Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone?

File: 25 KB, 400x300, capitalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 01:44:07 2011 No.2692751 [Reply] [Original]

Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 01:45:07 2011 No.2692764 duh...no.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 01:57:07 2011 No.2692852 >>2692764 Please explain? It's currently the best system thus far.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 01:58:07 2011 No.2692862 Yes it is, this is why communism failed.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:00:07 2011 No.2692880 Democratic socialism is the best way to go. Too bad our government is owned by corporations.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:00:07 2011 No.2692883 >>2692751 unfortunately yes. but what that doesn't mean is: -we should stop trying to think of something better - it isn't grossly unfair - the vast majority of the population get fucked in the ass by it, and so will their children

>>	bump Sun Mar 13 03:00:07 2011 No.2692887 its the best system for a society who's resources are scarce

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:00:07 2011 No.2692889 I would say that it's the least worst.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:01:07 2011 No.2692891 >>2692883 >it isn't grossly unfair Life isn't fair, deal with it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:01:07 2011 No.2692893 >>2692862 Or maybe it failed for the menace of an inminent war from the capitalist world, which forced it to work on a war economy and have a heavy control of the discidents.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:01:07 2011 No.2692894 communism "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:02:07 2011 No.2692901 >>2692883 How is it unfair and have you ever heard of the expression, "Life isn't fair"?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:03:07 2011 No.2692905

>>2692852
>start thread with vague question
>chew out anyone who responds negatively

Either way, to answer your question, capitalism is the best system to maximise profit, nothing else. And it will maximise profit at the expense of health, happiness, and general standard of living. A true capitalist system would quickly turn into the US circa 1880 - children and women working at the mill for 12 hours a day for pennies, men working more dangerous jobs for slightly more pay, no health coverage for injuries sustained on the job, no standards for food, medicine, and a huge pool of the unemployed to replace injured workers.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:03:07 2011 No.2692906 Of course it is. Capitalism is essentially leaving people alone, this leads to the greatest ex ante social utility and tends to lead to the greatest ex post social utility. Democracy is mob rule and violence. Taxation is theft.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:03:07 2011 No.2692908 /new/ says it is and they're usually experts on politics, so...

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:04:07 2011 No.2692914 >>2692891 It's not fair because we haven't made it fair yet.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:05:07 2011 No.2692915 Define "best system".

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:05:07 2011 No.2692917 Social democracy FTW. Capitalist economy, with progressive taxes to support infrastructure that isn't crushingly inhuman.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:05:07 2011 No.2692920

>>2692905
>implying I was the op.
>And it will maximise profit at the expense of health, happiness, and general standard of living. A true capitalist system would quickly turn into the US circa 1880 - children and women working at the mill for 12 hours a day for pennies, men working more dangerous jobs for slightly more pay, no health coverage for injuries sustained on the job, no standards for food, medicine, and a huge pool of the unemployed to replace injured workers.
This is what liberals actually believe.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:05:07 2011 No.2692921 File: 44 KB, 521x341, income gains of american upper class.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Anarcho-Syndicalism... ANYTHING BUT THIS.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:06:07 2011 No.2692927

>Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone?
Out of all other systems used? Yeah probably.

But the problem with capitalism, in my opinion is that it forces greedy upon people (the complete opposite of communism which pretty much disregards greed).

A better system, in my personal opinion, would be one where robots do 90% of the labor and everything is free, but also takes into account human greed and allows them to some how fulfill that endeavor.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:06:07 2011 No.2692929 I'm a poor man and I support capitalism because I have morals and realize there is more to life than free hand outs.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:07:07 2011 No.2692939 File: 205 KB, 705x455, 1299823798840.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2692927 LOL

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:07:47 2011 No.2692937 >>2692927 Someone is a fucking faggot who has never worked a day in their life. You deserve to die from starvation, nigger.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:08:07 2011 No.2692941 >>2692901 >how is it unfair ...are you serious?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:08:07 2011 No.2692948 >>2692941 You work, make money, buy new things. If you don't work, you don't get money, you don't get nice things. How is that not fair? You honestly want a bum to live luxurious like you?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:09:07 2011 No.2692954 File: 18 KB, 280x392, fascist uniform.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw I'm a fascist

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:09:07 2011 No.2692955 >>2692948 I am the second type and I agree with you.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:10:07 2011 No.2692959

>>2692920
>this is what liberals actually believe
pick up a history book. Read about workers' conditions before the progressive movement. Explain to me how that was not capitalism's fault, considering that the US was almost a completely free market state at the time.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:11:07 2011 No.2692964 >>2692959 Go ask /new/ and they're explain to you why you're wrong.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:11:07 2011 No.2692966 >>2692948 As far as I know, the people who get the most money don't work the most (bankers, CEOs, inheritancefags). Meanwhile, the folks at walmart work pretty hard and get shit pay. Seems like your premises are incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:11:07 2011 No.2692967 >>2692948 >You honestly want a bum to live luxurious like you? *looks around at shitty little studio apartment" Yeah, fuck the poor.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:11:07 2011 No.2692968 >>2692948 Of course, parents with money have absolutely nothing to do with it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:12:07 2011 No.2692975 >>2692964 a wonderful rebuttal. Now honestly, since you're so certain of your position, I'm sure you can back it up with something more than "fuck off"

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:12:07 2011 No.2692977 >>2692937 Sorry if I wish for a system that didn't label humans as livestock, something to be managed and maintained based on physical performance.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:12:07 2011 No.2692978 >>2692966 If you're working at Wal-Mart, you really fucked up your life. It's still not too late to go to college and get a real career. It's too late for me. ;;_;;

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:13:07 2011 No.2692980 >>2692977 Says the fat neckbeard sitting in his basement. >>2692975 Just do it, faggot, unless you're too afraid of being told.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:14:07 2011 No.2692985 >>2692980 Someone actually posted this thread on /new/.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:14:07 2011 No.2692986

>Big, powerful, greedy corporation fails in capitalism - it goes under and nobody cares.
>Big, powerful, greedy corporation fails in socialism - ZOMG GOT TO SAVE THEM WITH TAXPAYER MONEY

But capitalism is worse because it's so unfair and has so much disparity.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:14:07 2011 No.2692989 >>2692978 I don't personally work at wal-mart, but I pity the folks who do. Also keep in mind, it's not you that fucked up. The universe functions on causality; your environment caused you to fuck up.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:14:07 2011 No.2692990

>>2692901
>>2692891
Just because 'life isn't fair' doesn't mean humans can't try to make it 'fairer'. Of course though, middle-class white boys wouldn't understand how being born into a family that's not poor makes it so much easier to succeed then being born into poverty.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:15:07 2011 No.2692991 >>2692986 that second part should say fascism, not socialism. the gov't doesn't give a shit about corps in socialism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:15:07 2011 No.2692993 >>2692980 In case you haven't noticed, /new/ has been gone for about 3 months. And I'm not sure how asking for a rebuttal translates into "afraid of being told"

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:15:47 2011 No.2692995 >>2692986 >big corporation >socialism nigga you best be trollin

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:16:07 2011 No.2692997 CHINA STRONG

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:16:07 2011 No.2693000

>>2692990
>He thinks I'm a suburban white boy.
Bitch, I'm poor too and black.
>>2692989
Nah, you practically fucked your life up something fierce if you're working at fucking Wal-Mart. I used to work there. Now I'm leeching off of my parents. I'm such a disgrace.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:17:07 2011 No.2693007 File: 117 KB, 1150x800, new - News.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2692993 Would it kill you to use Google?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:17:07 2011 No.2693008 >>2692990 Agreed comrade! We must plunder the productive to make life more fair!

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:19:07 2011 No.2693021 >>2693007 you mean 4chon, the 1 post a day alternative to 4chan? yes, I'm sure I'll get told sometime in April

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:19:07 2011 No.2693022 >>2692989 How is it not me that fucked up? I could've gone to college yet I remained a lazy fucker for the majority of my life. Now I'm a worthless parasite on the face of society.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:20:07 2011 No.2693025

>>2693000
You missed the point. Thing is, you don't have free will. Nobody does. It's physically impossible.

