/sci/ - Science & Math

Well somebody has to fuck those fat chicks...

dat fecundity

>Met Macdonald on a bus
>Met Macdonald at Sunderland bus station
>Met at a bus stop
well fuck, guess i'm going to start hanging around busstations, if that doesn't cure my virginity nothing will.

>>1786533
You could just lower your standards without going to bus stations.

>>1786533

trust me, you're better of a virgin than fucking some mediocre cunt

>>1786533
My tried and true method to get the ladies:

Dress smartly(scarf, plain trousers/dark jeans, clean smart shoes, duffel coat(weather permitting)). Visit a fairly crowded coffee house near your most local university. Bring some manner of book(not a textbook, maybe a novel, either plain cover or a picture of like a ladnscape). Try to look inquisitive at all times, but not snooty.

Buy yourself some manner of coffee drink and find your girl. You're looking from a 5-7/10 girl who's alone, possibly engrossed in a book. Swoop in and explain that the place is full, ask if you can sit with her as there's no other place, you have your hands full and she seems the pleasant type.

Start a conversation, this is where the book comes handy. So that you're not stuck struggling for conversation or worse, talking about yourself extensively, talk about your book, how you're finding it and such. Bonus if she too has a book as you're on a level playing field.

Slowly drink your coffee but not at an absolute snails pace. When finished, say that you have to leave but ask for her number as you enjoyed her company and conversation. If she agrees, you have her hook, line and sinker. Meet her for a few more coffees and eventually ask her out.

Congratulations, you now have a sophisticated and well read girlfriend. Sex is not guaranteed instantly, though when it comes, you'll have a steady supply.

Thank me later.

>>1786572
Hate yourself at night for totally acting out of line just for some pussy. No thanks, try to earn big money, that's more honest.

>>1786572
I read that twice and it sounds foolproof. How did you discover this?

Notice how most of those whores have kids with other people as well. Fucking sluts.

>>1786572
>You're looking from a 5-7/10 girl who's alone

That's her age, right?

>>1786584
You don't do it for pussy, you do it for the girl. I employed the tactic on my now girlfriend and I genuinely love her, though I mentioned sex because the guy I responded to said he wants sex.
My advice is more a method to get a girl you like than to lie to girls for sex.

>>1786587
Personal experience, it just happened during my university days. I'm a very keen reader and decided to enjoy some professionally made coffee while I read. The place was crowded but it was damn good coffee, I'd have been prepared to stand for such a coffee.
Anyway, I was kindly offered a seat and I hit it off with this girl(now ex).

>>1786594
No, looks. I doubt loving parents would allow a child to be alone in a coffee shop.

>>1786572
That may work. But the kind of girls that would get it's the kind I'd want.

>>1786601
Well fuck. Suddenly, I'm not interested any longer.

>>1786603
Yeah, that's pretty much the problem. Any girl you can hit up and get to date is not worth having.

>>1786601
I was thinking it was her hight... 5-7 to 5-10. I was thinking, that's kind of tall for me -- lol.

>>1786609
I meant I don't like bookish girls...what did you mean?

>>1786609
It's not hitting up with them, moreso building a strong friendship while enticing her, and it isn't like mett her saturday, ask her out Sunday. It takes literally weeks of talking, sharing interests, getting to know one another, without the slightest form of flirting. With this, any amount of flirting is coming on too strong. A classy girl is attracted by your character and intelligence, not your wits and stale one liners.

>>1786622
I meant that the kind of girl who doesn't tell a total stranger who is trying to talk to her to piss off is not my kind of girl.

>>1786623
My wits are stronger than my intelligence. I'll stick with my throw away party girls thank you. I'm not a good enough person to keep a girl that this would work on anyway. Much too misogynistic.

>>1786626
Interesting how completely we misunderstood each other.

>>1786626
What state do you come from where people are so hostile to someone they don't even know? Where I'm from, as long as you're not interrupting anything or butting into their conversation, complete strangers are happy to exchange hellos or share a table in a crowded café.

>>1786636
>What state

Not American.

>>1786643
Sorry, just assumed. British here.

