadians pay for this shit through their taxes, the working class gets cucked and has to pay much MORE than they would ever pay in a free market for their healthcare.
The per capita health care costs in Canada are literally less than half compared to the United States though. It's like around $4,500 per head in Canada and over $9,000 per head in the US. Fucking insane. If you're making $15,000 per year in America at McDonalds or whatever, how on earth are you supposed to afford health insurance? lol. There are people who get shot by some incel, go to the hospital and have a $50,000 medical bill. lmao. That isn't an exaggeration.

>>9592214

Interesting point on the last bit, but this is precisely the reason I invested in crypto. Being at the top of a ponzi is fucking amazing. Millenials are basically like crypto December buyers at this point and 80's children are now being dubbed the "lost generation" as they all graduated school and entered the workforce during 07'/08' and are completely fucked. Many have extremely large gaps on their resumes exceeding 5 years and are no longer counted in employment statistics.

However I think gen Z will be a lot better off in the ponzi than millenials since there will be recovery by the time the younger ones start working.

>>9590236
The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli. >>9591298
What about making the government transparent?