So you fucking up is just the inevitable result of the interactions of an uncountable number of atoms over the course of the universe's existence. It's nothing for you to feel bad about, and it's nothing that you should suffer for, either. Which is why socialism makes sense.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:20:07 2011 No.2693026

>>2692751

Yes. Socialism doesn't work, because it creates a system where people aren't motivated at all to work harder. It also steals from people, violating their rights.

Empathetic capitalism is superior to randian bullshit though; you shouldn't withhold your inventions from society just because you think you're better than everyone else. You should be able to make bank off of them, though.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:21:07 2011 No.2693029
File: 72 KB, 600x700, capitalism illustrated.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I find it hilarious how the capitalists have been able to turn the working class against itself, by somehow making workers jealous of unemployed and hobos.

This shit needs to stop. The worlds' industrial might could give everyone a middle class, first world living standard if most of the profit wasn't salted into the bank accounts of the super-rich.

Do you really think you will break into the ranks of the worlds' owners? By working hard?

The worlds' hardest workers, in east-asian sweatshops, have a miserable, squalid existence to show for it.

However, if you are born rich you will never have to do a day's work in your life.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:21:07 2011 No.2693030 >>2693008 The rich aren't productive.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:21:07 2011 No.2693031

>>2693008
So you think that people like Paris Hilton should be filthy rich and be able to buy just about anything she wants because she was born into a rich family? While there are people working on farms their entire lives every day getting paid pennies?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:22:07 2011 No.2693037 >>2693031 She's privileged. There's nothing I can do.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693042 >>2692901 life is unfair so we take steps to correct it. otherwise slavery would not have been abolished, the civil rights act would not have passed, and you do not live the life of oliver twist.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693043

>>2693008
Define productive. Is the blue collar guy who works three jobs without benefits to support his family somehow less productive than the corporate executive that only puts in a fraction of a workday and gets several times the average vacation time?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693044 OP's trolling the opposite direction on /new/.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693045 >>2693037 You can vote to raise her taxes, and the taxes of people like her.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693047 File: 435 KB, 1512x2092, 1296148220917.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:23:07 2011 No.2693050 >>2693045 Why? What purpose would that solves?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:24:07 2011 No.2693052

>>2693026

Yugoslavia and Anarchist Catalonia both used forms of market socialism. You have a market for selling goods and services, but each business is worker-run and worker-owned, which a) makes them far more motivated and productive, and b) means that more people get a decent standard of living

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:24:07 2011 No.2693054 File: 76 KB, 1181x897, 1296160870498.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:25:07 2011 No.2693059 >>2693050 More progressive taxes limit wealth disparity and stabilize the economy. The middle class in the US is shrinking, and that's not good.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:25:07 2011 No.2693064

>>2693050
>So you think that people like Paris Hilton should be filthy rich and be able to buy just about anything she wants because she was born into a rich family?
It would make her a bit less rich, and everyone else would be a little better off for it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:25:07 2011 No.2693067 >>2692920 Go to China now, see for yourself.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:26:07 2011 No.2693072 >>2693052 That's fine. Now I except an answer: will 'traditionally' run businesses be allowed by the local mob to operate alongside these so called worker cooperatives (so called because all businesses are worker cooperatives) and out compete them?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:26:07 2011 No.2693073 >Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone? I don't think you get the point of capitalism or you're being intentionally dense.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:27:07 2011 No.2693075 >>2693064 And ruin her family who worked so hard to EARN their wealth? No thanks. I may never reach their level, but at least I have the respect for another being who earned their keep. Also, OP is using these comments to troll /new/.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:27:07 2011 No.2693078 It clearly is but empathic capitalism is better than randian shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:28:07 2011 No.2693084 >>2693075 >implying it's possible for progressive income taxes to "ruin" someone We're not doing forced redistribution of property here. It's income taxes. And in the 50s it was a hell of a lot more progressive than it is now.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:29:07 2011 No.2693086 You were not born with a guarantee that you were going to be satisfied or your life or money back

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:29:07 2011 No.2693087

>>2693075
They didn't earn it, they got lucky. Just like poor folks got unlucky. Sure, they may have been more motivated than some person who didn't end up rich, but what *made* them motivated to begin with?

Their environment, of course, just like the poor man's environment made him unmotivated, which made him poor. Nobody should profit from, or be punished for, the luck of their environment.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:29:07 2011 No.2693088 I'm poor and I'd be disgusted if I were to live in a socialist environment where the government steals my hard earn money that I worked for. Capitalism really is the best system that benefits people even if they don't know it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:29:07 2011 No.2693091 >>2693075 I don't think you understand just how rich they are. You could tax them 50% of their income and they would still be considered filthy fucking rich compared to the middle class.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:30:07 2011 No.2693094 >>2693087 Are you high? Also, Mr. Hilton owns hotels. He does work for his money.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:30:07 2011 No.2693098 >>2693088 In a socialist environment you'd be paid, you dumb shit. Redistribution goes from rich to poor, not the other way around (except in capitalism, where that is what happens).

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:30:07 2011 No.2693100 File: 112 KB, 1105x631, ohwow.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2693067 inb4 somebody says china is socialist

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:31:07 2011 No.2693105 >>2693094 >implying owning = working

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:31:07 2011 No.2693106

>>2693052
That's fine. Now I except an answer: will 'traditionally' run businesses be allowed by the local mob to operate alongside these so called worker cooperatives (so called because all businesses are actually worker cooperatives) and out compete them? Anarchist socialism is a fucking a joke and a contradiction in terms.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:32:07 2011 No.2693115 >>2693091 On top of that, they will get back their 50% after a year.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:32:07 2011 No.2693117

>>2693094
>Are you high?
No?

>Also, Mr. Hilton owns hotels. He does work for his money.
The second sentence doesn't follow the first. You don't have to work to *own* things. What work does he actually do? And if he earns 1000x the wages of his hotel employees, does that mean he works 1000x as hard as they do? I don't see how that's possible.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:33:07 2011 No.2693119 ITT: Idealists with fool's dreams. >>2693098 The government would own your work, not you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:33:07 2011 No.2693123 Capitalism is good. Central banks with fractional reserve lending and fiat money is not. The stock market is not, its like a carnival game, based on confidence.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:34:07 2011 No.2693127 >>2693119 This, these neckbeards live in a fantasy world.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:35:07 2011 No.2693134 >>2693094 If I ever get to afford to stay in one of his fancy hotels. Does he serve me morning coffee, a cream pie and a bowl of mushroom soup?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:35:07 2011 No.2693137

>>2693072

I'm not the person you're responding to, but seeing as they'd probably out-compete the worker-run businesses, no they shouldn't be allowed. It's sort of like how we don't allow slave labor anymore; yeah it's more efficient, but it's not something we want to have around.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:36:07 2011 No.2693139

>>2693026
fuck intellectual property protections. the drive for profit does not encourage innovation, for humans innovate as of course. think free hip hop mixtapes. or the dada movement. or (ugh) banksy. none of the above came to being for a profit motive.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:36:07 2011 No.2693141 >>2693127 Outsider mentality like that is what holds humanity back. People thinking about ways they could potentially help humanity is not a bad thing, why shun people for it?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:36:07 2011 No.2693145 >>2693119 What's the difference? What's the point in ownership, if all your needs and wants are satisfied?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:36:07 2011 No.2693148 >>2692751 Idealy, no, it's not the best system. Realistically though, it's the only system that will properly work because humans are inherently greedy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:36:07 2011 No.2693149 ...hmm, which side to believe, the ones that suggest different degrees of sensible compromise or the ones that want everything to be their way or the world economy will collapse right now and everything will be bad and nasty...