>Dress smartly(scarf, plain trousers/dark jeans, clean smart shoes, duffel coat(weather permitting)).
I donno... track suit and gold chain are apparently highly effective.

>>1786656
Highly effective at getting this quality of pussy.

>>1786665

>>1786572
I find Rohypnol works just as well.

>>1786488
>>1786488
So, although by nature, reproduction should be the goal in our lives; in reality it is not.
Having more kids will not automatically make me happier. However, I feel kinda disappointed that a person bordering on retardation can have such a successfull reproductive strategy. Porking the fatties.
I mean, come on, this is spreading your genes big time. Think of the bio-mass.

This is why an extensive welfare state fails. Fuck safety nets. That's what churches and families are for.

Idiocracy is near...

>>1786906
Sometimes people are just getting screwed over. The market can't guarantee everyone a job.

>>1786918
If you can't get a job move in with your parents and help them around the house.

>>1786918
Then I guess it's better to motivate them to look for work harder or start working on their own.

>>1786923
No, it doesn't work like that. If nobody's hiring, what makes you think these people can get jobs? Especially if they're not naturally skilled at anything, or have mental problems.

>>1786929
That's why there are a fuckton of unskilled jobs, nigger. Most of them you can do just fine with mental problems. Who the fuck doesn't have mental problems? "Nobody's hiring" is bullshit. Somebody is always hiring somewhere.

>>1786929

Than you tell them they either go cleaning the highways or they won't get their welfare money.

It really is that simple.

>>1786931
You need to len2economics.
The increase in humans doesn't necessitate an increase in production/resource management/services proportional to birth rates.
That's one of the many problems of overpopulation.

>>1786929
I've got people in my country who stand with a big stop sign next to pedestrian crossings close to schools and stop the passing cars so that the kids can pass through. If the economy is so efficient that all existing jobs are taken then you should create a new job. There's always work to do, even if all you're skilled with is holding stuff in your hands. The situation is a lot more sad with mentally incapacitated people but unless their family or neighbors can provide them with enough resources and care to survive, they should be locked in a mental facility.

>>1786940
משמרות הזהב?

>>1786942
I beg you pardon?

>>1786940
>I've got people in my country who stand with a big stop sign next to pedestrian crossings close to schools and stop the passing cars so that the kids can pass through

They are called policemen.

>>1786940

This is part of why capitalism fails. We have the resources to provide for all, but not enough pertinant work. Don't create a worthless job niche for someone who can't serve society; give them an education and the ability to do something worth while.

You can try as hard as you want, but there will never be enough real work as long as our population keeps increasing. We have to realize soon that there will be more and more "freeloaders" as time goes on. The only answer here is stop making babies, or teach the people who are "better" and more viable to society to actually be proud that they provide a life for everyone around them.

>>1786965
Nope, cops here are paper pushers. I think most of them haven't seen what outside of the police station looks like in a while.

>>1786972
Only people with enough money to support them should be able to have children. I don't know, make them buy a baby token or something. Or maybe some sort of yearly tax and take their kid away if they can't pay it.

>>1786933
No, you need to lrn2economics. No matter what the population, there has always and will always be a use for the labor. The availability of labor lowers the cost of labor and creates demand for things we never thought we needed before, like fucking pizza delivery.

>>1786980
So why are there people that can't get jobs, even though they are always applying for them?

>>1786972
You are deeply confused. Crossing guards are not "pertinent" enough for you? There will always be work. There always has been. More people adds to the demand. If you're consuming as much as your produce, it's ridiculous to suggest there won't be enough demand to justify your production. You have some kind of deep-seated economical misconception that sounds like it was spoonfed to you by some inbred marxist.

>>1786983
People cycle in and out of the job market. Those are the unemployed people. If you can't get a job no matter how long you try, then you are a druggie.

>>1786995
>People cycle in and out of the job market.

And this is why capitalism is wrong.

>>1786972
>We have the resources to provide for all
I don't know who told you that but he obviously lied. Also, there is no such thing as meaningless work. As long as there are people willing to pay to see their children safer on a crossing, your job is as meaningful as any other job.

>>1787000
>people willing to pay to see their children safer on a crossing

Where I'm from we have these shiny things called traffic lights. When the little guy drawn on it is green, kids can walk, when it is red, kids can't walk. Works wonders and doesn't want any money.

>>1787009
It would cost probably 50 years worth of crossing guard wages to pay for a traffic light. And the traffic light can't know when the kids are done crossing so it can turn green again.

>>1786996
You are delusional. Fuck your infantile mentality. Learn to responsibility. It's not up to other people to take care of you.

>>1787009
It's no point to put traffic lights in spots where they aren't needed. Children end classes once every 45 minutes + break time, but the traffic lights hold traffic every 30 seconds.

>>1787014
>>1787018
You know, you can sync pedestrian traffic lights to regular traffic lights at intersections.

>>1787018
The crossing guards usually work just the 45 min before school and after school. A group of kids crosses for 10 seconds every minute or so.

>>1787025
I'm sure you can tell that to parents of the children in school and they'll gladly shell out the money to pay for the traffic lights and the synchronization and all the necessary costs.

>>1787033
I wonder why we have them like everywhere over here.

Maybe it's because we actually have traffic, instead of your silly American towns in the middle of nowhere?

Capitalism fails because it pretty much criminalises a lack of a job. No job, no food, no means to survive. Sounds good as a way to motivate people to find jobs, until there comes a point where there is no more demand for new workers.

With the growing automation of all industries thanks to computers and machines, the demand for new unskilled workers is actually going to fall. Sure, someone is always hiring - in the IT department, or any high tech industry. The kind that requires a higher education and an IQ of above 100. What happens to unskilled labour? They get laid off in favour of machinery developed by the aforementioned high tech industry, and then you get situations like OP outlined.

Capitalism became outdated by the end of the industrial revolution. It should become replaced by another system soon, closer perhaps to the ones in Sweden and Norway.

>>1787039
That may be because of legal regulations. Everyone can put up a person with stop sign to stand anywhere, but not everyone can put up their own traffic lights. At least that's how it works here. But I think we've strain too far from the issue at hand, which is, you can never run out of work to be done.

>>1787059
You forget that someone has to pay these people's wages. Sure, why not, put a crossing guard at every single crossing. Unemployment = 0%. Where will you get the money for the wages though? Remember, it has to be at least minimum wage in Britain which is about 6 quid an hour right now I think. You also need to pay for their equipment and the maintenance of said equipment. Then you also need to plan for the next generation to be born and what jobs they can undertake once you run out of crossings to guard (which you inevitably will).

If you figure out a working business plan for this, I will vote for you in the next election.

>>1787047
>Capitalism fails because it pretty much criminalises a lack of a job
I don't think you understand what criminalizing means. Unless you find anyone willing to share with you his food and other means to survive, don't expect you'll get any. Work isn't the place you go to, sit for 8 hours and go home. Work is where you produce value that can be later exchanged for means of survival. To simplify the exchange money was invented. Still, you can spend 24/7 at "work" and unless you don't create enough value to support yourself, you're not going to be given anything for free.

>>1787047
The socialist regimes applied in Norway and Sweden requires intelligent and responsible people such as Norwegians and Swedes.
It cannot work in places with an overabundance of nigger and other trash who will always seek to exploit the system.

>>1787047
>Capitalism fails because it pretty much criminalises a lack of a job.
FFS. just, no.

>No job, no food, no means to survive. Sounds good as a way to motivate people to find jobs, until there comes a point where there is no more demand for new workers.
That point never happens. Fucking basic economics. No work, no food is exactly what it MUST be in ANY sustainable system.

>With the growing automation of all industries thanks to computers and machines, the demand for new unskilled workers is actually going to fall.
Industry uses whatever work is available. In america we don't have all the factory work we used to. So are the unskilled starving? No, they're working at fast food and retail... positions that didn't exist. The exist BECAUSE THE FUCKING WORKERS EXIST.

>>1787065
>Work is where you produce value that can be later exchanged for means of survival.
You must be new to post 20th century Earth.

>>1787069
Not him, but what he said is EXACTLY what fucking work is. Grow the fuck up.

>>1787068
>I don't understand the concept of gradual automation in all fields of lower grade labor
As time passes on, the higher IQ you must have in order to survive, seeing as how machines are becoming faster/smarter/stronger/more durable/reliable etc.