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:37:07 2011 No.2693151 >>2692887 this. I've suspected it's good for starting a society in a technological revolution. But once you've got it going, it's outdated. Don't know what to replace it with though

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:37:07 2011 No.2693152 >>2693117 This. All you need to do is invest a large sum of money in a stable company to get enough to live on. Of course, that sum of money is out of reach of workers, keeping them trapped.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:37:07 2011 No.2693153 >>2693100 >>2693067 Ask a guy living in China anything.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:38:07 2011 No.2693157 >>2693153 Any overt racism/nationalism in employment? Social circles?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:38:07 2011 No.2693158 >>2693148 Ideally yes, retard; how does it feel being homeless?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:38:07 2011 No.2693159 >>2693137 >It's sort of like how we don't allow slave labor anymore; yeah it's more efficient, but it's not something we want to have around. Wrong slave labor is cheaper yes but not nearly as efficient as paying somebody to do a job.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:39:07 2011 No.2693168 What was the difference for living standards of workers before and after Deng Xiaoping's liberalization?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:39:07 2011 No.2693178 >>2693158 Ideally no, and realistically no. We're in the middle of another economic crisis, and we have these things every fucking decade. Capitalism is nice in theory, except not, because even the theory is ass-backwards. Fuck you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:39:07 2011 No.2693181 >>2693052 yugoslavia was a poverty ridden shithole and anarchist spain was tyrannical hell you want to be socialists fine just go do it somewhere else

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:40:07 2011 No.2693185 >>2693178 I'll take it over Soviet Russia.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:40:07 2011 No.2693188 >>2693158 Our ideals do not match, how appropriate.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:41:07 2011 No.2693192 >>2693185 I'd take Soviet Russia over it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:41:07 2011 No.2693194 >>2693159 With slavery you have to worry about housing and feeding your slaves. Also keeping them from escaping. Too much work.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:41:07 2011 No.2693197 >>2692887 what you smoking? capitalism thrives off of wanton consumerism. the gdp goes up when people buy useless shit, ever consuming more of the world's scarce resources.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:42:07 2011 No.2693199 >>2693159 >>slave labour >>not efficient MFW

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:42:07 2011 No.2693202 >>2693192 Enjoy not having food.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:42:07 2011 No.2693204 >>2693194 >>2693159 It was just an example, guys; the point still stands.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:42:07 2011 No.2693206 >>2693194 Not to mention slaves feel trapped (because they are) and therefore hold a constant grudge against their owner and therefore are not nearly as productive as they could be. But that's just high school business management.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:43:07 2011 No.2693210 >>2692927 you live in your fantasy life. Learning about basic economics might help you understand about the big boy world.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:44:07 2011 No.2693217 >>2693119 >>Yugoslavia >>Argentinian recovered factories >>Anarchist Catalonia Worker's control, bro. Not state control.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:44:07 2011 No.2693218 >>2693157 No racism here. Chinese love foreigners. Everyday in the street, someone try to practice a little English with me. Kids are smiling and say "Hello!" Chinese are also quite proud of their country, though.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:44:07 2011 No.2693221 >>2693210 >basic economics >built from capitalist ideals >will not be appropriate for his new system

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:45:07 2011 No.2693224 >>2693145 if you want total security, go to prison. there you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. the only thing lacking…is freedom.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:45:07 2011 No.2693225 >>2693202 Enjoy hating your neighbor, or more realistically, not even knowing who they are. Soviet Russia may have had infrastructure problems, but at least they had a sense of community.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:46:07 2011 No.2693234 No, it is not true. Society is always evolving and changing. It won't be around forever.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:46:07 2011 No.2693238 >>2693225 >implying community over food. Food is the most basic necessity to life you ignorant fool.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:46:07 2011 No.2693240 >>2693225 Are you fucking KIDDING me? Do you have any idea what it was like for them to live in a state where the secret police will disappear you if you say something that doesn't toe the party line? Not to mention the purges of Stalin...

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:47:07 2011 No.2693244 >>2693224 >>security >>prison I'd feel safer in somalia. In addition to this, prisons do NOT fulfill all of human needs. Otherwise they wouldn't be used as a punishment.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:48:07 2011 No.2693260 >>2693240 >>2693238 >>2693225 >>2693202 >>2693192 >>2693185 Did any of you actually live in Soviet Russia? I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say no, you did not live in Soviet Russia.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:49:07 2011 No.2693266

>>2693238
Yeah, and a sense of community is essential to a fulfilled life. Plus, it's not like the Russians just sat there and starved (okay, some did); due to poor infrastructure they often grew their own food, and knew how to repair the tools and vehicles that they depended upon. They were probably more self-reliant than you or I.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:50:07 2011 No.2693269 >>2693244 Someone never been to prison.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:50:07 2011 No.2693273 >>2693260 I've read enough first-hand accounts. And I never implied firsthand knowledge. I've never been to London either. But I know they have a fuckton of cameras on the streets.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:51:07 2011 No.2693276 >>2693260 I live in China. Ask me anything.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:51:07 2011 No.2693279 >>2693273 No they don't. Proof number one you're full of shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:51:07 2011 No.2693280 >>2693266 Because it was either that or death.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:52:07 2011 No.2693284 >>2693279 >No they don't. Proof number one you're full of shit. no u. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23412867-tens-of-thousands-of-cctv-cameras-yet-80-of-crim e-unsolved.do

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:52:07 2011 No.2693288 >>2693280 And?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:52:07 2011 No.2693289 >>2693276 What are your labour rights like?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:53:07 2011 No.2693296 >>2693288 You seem to act like you actually would have preferred living in Soviet Russia. I'm suggesting you're being naive.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:53:07 2011 No.2693299

I'm on the verge of being homeless. I work hard for 6 days a week and just cannot keep up with rent. I have a brother and mother to support. Moving into a new place next month, a shitty little dump. Yet in my old age I find myself thankful for a capitalist system. Maybe I am just now realizing that I'd never be rich or have any fancy shit. But that's just who I am. Plus I never directly went to college after high school so I probably fucked my life up somehow.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:53:07 2011 No.2693302 ITT: Retards that aren't reading the question properly >Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone? >capitalism, best system, EVERYONE: truth? No, it is not the best system for everyone. It is only best for those that lack empathy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:54:07 2011 No.2693309 >>2693302 Because empathic capitalism doesn't exist, amiright? Also, there'll always been poverty.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:55:07 2011 No.2693311 >>2693302 >No, it is not the best system for everyone. It is only best for those that lack empathy. Yeah, no. Unless you're talking about full-on Ayn Rand capitalism, which no one uses.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:55:07 2011 No.2693313 >>2693296 This. the soviet bloc's governments made a buck off their workers the same way that western corporations do. Either you're a Party Member or a poorfag.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:56:07 2011 No.2693319 >>2693299 Learn to blow job, it helps with money.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:56:07 2011 No.2693323 >>2693309 No, it doesn't exist. Money detracts the human element from any transaction. >>2693311 Give an example of capitalism that is not "full-on Ayn Rand capitalism"

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:57:07 2011 No.2693327 >>2693319 Nah, I don't need to. I found a place for $500 rent. This gives me the chance to have some nice things like Internet and Netflix. But I may need to cancel cable.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:58:07 2011 No.2693332 >>2693323 You're a fucking retard. Emapthic capitalism is the best capitalism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:58:07 2011 No.2693333 Apparently leaving people alone to make their own decisions and not taking half their shit at gunpoint is immoral.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:58:07 2011 No.2693337 >>2693323 >Give an example of capitalism that is not "full-on Ayn Rand capitalism" Public education and unemployment benefits are socialist, from a Randian perspective. Not to mention subsidized health care.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:58:07 2011 No.2693338

>>2693289
Mostly I have none. But finding a job is easy. So if I'm not happy with what I have, I just look for something else.
A lot of people belong to the administration/public service here, so I guess it's a lot more stable for them. No unemployement I've heard of.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:59:07 2011 No.2693341 >>2693332 I'll reiterate my original statement, because it is still valid. ITT: Retards that aren't reading the question properly Emphasis on the retard.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:59:07 2011 No.2693345 >>2693327 Still it's always handy to know. If you need to practise, you can always call me up.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 03:59:07 2011 No.2693347 File: 162 KB, 482x600, Recettear-Capitalism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:00:07 2011 No.2693354 >>2693333 Quad truth: it is immoral.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:01:07 2011 No.2693371 >>2693354 >>>/b/

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:02:07 2011 No.2693377

Wtf is this blaming the environment crap for the failures of a person? I'm borderline homeless and you're telling me it's not my fault? You're fucking idiots and probably losers needing something to cling onto as an excuse for why you fucked up your own lives.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:04:07 2011 No.2693390

>>2693337

Ok, so a capitalist society that employs some socialist legislation is empathic capitalism?