>>1787066
Norwegians and Swedes used to be Vikings, e.g. rob other people for all their gold and riches and then murder them. How did they evolve into a socialist society? They tried obviously. They coached their society to change rather than saying "fuck this, it can't work here".

>>1787065
You're not responding to the issue though. What does a person not intelligent enough to finish university supposed to do when machines displace him from work or when there is simply no demand for the kind of job that he could do? If he could "get a job" it would be simple yes, but what if he can't because there are no jobs for him?

>>1787071
Needed: reading comprehension skills.
What he mentioned is what work SHOULD BE. Not what it CURRENTLY IS.
Kapish?

>>1787071
>Grow the fuck up.

The proper capitalist's answer to everything. BOOO HOOOO GROW UP YOU BIG MEANIE!

>>1787062
I just gave a single example, I'm not trying to extrapolate it. Some people found schools to pay their wages. Some others might find their neighbors and mow their lawns to earn their money. Some people might not even realize they need your work until you approach them and tell them you can do it for a set wage. But the true point is, you can never run out of work to do. It's as simple as that.

Then again, minimum wages are a bad idea and should be abolished. The only thing they do is stop employers from employing people who can't produce value worth of a set amount at all. That means that unless you're skilled enough to make 6 pounds per hour you're either unemployed or overpaid. Both situations are equally wrong.

>>1787075
Because they had a national mentality compatible with such change.
The rest of the world?
Not so much.
This is why I admire the Nordic countries.

>>1787068
Is this why America has 10% unemployment and 3.5 million homeless people? Sounds like your system is working flawlessly.

>>1787079

Yes, we should totally be allowed to pay the worthless dregs that clean my laundry, serve me food, and build my roadways less than the minimum amount of money needed to survive.

Fucking mouthbreathing scum should have been born to a family with the money to put them through college.

>>1787079
You are obviously pretty rich and have never been on a minimum wage then. This is what all rich people think "minimum wages are bad". No, dumbshit, they prevent companies from exploiting the workforce. Without minimum wages, you'd probably have a communist rebellion in Britain because the workforce would just be so pissed off with the shitty retarded wages that they would get from greedy bosses, they would make the miners strike look like a breeze compared to the shitstorm that they would stir up due to this. There is a reason why capitalists agreed to minimum wages, and this is exactly it.

>>1787075
You know what people do when their work becomes obsolete? They requalify. It's as simple as that. Because there's always work to do, they can always find new things to do.
>>1787076
It isn't like that in socialist countries. And socialism is a magical system known for heroically overcoming problems unknown in other systems. The moment socialist countries run out of capital they earned in the years of rampaging capitalism they'll go back to it. Until then, they can treat work however they like.

>>1787092

Seriously, the day you decide you don't feel like paying someone enough money to survive for whiping your ass is the day they decide it's better to kill you and take what you have.

>>1787068
>No work, no food is exactly what it MUST be in ANY sustainable system.
>No more demand for work
>NOT A PROBLEM I WILL FIND A JOB BECAUSE SOMEONE IS ALWAYS HIRING

>>1787100
Yup, unless you are paying someone else just a bit more to protect you.

>>1787084
That's not capitalism's fault, it's the Jews' fault for hogging up all the money.

>>1787106
In a truly socialist country, they'd be taxed into poverty.

>>1787111
Another reason to admire Sweden and Norway.
When are we moving there, /sci/?

>>1787099
They run out of capital because they need to, oh I dunno, maybe save their banks from falling over and dying after a 20 year policy of complete dogshit which was allowed only because of free market rules? Happened in Britain (sort of socialist) and the US (pretty much not socialist) and Greece, and a whole bunch of other European countries.

>The moment socialist countries run out of capital they earned in the years of rampaging capitalism they'll go back to it.
>wtfamireading.jpg

>>1787092
I used to work physically and earn minimum wage. But you know what? It doesn't work like that. American workers in the beginning of the 20th century had no minimum wages and they were the first workers in the world to drive cars. That's because after a month of being exploited in their factories they got their salaries and exploited other workers just as much. All basic articles were cheaper because their prices weren't artificially inflated by minimum wages of anyone working during production.