Seems more like capitalism with a dash of socialist tendencys.

It is like having a red ball with a little blue ball taped to the side rather than a purple ball.

Capitalism is the strive for profit. It is about money. People are equated their value in money. Like I said before, money detracts the human element from any transaction.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:06:07 2011 No.2693400 >>2693008 Implying the rich and land owner population are "productive." Middle class property owning americans are trash and utter shit. Upper middle class are wrong. The super rich are even worse. Pirvate property.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:06:07 2011 No.2693404 >>2693390 You shouldn't be here little boy.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:07:07 2011 No.2693414

>>2693390
You say that, but I don't really know what you're talking about specifically, and I don't think you do either.
I'm not the "empathic capitalism" guy - I favor social democracy personally. Mainly capitalist economy, progressive taxes to support social infrastructure (free public education, universal health care, etc), and a representative democratic political system.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:07:07 2011 No.2693416 >>2693404 >mfw you can't dispute anything if your life depended on it

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:08:07 2011 No.2693419 >>2693400 >Middle class property owning americans are trash and utter shit. You just lost my support for your post. The middle class is where as many people should be as possible.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:09:07 2011 No.2693427 >>2693327 be a real man and squat you yuppie piece of shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:14:07 2011 No.2693453 Was seeing some discussion about "Soviet Russia". I was born in USSR at 1976. I remember things and I have learned more from older people and by reading. If somebody wants to ask things about "Soviet Russia", I'll answer.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:15:07 2011 No.2693461 >>2693453 Is Obama a socialist? Fox news says so and Id like to believe them.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:15:07 2011 No.2693462 >>2693416 >implying you deserve to be educated. Go to bed.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:18:07 2011 No.2693477 >>2693461 That is not about "Soviet Russia". I didn't write ask me anything (white plastic things on shoe laces are called aglets).

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:18:07 2011 No.2693481 >>2693453 Yo, bro. I'm the guy living in China. Also born in 1976. Lot of Mao nostalgia, here. Is it the same with Stalin in ex-USSR?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:22:07 2011 No.2693506 >>2693453 How about your opinion on OP's question?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:22:07 2011 No.2693509 >>2693453 How similar to pre-1990 east germany was the rest of soviet russia?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:23:07 2011 No.2693516
File: 192 KB, 464x629, better2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I find it hilarious how the communists (you heard me, communists) have been able to turn manual laborers against intellectual laborers, by somehow making workers jealous of the middle class who succeed by working smart while kneeling down and worshipping statist crony-socialist corporatists like George Soros who succeed through corruption opened up by state interventionism.

This shit needs to stop. The worlds' industrial might could give everyone a middle class, first world living standard if most of the profit wasn't taxed and regulated into the bank accounts of the super-rich.

Do you really think you will break into the ranks of the worlds' statists? By helping to persecute the middle class?

The worlds' most oppressed workers, in socialist planned economies, have a miserable, squalid existence to show for it, even when they have the vote.

However, in a free market you have the most direct system of representation on economic matters, individual freedom, this way everyone can own a piece of the pie, true "collective ownership of the means of production", not some corrupt bureaucracy calling itself a "people's republic". Instead of everyone being impoverished proletariats serving the politburo as the communists dream, everyone can be petite bourgeois, both owning and working as free individuals making their own decisions.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:31:07 2011 No.2693555 >>2693516 What you want is not a society, it's more like a free for all survival of the fittest fuck fest. Communists care about their country as a whole, and if you care as well, you can just join the "corrupt bureaucracy".

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:33:07 2011 No.2693570 >>2693555 And communism isn't a society either. Life isn't some turkey shoot.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:36:07 2011 No.2693588

>>2693481
I live in Estonia. We have always hated Stalin. There is very little Soviet nostalgia around.

>>2693506
I believe free market capitalism is the best system there is right now. I am not big on welfare state. I think this is something for the countries rich with resources (or in lesser degree generally rich countries). Socialism was just horrible. It was very inefficient system and very restrictive system on people's choices. If you take so many freedoms from people, then secret police, etc... are unintended consequences. You can't have one without the other.

>>2693509
East-Germany was much richer, than rest of Eastern Block. East-German goods were available very rarely, but these were the best ones available.

I have a feeling their brainwashing and soul crushing machine worked with good old German efficiency though.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:38:07 2011 No.2693598 >>2693570 WTF turkey shoot? Is that supposed to make sense?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:40:07 2011 No.2693609 Yes, because it doesn't use coercion and force.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:46:07 2011 No.2693635 >>2693609 All governments do.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 04:57:07 2011 No.2693692 >>2693598 This fella never watched Hey Arnold! before. >That's the trouble with society, we have no work ethic. Life's not some turkey shoot.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:02:07 2011 No.2693712

Democratic socialism sounds pretty good. Pure capitalism is asinine. sociopaths succeed in such a system and the rich get richer. Letting people do whatever they want without checks and balances is always a stupid thing to do. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:05:07 2011 No.2693731 >>2693712 >Democratic socialism What does it mean for you? Wikipedia is not very decided on that, but mostly leans toward some shitty utopia.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:05:47 2011 No.2693726 >>2693712 Sounds like a lazy fuck who is using excuse for why they are in the dumps. Just like me except I know the value of capitalism. It means freedom, now fuck off nigger. :D

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:06:07 2011 No.2693732 absolutely! hopefully not THE best system, but the best one so far.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:12:07 2011 No.2693754 >>2693726 You are an idiot. Lets not rely on law. Whoever works harder and succeeds deserved to succeed. (gets out a bat to kick your ass and steal your money)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:14:07 2011 No.2693758 File: 92 KB, 500x375, IAPxd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] capitalism looks good on paper but doesn't work in reality

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:16:07 2011 No.2693765 >>2693726 Don't take it personally I am just working harder than you. (whack!)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:38:07 2011 No.2693848 mfw people think capitalism is a pretty good idea while their bosses earn 20x their pay for half the work

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:47:07 2011 No.2693881 >>2693848 What would you think is a good idea?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:48:07 2011 No.2693885

>>2693765
Bullshit, I work the whole day while you sit at home eating you fat fuck.
>>2693848
Except most bosses work their way up to earn that paycheck. Something none of us lazy buggers will ever know.
>>2693758
That's socialism that looks good on paper, but in reality falls apart.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:48:07 2011 No.2693886 ITT: a guy from ex-Soviet Union, and a guy living in China: notasinglefuckwasgiventhatday.jpg People prefer to keep talking from their asses.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:48:07 2011 No.2693887 No. Soon I'll be living in the woods, far away from here.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:51:07 2011 No.2693899 File: 1.17 MB, 200x207, samljackson-1.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2693758 Bourgeois has to be the pretentious word you can use in a discussion of economics.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:54:07 2011 No.2693909 >>2693848 how about a system where people are paid for exactly how much they put in, and where workers collectively make the decisions usually reserved to the board of directors

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:57:07 2011 No.2693926 >>2693909 But what if the workers aren't trained in management? Being able to tighten bolts on an assembly line doesn't give you the ability to run anything.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 05:58:07 2011 No.2693930 >>2693909 Makes sense.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:03:07 2011 No.2693947

>>2693909
Someone attempted this "trap" before by asking would the anarchocommiethingy allow private enterprise.

The catch, I believe, would have been, that free market capitalism allows for worker co-operatives. You can find like-minded people start your co-operative and run it democratically. The system does not prevent that so assuming you live in a western country you already live in such a system.

Have you explored this option? What is stopping you from joining or starting a worker co-operative?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:08:07 2011 No.2693963

>>2693926
i'm talking about the board of directors, not mid-level management. the workers would decide the what, how, and when of production. managers would still exist, but would be held directly accountable to the workers.