>>1787106

Despite having a constant supply of labor opportunities, people are usually arrogant cunts who refuse to do "heavy" labor such as pizza delivery or anything with low pay. That's why America fails - you see those fat fucks taking disability pay when their sorry ass is being replaced by some worker in Asia who is doesn't care how bad the work is as long as there is money.

>>1787117
You give some of the worst examples possible. Greece was the most socialist country in Europe, with earliest retirement age in the whole EU and a huge welfare state. The thing that happened in the US was also caused by socialism, in particular by the federal reserve bank subsidizing loans, thus removing one of the driving market forces, fear, and leaving only the other one, that is greed. If the federal bank never intervened and free market was upheld, none of this would happen.

>>1787119
The reason why American workers drove cars was not because of the lack of inflated prices, but because of the fact that American industry was literally flying out of World War 2 in full swing without a single factory damaged - unlike basically all of Europe which got so bombed, it was set back for at least 20 years before it was all rebuilt. WW2 is what cemented American economic domination in the 20th century.

The other point I am going to make is that back then production lines consisted of humans putting together cars by hand. This has since changed to engineers controlling 95% automated conveyor belts which assemble basically everything.

Basically a minimum wage CAN BE bad if there are more jobs than there are workers. But if there are LESS jobs than there are workers, a minimum wage is the ONLY thing that protects those workers from abuse. It's simple.

These people once ruled the planet.

>>1787145
Reminds me of the emperors of china >.>, they were sexual beasts. Ah those were good times...

>>1787142
Complete speculation. The crisis in America happened exactly due to the same reason as the one in Britain: private banks lending money irresponsibly. The policies of the Republican government going back a good 20 years exacerbated it further by ripping into every possible government fund to fund their tax lowering "economy stimulating" pursuits. Clinton fixed it a bit, but then Bush ruined it all over again.

And where does socialism even come into this? America is about as socialist as I am the pope of the christian church. It has some social security and that's about it. Government funded health care is *still* in its infant stages. Where is this socialism in America because I can't see? And don't even call the federal reserve socialist, because that's just ludicrous.

>>1787143
I'm talking about early 20th century, before the 2nd world war. There were no bombings in europe then. Only ever spreading socialism which is more damaging then bombs.

As I said before, if you lose your job due to automation then all you have to do is requalify. I can cry all you want but you won't stop the technical advance. And if you're telling me it's a disgrace to you to get fired of your well paid job and find one with a lower wage then I don't care. I used to work physically in a factory or as a cleaner. Now I've got a MSc and if it ever occurs that I lose my current job and can't find an another job, I'd go back to being a cleaner. Also, I don't think you've ever been to a factory if you say 95% of all work is done automatically.

Minimum wage is always bad. Everyone should be paid according to the value they can produce, not by some arbitrary standards.

>>1787143
>But if there are LESS jobs than there are workers, a minimum wage is the ONLY thing that protects those workers from abuse. It's simple.
>Implying the only thing causing there to be less jobs than workers isn't the minimum wage.

>>1787176
>Only ever spreading socialism which is more damaging then bombs.

Bomb Damage or Rent Control?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9PUJZYzw3k

>>1787168
I'm not saying the country is socialist, only that federal reserves bank intervened in a socialist manner and that caused the crisis. You say that the banks started lending money irresponsibly - which is true. But behind that was the federal bank that started subsidizing those loans. If the country starts giving out money, you'd be an idiot by not taking it, either as the loan-taker or a banker who makes a profit of that. By removing the fear out of the equation, all that was left was greed. So without the federal money behind the loans, there would be no crisis as seen today. The problem in England was much broader, but I can describe it to you if you want.

>>1787184
Ok, I tried, but even after turning the volume to the max I still can't hear a word that he's saying. Care to explain what it's about?

>>1787176
The hilarious thing is that I am the socialist yet YOU believe every single person is completely equal. That is not and has never been the case. Some people are more intelligent than others, you can't simply tell a life long coal miner who is getting laid off to "go get a university education", because of 1. his no doubt mature age means he needs to pay for his education in most countries, 2. overall human intelligence is steadily rising but there are still a LOT of people of all ages who simply will not be able to fit into the new high tech economy because of lower intelligence (this is just an example by the way). It's not their fault they were born less capable or that their family was unable to support their education, is it?

So unless your plan is to make education completely free, government funded to the maximum level, and available to people of all ages, and still have easily available jobs (cleaning, etc.) for unskilled workers who are unable to manage in higher education regardless, I completely disagree with everything you are saying because you are completely, totally wrong. If people do not have any chance to lift themselves out of their hole, they won't be able to do it now will they? And the answer is certainly not "well fuck them then".

>>1787201
Most jobs, regardless of the country, do not require a higher education. The industries over time adjust to the education of the populace, because they make use of the kind of work that is available. Whatever work is available can be turned toward profit for a company.

>>1787201
How did I ever say that everyone is equal? I believe the exact opposite - nobody's equal. And no, I don't think that people being laid off should go to a university - I just think they should find an another job, that's it. I don't need people mowing my lawns to have a tertiary education, but for 6 pounds an hour I'd rather do it myself, especially if I've got all the equipment.

And I don't believe in people being unable to improve the quality of their lives. I know some first-hand examples of people working in factory with me to pay for their universities they attended in the weekends. If you're poor then you should curse your parents and work harder so that your children won't have to grow up in poverty. Blaming the world for it unreasonable.

>>1787195
But you aren't saying why were the loans subsidised or who instated that policy. The answer is big business sitting within the government as congressmen backing and funding the republican party. The problem in America is that big business has so much influence on the government, it can actually make up policy to facilitate its own greed. I know, now we're descending into pointing fingers and missing the whole point of the original discussion.

But this illustrates my original point in a way: capitalism provided ample opportunity for everyone in the 1930s. Nowadays, it provides the same for the rich and the lucky only. Improving technology is making the system obsolete because jobs require much more intelligence and skill on the overall today than they did a 100 years ago, and human intelligence is simply not keeping up. So, countries that will decide to "weather through the bad times" will suffer some of the greatest social upheaval and riots in the civilised world. Britain of today is slowly turning that way. Greece was in a state of nigh total revolt for months now. America... well, 10 trillion dollars of debt... I am wondering how long the government can keep up with that, plus a couple of wars and an uphill struggle to maintain a world super power status to add onto the bill.

Capitalism cannot be left to run away in today's society. It needs strict government control in the form of people who are not in any way related to any big business. Then the government can work.

>>1787200
He shows some pictures of cities that have either been bombed or imposed rent control. They look deceivingly similar.

"Bomb damage or rent control? ... That's Nagasaki."

>>1787218
They can't survive for any less. Why should they work if they won't be able to put ends together anyway? They need so much money to pay for rent, electricity, clean water and food - the bare minimum. If they can't that on shitty wages while working jobs that they can, why bother? Why not revolt instead?

>>1787226
The reason is the same as ever in socialism - you think you're doing good, but mess things up at the same time. You don't need corporate conspiracies to explain everything, stupidity of reigning people is a reason good enough.

I disagree that capitalism only provides for the rich and lucky. It also provides for the hard working and smart. Socialism is only a philosophical explanation for laziness, nothing more. And I don't think that working in a restaurant requires more intelligence then it did 70 years ago, only less. The more people get tertiary education and start using their smarts to earn money, the less plumbers there will be, the more money will a plumber earn. In the end, it always reaches a state of equilibrium because no matter how fast we develop new technologies, there will always be simple jobs needed to be done.

>>1787251

You're a fool. End of story. Too bad for you the rich family you got born into will keep you afloat.

>>1787232
LOL -- if they wouldn't work for a lower wage they you wouldn't fucking need a minimum wage law, would you?

>>1787232
They can work more than 8 hours daily. I used to work double shifts some days to make ends meet. I fail to see a reason why anyone couldn't.

>>1787257
Too bad you have to resort to ad hominems to prove your point. And just so you know, no, I'm not from a rich family. Neither was my dad who worked his below off to provide for me. The difference between you and me or my father is that instead of blaming the world for inequality, we work hard to shift it in our favor. If you can't then I'm sorry for you. You won't be missed.