>>2693947
it's an interesting idea, that socialists like richard wolff have suggested (albeit to a more extreme extent), but i personally think that it doesn't make any sense from a class-based point of view (if the working class has the ability to improve its conditions by force, why shouldn't they?)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:11:07 2011 No.2693974 >>2693963 That system has already been tried. It's called organized labor, and it sucked our auto industry dry like a vampire.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:15:07 2011 No.2693991 >>2693963 So by yearning for fair system you are not actually talking about worker owned factories and democratic decision making in the workplace. Your wish is to use force to take something away from other people.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:17:07 2011 No.2694000
File: 7 KB, 200x251, 1291355097600s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

53% of Americans believe they are in the top 1%.

The American dream never existed. The wealthiest people are the ones who control the laws of the country and the media to propagate them, so you THINK that capitalism is a system that is benefiting you. In reality, it is a system that is causing you to work more hours for less pay. It is not in the interest of corporations to stop producing goods because then they will get less profit. So, they convince you to buy goods you don't need with money you don't have. So you work longer hours at reduced wages striving to buy something you will throw away in a year's time or less. The extra profit goes directly to them and their friends in public relations so they can continue to deceive the public as a whole.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:19:07 2011 No.2694005

Capitalism promotes taking the 'safe bet' because it is centered around creating a profit margin. This safe bet leads to the overall degradation of art, slows the progress of industry and invention, and leads to wasted resources being used in competition.

Capitalism, at least in current form, favors the rich and expands the gap between the classes. If you are a worker in the modern capitalist environment, you are kept from being treated like a serf, only because of government and union intervention.

Socialism is the answer. At least you can use the government as a tool to uphold civil rights; corporations can only be trusted to want to make money off of you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:20:07 2011 No.2694007 >>2694000 Underageb&

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:33:07 2011 No.2694034

>>2694005
>Capitalism promotes taking the 'safe bet'

But it is exactly the opposite. If you take a risk and it works out you get the reward. This pushes people to take risks and drives innovation.

Socialism is the one, that discourages risk taking and promotes taking a "safe bet". The innovations of modern world have came from capitalist systems. Socialism was the one, that proved to be inefficient and stagnant.

Did you think today is the Opposite Day and write it backwards?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:35:07 2011 No.2694043 >>2694034 because there is no competition in socialism

Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. Sun Mar 13 06:36:07 2011 No.2694048
File: 238 KB, 678x1024, 1294799876403.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Currently, a social democracy with a relatively unhindered free market is the best way.

Unfortunately it's still not what I would consider 'good.'

http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna5.htm

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:37:07 2011 No.2694053 File: 29 KB, 468x478, property.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2694048 >Nothing is owned Either explain this bullshit in a concise logical manner or you're a hippy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:39:07 2011 No.2694060 This >>2694005 And this >>2694000

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:41:07 2011 No.2694065

>>2694043
Are you influenced by facts? Every socialist country was backwards and stagnant. Socialism has failed spectacularly everywhere while capitalism was the system, that allowed high living standard to people.

People are not machines or ants. They need to have motivation to innovate and take risks.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:42:07 2011 No.2694068

on the whole, people are far too stupid to be able to handle true freedom. that's why everyone is dependent upon society in the first place. nobody runs through the motions as everyone else has before because of some distorted view of freedom; it is simply the path of least resistance. we accept certain limitations in our lives, in exchange for a promise to subvert many of the most repugnant aspects inherent to living wild in a natural world. my question is just how bad do things have to get before this trade off becomes generally intolerable? any system is accomplishing the same fundamentals, a better question is:

Is it true that having a system is best for everyone?

who knows, OP.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:45:07 2011 No.2694074 Socialist is for pussies.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:47:07 2011 No.2694085

>>2694034

>But it is exactly the opposite. If you take a risk and it works out you get the reward. This pushes people to take risks and drives innovation.

Except that this is only what happens in the pipe dream that capitalists imagine for themselves. In reality, corporations take the safe bet because they want a guaranteed profit margin, not one that MIGHT pay off and give a reward. If you take that risk and it doesn't pay off, all you have is your dick in your hand and your competitors are now ahead. This attitude encourages conservatism and resulting stagnation.

>Socialism is the one, that discourages risk taking and promotes taking a "safe bet". The innovations of modern world have came from capitalist systems. Socialism was the one, that proved to be inefficient and stagnant.

A facsimile of socialism is what is being practiced in the happiest nations on Earth, including places like The Netherlands and Switzerland. I am sure, given that you have the above opinion, that you don't really know anything about it. You probably think that it is analogous to Communism. That being said, I admit a system that is too government centric has issues responding to societal cues. Some amount of private industry must be sustained if a healthy socialist society wants to stay afloat.

>Did you think today is the Opposite Day and write it backwards?

No, I just did this thing called 'thinking for myself.' I know it's difficult when every pundit and rich, powerful, man in any given first world country is fellating the system that made him that way to you. You probably think you can actually be in the top 1% of wage earners. The reality is, you can't, you won't, and no one can that has any conscience. Unrestrained capitalism rewards psychopaths and sociopaths.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:47:07 2011 No.2694086

>>2692751

in the sense of "everyone" to mean society as a whole. it is hard for me to answer as i have not known and experienced any other method of economic perpetuation.

in the sense of "everyone" to mean people as individuals, no, i don't believe it is the best system for everyone. this is because the capitalist system is fundamentally discriminatory. as people are discriminated against; some are favoured, some are disfavoured (i'm not arguing people's motivation/ambition here). for those that are favoured, the system is best as it provides them with the means for a better life. for those that are disfavoured it is not the best system as it does not provide them with the means for a better life.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:48:07 2011 No.2694093 >>2693588 If Estonians don't prefer a welfare state, why are there so many working here in Sweden. Because of cheap alcohol?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:57:07 2011 No.2694117

Sweden would be richer without the welfare state, not to mention all the immigrants from countries on the other end of the human development index. Why do Somali refugees specifically need to go to Sweden? If they were really running for their lives they'd have stopped at the first place where no one is trying to murder them.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 06:59:07 2011 No.2694126 >>2694117 >Sweden would have a higher income inequality without the welfare state FTFY

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:03:07 2011 No.2694145

>>2694093
The same reason why many Swedes are working in Norway - it is a richer neighboring country.

Estonian people showed their will in elections a week ago. Center-right coalition got 56 seats out of 101. Out of the available parties Estonians elected the ones, whose ideology is keeping the flat income tax and small government.

I believe Swedish voters have also turned towards reducing taxes and welfare state with lefties being in opposition since last elections.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:07:07 2011 No.2694157 Capitalism depends on the free market, which is basically a system that is dependent on the survival of the fittest. Capitalism is perfectly in like with Darwin's theories.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:08:07 2011 No.2694158

>>2694126
Why do you need a welfare state to keep people out of poverty? Other systems are far more efficient than centralized state planning, for instance direct democratic local government services. Income inequality would decrease due to the laying off of 10000s of unnecessary bureaucrats, like social workers, who could become unskilled laborers in the jobs the evicted immigrants leave behind.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:10:07 2011 No.2694162

No it's absolutely not.
I've written enough miniature essays on 4chan about this that I can't be bothered to anymore at this point.
But suffice it to say that capitalism is harmful to humanity and to the natural world and everything else you could think of.
It is basically a system whereby those that are selfish and powerful profit further, and others struggle to get by. Creativity and advancement of knowledge etc. are not valued as they should be at all, and the rich get richer without contributing anything to the world except massive amounts of chemicals, arms, weapons, consumer garbage etc.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:15:07 2011 No.2694178
File: 18 KB, 338x450, cigar-smoking-gentleman-in-a-black-tail-coat-and-trousers-white-waistcoat-bowtie-and-gloves-top-hat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

TO EVERYBODY WHO SAYS SOCIAL DEMOCRACY:

Sweden currently a hybrid between capitalism and social democracy, but in the 70s it was pure social democracy. But after the 70:s Swedish government made huge capitalistic reforms. One of the reason was that all organizations were moving where you did not tax more than you earned. This is true. Astrid Lindgren (creator of Pippi Longstocking etc) payed 105kr tax on every 100kr earned. That is, she paid more than she earned. This is very hard to get your head around, but this is true. Socialosm, h-ho? No, sir!

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:18:07 2011 No.2694186 >>2694178 But sweden still has the most taxes in the world. That is why IKEA and more have moved, causing Sweden to loose a lot of tax money they could have had of we had lower taxes. My mother and father each tax about 70% in their income.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:18:07 2011 No.2694187

>>2694162
>I've written enough miniature essays on 4chan about this
Has been brow beaten by goatee'd coffee house types for over a century, most people have already seen everything you have to say about capitalism. Try coming up with something fresh and original, for instance accepting the virtues of individual freedom that capitalism utilizes which are absent in fruity little leftist socialist utopias.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:19:07 2011 No.2694189 >>2694178 > hybrid between capitalism and social democracy fullretard.jpg

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:20:07 2011 No.2694192 >>2694187 what freedoms straw man much?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:20:07 2011 No.2694193 >>2694189 If you care to come with a more mature argument, i would be pleased.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:22:07 2011 No.2694198 >>2694193 How can you have a hybrid of social democracy and capitalism, when social democracy already is capitalist

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:26:07 2011 No.2694206 >>2694198 Because social democracy involves the capitalist mode of procution, and not real capitalism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:28:07 2011 No.2694214 File: 31 KB, 434x370, 1274656238594aa.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2694189

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:29:07 2011 No.2694215

>>2694157

maybe for the first week.

Darwin's theories describe the system of our natural world. The natural system is and will always be completely autonomous.

You do realize that by the act alone of creating a simulation of our natural order, it is immediately flawed. Without pure autonomy, all that you have left is a God machine for anyone with the correct access. How can any one, or even worse a large group, ever be trusted not to tamper with such all-encompassing power?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:29:07 2011 No.2694216 >>2694192 I just said, "individual freedom", looks like it's high time to freshen up on reading comprehension.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:32:08 2011 No.2694224 [DELETED]

Capitalism is a system open for exploitation, it's that simple. The "economic freedom" bullshit you get shoved down your throat is a lie. If anything, capitalism is economic slavery. Slavery for the super-rich and slavery for your masters. The system allows for classes to be developed, highlighting that these human beings are superior, these humans are better than these other humans.
Capitalism is not the best system we've got, it's the system that was best put into execution. All socialist leaders were authoritarian faggots who fucked life up for their people, ignoring the principles they supposedly believed in.
Socialists are saying those that work hard to get rich shouldn't be rich, we're not saying that those who do no work deserve the same luxuries as the aforementioned hard workers, we're saying those classes should be reduced. Of course those who work harder should have more, but do you really need the 5th television and do corporations really need the extra billion dollars while other human beings die of disease and starvation. An very minimal infringement on abuse of the free market to better serve mankind.
Capitalism is not the best system for everyone.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:34:07 2011 No.2694228 >>2694224 >Socialists aren't saying Correction.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:36:07 2011 No.2694235
File: 44 KB, 640x199, economist.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

where shit becomes a monopoly/cartel in a free market = run it democratically

where shit works fine in a free market = don't fuck with it

grey area between cartels and polyopoly = anti-trust laws

This should be pretty straightforward. What's so difficult?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:40:07 2011 No.2694245 >>2694235 What happens when the free market becomes the monopoly?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:40:07 2011 No.2694246 Capitalism = Freedom, so yes.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:43:07 2011 No.2694254 >>2694245 That's like dividing by 0, it won't happen.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:44:07 2011 No.2694258 >>2694254 How do you divide by zero?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:44:07 2011 No.2694259 >>2694246 Not necessarily.

m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 Sun Mar 13 07:44:07 2011 No.2694260

>>2694235
It's the application that's the hard part. For one, how are you going to assess that something works fine and will continue to work as well in the future?

And to give company economists their due, they're not always so ambiguous in their predictions.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:48:07 2011 No.2694274 >>2694254 I will make a bet and wager we wouldn't even know it if it already were.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:49:07 2011 No.2694280 File: 317 KB, 1024x985, 1277109662236.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 07:53:07 2011 No.2694291
File: 177 KB, 1294x1651, evdo.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2694280
Federal reserve (key word: federal) and government (key word: government) sponsored enterprises fredmac and fanmay caused the financial crisis.

Thanks a lot for creating a bloated plutocracy socialists, the complete opposite of what you set out to do.

>>	m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 Sun Mar 13 07:59:07 2011 No.2694314 >>2694291 No, they didn't cause it, but some of their actions exacerbated the recession's effects. And how the hell did the GSEs create a "bloated plutocracy" when they were giving people to purchase properties beyond their means?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:00:07 2011 No.2694318 >>2694314 State interventionism in general created the bloated plutocracy by granting corporations special privileges and opening up loopholes for corruption. Read more books.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:01:07 2011 No.2694320 >>2694259 Yes, you just mad because you take it for granted.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:03:07 2011 No.2694324

>>2694291

Hahahaha, oh it's this old trope.

Step 1) Capitalists fuck everything up by being so greedy that they undermine their own market
Step 2) Government comes in and attempts to fix the problem with new regulation
Step 3) The corporations continue with their own corruption and, in fact, abuse the new rules and the trust of all of their consumers
Step 4) The whole charade falls apart due to their greed
Step 5) Capitalists claim that the government programs that were instituted were what caused the problem

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:06:07 2011 No.2694330 >>2694314 they were not performing acts of kindness, is that a troll? are you bat shit insane? i doubt very many of those people would be home if you knocked on their doors today.

>>	m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 Sun Mar 13 08:08:07 2011 No.2694340 >>2694318 Give me some examples of state interventionism that did such things.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:10:07 2011 No.2694345 >>2694291 inb4 capitalists are poor hard working men trying to stop the international jewish banking conspiracy from impurifying our precious bodily fluids. You and alex jones can GTFO

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:17:07 2011 No.2694362

>>2694280
I think both wealth and income on this kinds of graphs are a bit misleading.

For example social welfare benefits are not counted within income. To get an accurate comparison they should be counted in both income and wealth.

In wealth, because the wealth of rich people is in stocks. Value of company is much more, than just value of companies assets. Companies predicted receivables over some years are added to the value.

For example shareholder equity of Apple is 54 billion, but market capitalization of Apple is 324 billion.

If you were to use similar formulas to calculate the value of benefits guaranteed to bottom 90% of people, you'd get a different wealth numbers.

I wonder if anyone has done (or could do) graphs with counting these things in?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:18:07 2011 No.2694364

If you mean best to the top 1% then yes it is.
Otherwise it's actually quite terrible in its purest form.
Capitalism can work but then we need to have strong regulation and taxation systems in place to prevent the condensation of wealth.
Basically if we have strong regulations, heavy and progressive tax system which focuses on income and individual products.
In addition to this really strong inheritance tax. The higher the better preferably close to a 100% from amounts over 100k excluding family home and such important parts of property.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:18:07 2011 No.2694365

>>2694324
Step 1) Socialists turn the lower class against the middle class.
Step 2) Government comes in and places restrictions on small and medium sized businesses in the name of destroying the middle class while granting special privileges to corporations.
Step 3) The corporations continue with their own corruption and, in fact, abuse the new rules and the trust of all of their consumers
Step 4) The whole charade falls apart due to their greed
Step 5) Politicians blame the evil middle class and their free market.

By not giving the state these powers you are only opening up loopholes to be exploited by figures like George Soros and Jeffrey Epstein. Dismiss facts all you want.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:19:07 2011 No.2694370 Solution: Make every person in a country a shareholder of every company.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:20:07 2011 No.2694372 Most people who criticise capitalism are entitled college students with comfortable lives.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:22:07 2011 No.2694377 >>2694365 That's fascism you're thinking of. Socialists don't support corporate welfare. And its the right wing who turn the middle and working class against each other - or more specifically, unionized and non-unionized workforces.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:25:07 2011 No.2694383
File: 69 KB, 962x1417, moneys.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2694340
The enormous fucking bailouts I posted in that image.
Some of the things mentioned in this image.
corn and sugar subsides
corporate personhood
absurd monsanto patent laws
a plethora of obscure regulations, taxes, subsides and tariffs in various industries

Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. Sun Mar 13 08:27:07 2011 No.2694388
File: 258 KB, 1445x1585, 1262889348634.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2694383
LOOK AT THAT MANNED MISSION TO MARS BOX
LOOK HOW RELATIVELY SMALL IT IS
THEN REALIZE THE PRICE IS PROBABLY A FIFTH OF THAT IF YOU PUT ZUBRIN IN CHARGE

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:31:07 2011 No.2694394

>>2694377
I'm not referring to theoretical socialism, in your imagination, I'm referring to socialism in practice, in the real world, getting people to place their faith in a bureaucracy just because it claims to act in their collective interest.