>>1787251
Socialism does not mean "I will freeload on government money for no reason". It means "I will receive equal opportunity and government assured means of survival no matter my personal situation". A socialist utopia with unlimited resources is a post-scarcity fantasy. In contrast to that, the free market no regulation or social security state means "I will try and see if I can make it in the world - but if I can't due to either my own inadequacies which I just can't help - or perhaps a failing economy, then my life is fucked". I disagree with the latter because everyone deserves completely equal opportunities no matter their background, financial situation or intelligence quotient. This is something that countries like America simply do not recognise, thus producing the exact problem with capitalism that every single left winger in the world keeps pointing out: workers can't keep up with the changing demand. Wholly legitimate. I still haven't seen your solution to that other than that "they should try to keep up". I don't see how unless the person is truly exceptional at everything they do. But not everyone is a person of success, and those need to be accounted for by being given much needed help. I don't see how this does not make sense to you, individualism is such ridiculous horse shit as long as we live in a broad human society.

>>1787283
>Socialism ... means "I will receive ... government assured means of survival no matter my personal situation".

Then it fails on fundamental principle alone, before it does anything else.

>>1787260
What are you? Retarded? The minimum wage is in place exactly because the unions wouldn't work for less than that and there were strikes and demands for government regulation. Go back to primary school for gods sake.

>>1787271

This is your problem. You insult the rest of the world by saying that nonsense without recognizing the honest hardships of others. You make it sound like this is simple, it's not. Not everyone who is unemployed or working for minimum wage is worthless or part of some lower class, as you assert.

>>1787291
LOL, who told you that BS? You need to reducate yourself at a proper learning institution! If people were already unwilling to work for under the minimum wage before the law took effect, then the law would have HAD NO FUCKING EFFECT! Who's retarded? That's right, IT'S YOU!

>>1787288
What? So the British benefit system does not assure a person's survival? How could that be, if person in OPs post still lives? Britain is a nanny state = basically socialism.

In b4 socialism equals a state planned economy, it does not.

>>1787294
Fuck off troll. I want my capitalist debater back.

>>1787293
Working class people tend to have a fucking WORK ETHIC, unlike you spoiled rich socialist fuck. It's not them who are worthless, it is you.

>>1787299
You're the troll. No one is as retarded as you are pretending to be. No functioning person can be a Marxist.

>>1787307
You are an idiot. I'm not a Marxist.

>>1787283
To me socialism is any system that uses taxes not to finance the only necessary institutions (army, judiciary system) but to redistribute it between citizens. The moment country takes money from a citizen and gives (keyword) it to an another citizen it is a socialism. In capitalism it works more in the sorts of "you can either work hard for your money or find someone who'll provide you with equal opportunity and means of survival no matter your personal situation, however we won't force anyone to provide those to you". And you're mistaking things, in capitalism the market can still be regulated. I don't know how you came up with no regulations all of a sudden. Also, there is no such thing as not keeping up with changing demand. You can always do a simpler, less paid job. If you think that's beneath you and you won't be flipping burgers because you got a MSc then I'm sorry for you bro, but I won't help. There are plenty of people who aren't really succesful, but still manage to earn enough money to live another day. Maybe if you don't want to work hard then you belong with them, and not with succesful people?

>>1787310
Could have fooled me. You're no less retarded than a Marxist.

>>1787293
I've had my fair share of those hardships you're talking about. It still didn't make me whine about the society being unfair. All it made me do was work harder.

And no, I don't think everyone who does low paid job is worthless or lower class. Au contraire I feel for them because I used to be one of them. But the moment you stick out your hand for help instead of working harder to earn it, you lose all sympathy on my part.

>>1787299
I'm the capitalist debater and I replied to your previous post here: >>1787262. Can't respond to how the discussion has developped since because I haven't taken part in it.

>>1787316
>implying hard working
>postin 4chan

>>1787358
Matlab tends to give you plenty of free time while it's calculating stuff.

>>1787363
>plenty of free time
isn't that the oppossite of "hard" working?

>>1787367
I was talking about the past, before I got my MSc. After that life became a whole lot easier.