Also, yes, the right wing are just as guilty, but if it were as simple as left = good, right = bad, then this problem would have been solved by now. So we need to attack marxism/leftism/socialist types as well.

>>	m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 Sun Mar 13 08:32:07 2011 No.2694398 >>2694330 What? I don't think you can fault their intent, which was to provide the poor a means of purchasing a home.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:36:07 2011 No.2694410 >>2694372 psst.. you're giving away too much information about yourself when you project so randomly about obvious personal issues you are still clinging to from your past. why is it never obvious to you guys?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:37:07 2011 No.2694414 ITT: jelly poorfags

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:39:07 2011 No.2694416

>>2694365

>Step 1) Socialists turn the lower class against the middle class.

Yeah, that's some bullshit right there. The lower class is not typically complaining about the middle class, they are complaining about the middle-upper class and the upper-upper class. In this, the middle class is with them. Of course, this makes sense given that they are lower class because all of the money in their economy being sucked into the top 1% of earners. I am not entirely sure where this perverted capitalist fantasy that the lower class hates the middle class comes from. If anyone seems to despise the middle class it is those who are in the upper class, given that they consume everyone else's wealth.

>Step 2) Government comes in and places restrictions on small and medium sized businesses in the name of destroying the middle class while granting special privileges to corporations.

Hahahaha, WHAT? What are you even talking about? Most regulations are placed upon large industry. Don't get me wrong, many decisions by the US government are in the interests of huge corporations and stifle growth in startup business, but this is definitely not the norm. The norm is that democrats who put in heavy regulation, desire to do it to very large industries.

>Step 3) The corporations continue with their own corruption and, in fact, abuse the new rules and the trust of all of their consumers
>Step 4) The whole charade falls apart due to their greed

Definitely in agreement here.

>Step 5) Politicians blame the evil middle class and their free market.

You're living in a fantasy world. Every politician, left and right, basically uses the middle class as their golden boy, hoping they can catapult them into success and luxury in order to bolster an image of America as free and open to economic progress with them at the helm as the great leader.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:46:07 2011 No.2694428

>>2694372

Yeah good point. It's really important to stereotype your opponents in order to dismiss their positions. It's also really important who they are where they come from, not their arguments. Arguments have everything to do with the person arguing, not logical consistency or adherence to fact. You're a capitalist sympathizer! Don't get bogged down by reality. Your opponents are all mindless hippies and drugged out college students.

m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 Sun Mar 13 08:51:07 2011 No.2694443

>>2694383
>corn and sugar subsides

You do know that these benefit people, right?

>corporate personhood

...that still doesn't afford corporations all of the rights as actual people, has been in effect for as long as
corporations themselves, and is of benefit for those working in corporations.

And you might be interested in this article about montesanto:

http://www.gmwatch.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12338

I don't think you know what state interventionism means. And weren't you talking about GSEs and the Fed?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 08:57:07 2011 No.2694467 >>2694428 If we were to only have solid arguments based on facts, then it would be really hard for anyone to defend socialism here.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:03:07 2011 No.2694490 File: 207 KB, 1280x960, facts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:10:07 2011 No.2694522 >>2694490 This is a picture of (starving?) children. How is this a fact. It seems more like an appeal to emotions.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:11:07 2011 No.2694525 >>2694490 obvious shop is obvious

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:26:07 2011 No.2694575 GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY /sci/ YOU /nevv/FAGGOTS GODDAMN I'M SO FUCKING MAD. B& FOR TWO WEEKS, HORNY AS FUCK TO GET BACK TO /sci/ AND BEHOLD RETARD THREAD WITH OVER 9000 POSTS GOD DAMN FUCKING SHITTING TITS

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:29:07 2011 No.2694590 >>2694575 What offended you about this thread? Why do you feel you must shout out and not just close the thread?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:33:07 2011 No.2694609 really really great for a few pretty nice for some kinda shitty for most

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:42:07 2011 No.2694634 >>2694609 Nah, it's good for everyone. People are just too greedy to realize it. Nigger.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:44:07 2011 No.2694641 No. There need to be some redistributing of money, so that everyone can live a life. Social democracy is the way to go.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:49:07 2011 No.2694658 File: 31 KB, 400x400, CAPITALISM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 09:49:07 2011 No.2694664 >>2694641 Well there are taxes. I don't think there is any capitalist state without taxes.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 10:15:07 2011 No.2694779 >>2694664 Two things are guarantee in life. Death and taxation.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 10:42:07 2011 No.2694868 File: 210 KB, 480x640, Capitalism_wow.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Like Jesus said, don't give anyone anything. Take everything and keep it all to yourself.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:08:07 2011 No.2694983

Capitalism:

>Caused income inequality
>People are forced to labor like slaves just so they can survive. Work now has no meaning except selling yourself to have food on the table and roof on your head.
>Caused the financial collapse.
>A mere 5-10% of the world's population controls 90% of the world's resources.
>Environment and health are set aside as long as profit is maximized for the benefits of the few.

And they say capitalism is the best. /sci/ confirmed to be a haven for Fox News, Peter Schiff and Paultard nutjobs

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:15:49 2011 No.2695008 [DELETED]

>>2694000
>53% of Ame>>2692927
>>2692927
ricans believe they are in the top 1%.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

Also, this:
>>2692927
>A better system, in my personal opinion, would be one where robots do 90% of the labor and everything is free, but also takes into account human greed and allows them to some how fulfill that endeavor.
There's no reason we can't automate most bullshit work and split the remaining labor amongst the workforce to say, 10 hrs/week.

Even in today's economy, the minimum wage should be raised, and tied to inflation, and the work week lowered to at most 32 hours, forcing employers to pay more and hire more people.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:17:07 2011 No.2695013

>>2694000
>53% of Americans believe they are in the top 1%.
>The American dream never existed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

Also, this:
>>2692927
>A better system, in my personal opinion, would be one where robots do 90% of the labor and everything is free, but also takes into account human greed and allows them to some how fulfill that endeavor.
There's no reason we can't automate most bullshit work and split the remaining labor amongst the workforce to say, 10 hrs/week.

Even in today's economy, the minimum wage should be raised, and tied to inflation, and the work week lowered to at most 32 hours, forcing employers to pay more and hire more people.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:21:07 2011 No.2695027 Remove income tax from people who make less than 500k a year.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:23:07 2011 No.2695029 Before Reagan the top income tax bracket was 70%. Bring that shit back. The US was its most productive when it had a high income tax.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:27:07 2011 No.2695040 >>2695027 I wonder what a flat tax rate would have to be in order to kick in a flat tax at 500k, or even 100k, and have everyone blow the threshold have no taxes? How much does the income tax bring in, anyone?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:29:07 2011 No.2695049

>>2695029
Why do you think that would be better? Are you not afraid businesses (and taxpayers) would start to escape USA and you'd end up with less for everything?

Do you think Sweden is happy or better off when it's high taxes caused IKEA to move its headquarters to Netherlands?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:37:07 2011 No.2695068
File: 38 KB, 648x435, top us federal marginal income tax rate 1913 - 2009.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2695049
As far as I'm concerned, history has proven we do better with a higher top income tax rate. And preceding that (and our current situation,) shows that lower taxes leads to larger wealth inequality, a poorer populace, and a worse society.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:39:07 2011 No.2695084

>>2695049
Then again, to add to: >>2695068
I have no problem with charging tariffs on imported goods that unfairly exploit workers. If a company can't pay $X to employees, raise the tariff marginally in proportion to their pay.

Yes, I'm talking about exporting American law via trade law. It's the best tool we have to shape the world.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 11:57:07 2011 No.2695150
File: 55 KB, 750x536, 1295823482570.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Joe the plumber was right, fuck obama and his "alittle socialism would do you good shit." Anyone who believe in the rich paying for everyone else can fuck off. I that makes me a some kind of fool for believing in them in the first place than so be it. Rich people are the alpha males of society, it become an alpha or stay beta fucking socialist!

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:05:07 2011 No.2695172
File: 30 KB, 500x350, piratesarecool4[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2695068
Well in a same way history has shown, that lack of pirates is proportional with global warming.

Many former socialists have changed their views though as they recognize, that capitalism is surprisingly the system, that brought unprecedented quality of life improvements. If you really get into it, then in modern world it is not, what is drawn in caricatures. Operational margins of companies are really tight so it is not like a fat capitalist is taking a lion share of the money.

It is perhaps slightly ironic, that two companies, that stereotypically enjoy patronage of socialist leaning youth - Starbucks and Apple - enjoy very high operational margins for their sectors.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:08:07 2011 No.2695182 >>2695172 > implying this is not due to unions

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:11:07 2011 No.2695192 >>2695172 Um, my post has nothing to do with socialism?

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:14:07 2011 No.2695201

>>2695172
Um, my post has nothing to do with socialism? Because, believe it or not, taxes do not equal socialism. I embrace capitalism, but do realize that unchecked it leads to an accumulation of wealth, which is unhealthy for society. And if we want to avoid revolt (which may actually lead to socialism,) then it's best to shear off enough to keep the people on bottom happy. Hence, public programs. There's a difference between "reasonable appeasement of the public" and "socialism." You'd do well to learn it.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:15:07 2011 No.2695204

>>2695182
I don't agree with that, but I hope someone else argues you about American unions. I'd show you the counterexample of Japan, with union activity almost nonexistant compared to USA.

After instituting capitalism Japan quickly changed from backward feudal nation into one of the world's richest countries. All while the tax % of the GDP is one of the lowest among developed nations and union power is almost nonexistant.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:17:07 2011 No.2695215 >>2695201 Wow, that last line came off WAY fucking more assholish than I intended it... Imagine instead it said "The difference is real, and important."

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:18:07 2011 No.2695220

Um, my post has nothing to do with socialism? Because, believe it or not, taxes do not equal socialism. I embrace capitalism, but do realize that unchecked it leads to an accumulation of wealth, which is unhealthy for society. And if we want to avoid revolt (which may actually lead to socialism,) then it's best to shear off enough to keep the people on bottom happy. Hence, public programs. There's a difference between "reasonable appeasement of the public" and "socialism." You'd do well to learn it.

Go check out mexico no socialism there and what is the result? Poor mother fuckers, food price is high, unemployment, basically have drug cartels running the place.

Capitalism unchecked leads to revolution and destruction of a society (wider wealth gap) (fact USA has the biggest wealth gap from poor to rich of all modern nations; might explain why we are also the most pervered/violent/ect.).

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:20:07 2011 No.2695229 >>2695220 You quoted my paragraph there. I disagree with the characterization of a public wellbeing as "socialism." Aside from that, if you read my earlier posts, we agree.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:21:07 2011 No.2695234 >>2695204 japan doesn't have fuckhuge unions but there are smaller local organisations that are quick to unite for some bargaining strikes aren't unheard of

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:21:07 2011 No.2695235

No. It leads many to believe that money is everything and that the ultimate goal in life to be happy is money.
Everyday we are plastered with happy rich people, who we believe to hold the essence of human emotion and prosperity.
The only thing we don't have that they do is money. So we all strive for happiness that won't even lead to happy ending. All we get is a bunch of dead bodies lining the street because some drug deal went bad.

Capitalism is sick, and you all know that this is true. I'm not going to say the Soviet Union fixed this, because they didn't, but if Communism had the practice that Capitalism has had it would be a fucking Utopia.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:23:07 2011 No.2695246 >>2695204 Japan has a sense of nationalism that is far stronger than even America's. Their rich don't cross borders due to a sense of national pride and saving public face if it was found out, not because of tax rates.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:24:07 2011 No.2695248

In a smaller community executing egalitarian philosophies becomes much more easier. Living in a society full of strangers spawns distrust, which in turn spawns greed.

Smaller community = Best choice would be anarchism.

Our community = Best choice would be democratic socialism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:27:07 2011 No.2695257 File: 16 KB, 500x300, earmuffkitty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2695248 hawt

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:28:07 2011 No.2695259 >>2695234 According to wikipedia days lost to strikes are 9% of that of USA (per capita).

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:31:07 2011 No.2695266

Money is happiness if I'm the same as someone I;m not happy and neither is anyone else. It's the same reason people in the military try and make money on the side all the time to get better shit than the other guys around them that make the exact same money and no needs.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:32:07 2011 No.2695272 Income taxes and all social programs need to be abolished then all the problems can work themselves out in a capitalistic way and the system would be self correcting.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:41:07 2011 No.2695300

>>2695248
>Democratic Socialism

I was puzzled what it means. I assume it is the policy of "American Democratic Socialist Party".

Read their wikipedia page and skimmed through their site and leaflet : http://www.dsausa.org/pdf/widemsoc.pdf

I am sorry. It is 'no stuff just fluff'. You can see how much less radical programs have failed in Sweden of all places. This is not serious. It is cafe-philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:41:07 2011 No.2695302 >>2695259 They usually protest by putting on a shirt of wrong color or something, because they are Japanese.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 12:47:07 2011 No.2695321 >>2695300 I'll admit I haven't read up on exact definitions of these words. By democratic socialism I meant what USA has now, with more individual freedom, more taxing of the super rich, more social security. And less $ spent on wars.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 18:30:07 2011 No.2697025
File: 172 KB, 1241x1022, delacroix-la_liberte_guidant_le_peuple.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>2692852
Nope, it was just the only thing we bothered to try.
Once some ambitious guys realized that it work thanks to inequality. Meaning that as long as the two "competitor" play along and rules everything they can get paid whatever they want and piss on the poor who believe they are doing their best to "stay in the race"

Capitalism is easier because the lack of order is the natural state of reality, yes that's right, Capitalism is basically a slightly more regulated chaos and it work as well as a king (president) trying to keep in line his vassals when they begin to grow too powerful.

Anyway, with the evolution of technology we will rapidly realize that people can't compete with machines and aren't needed for new job.

After all, people don't run that world, money do.
I think we will have another Revolution someday.

Not that communism is better, too many critical flaw.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 18:34:07 2011 No.2697049
File: 393 KB, 1280x950, mussolinihitler.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Hitler was right.
This is the case. This exceptional character was absolutely right!
He was right when he brought the Aryan ideal of truth to combat foreign corruption and lies
He was right when he brought back the eternal laws, which the world had forgotten
He was right when he objected to the disease of materialism, found in communism as in capitalism
He was right when he gave the hungry and humiliated people work and bread
He was right when he showed mankind a better way
He was right when he gave the world a vision
He was right when he sought eternal peace in Europe and among the peoples of the world
He was right when he fought against the injustices of the prevailing law and the truth
He was right when he gave his life for a better world
Indeed. Hitler was right!
And not only was he right, but continues to be.
His message of racial idealism is still topical today, and as nutritious as it was the first time it was proclaimed.
If you feel the same way, we invite you to join his side on these timeless issues

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 18:52:07 2011 No.2697131 >>2697049 flawless victory

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 19:01:07 2011 No.2697164 >>2697049 /thread killed

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 19:03:07 2011 No.2697172 Capitalism is the only system that provides freedom to all humanity. Those who do not see are just blinded by poverty.

Anonymous Sun Mar 13 19:21:07 2011 No.2697257

This thread is dildos.

I love how ppl automatically assume it's the rich who supports capitalism when in reality it's a good potion of the poor too.

It's because we poor have morals and know there is more to life than free hand outs.

Liberals are retarded.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 19:22:07 2011 No.2697265 >>2697049 Hitler was a great man.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 13 21:26:07 2011 No.2697937 >Is it true that capitalism is the best system for everyone? Yes it really is believe it or not.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math