Daily reminder that all the unfair wealth distribution in capitalist society comes from the fact that children inherit money which keeps rich families richer and poor families poor.
How can we ban rich families from giving away their wealth?
How does inheriting money make the poor poorer?
Explain how a working-class family is suddenly worse off when a rich man dies and leaves his fortune to his son.
>>68344976
>lower quality
>fewer choices
Compared to what? Feudalism? State communism?
>Come from a working class family
>Bust my ass to go to university for engineering
>Loads of debt because absolutely zero funding from single parent
>Grandmother passes away and leaves me with her money to cover my debt instead of giving it to her kids so they can get new kitchen tiles and better cars
For some people, inheritance is lifechanging
>>68344976
True my Armenian friend, watch the venus project or resource based economy. That's the future. Capitalism is for "me me me look at me i'm the best" = just selfish retarded people it's a old system and need to go.
>>68346051
He unironically posted a pic that states capitalism as a reason for low quality products. This here is a communist turd and needs be executed or at the very least get some knowledge on economics before being considered a human being. Please, refrain from trying to seriously argue with such fuckwits.
>>68346051
It gives massive advantage to rich. There is very little chance that the poor kid will get rich while it's almost certain that the rich kid will remain rich, although both have done nothing valuable yet.
>>68344976
By switching to the glorious system of Communism :D
>>68346380
While the other kid inherits 100 million pounds while doing nothing in his life other than eating and playing golf. And also continues to grow his wealth because it's close to trivial to earn money when you already have that much.
>>68346384
I know right? If only there were a way to throw off the bonds of oppression, my proletariat comrade!
>>68346380
I say, take the accumulated wealth, sitting and being useless in rich faggots' safes and pay for education of people like you and me.
>>68346405
Ok, I admit, the picture isn't the best but the point of this thread isn't the picture. I am not communist in a sense that if somebody earned money himself, he can be as rich as he can but not when unfairly inheriting it.
>>68346713
>>68346916
>>68346487
Actually, I changed my mind. You're worse than most communists. Unlike the majority of them, you are selfish to top it off.
>>68347261
How is wanted equal opportunities selfish, retard?
>>68347373
wanting*
>>68346487
"Rich" and "poor" are just labels with relative meaning. America is the most capitalist country on Earth, and that means the rich are very rich and the poor are very numerous. But guess what?
The vast majority of the poor in America don't starve. They don't go homeless. They get televisions and video games and smartphones and warm beds and safe food and drink. That's because capitalism generates vast wealth and productivity, dropping prices for everyone.
I would rather be poor in a capitalist nation than "equal" in a communist one, where everyone shares in lacking those amenities.
Inheritance is a good thing because if someone has to be wise and productive to make himself rich, there's a good chance he'll pass those values on to those children.
Who do you want to have lots of money, the child of parents who spent and invested wisely and worked hard, or the child of parents who relied on handouts and squandered what chances they had?
>you shouldn't be allowed to give a person money if you want to
Well then let's tax all charitable donations, abolish soup kitches and make all volunteerism illegal.
>>68346564
Ebin strawman
>>68347373
>gibmedats: the post
>>68347693
>The vast majority of the poor in America don't starve. They don't go homeless. They get televisions and video games and smartphones and warm beds and safe food and drink. That's because capitalism generates vast wealth and productivity, dropping prices for everyone.
Please don't make me laugh
>>68344976
Too often, business is blamed for recklessly polluting in the pursuit of bigger profits. The typical line is something like: “We have to cap emissions because corporations pollute to make more money!” This represents a fundamental misunderstanding about “pollution”. In order to understand the causes, one must understand inputs and outputs.
Let’s explain with a thought experiment.
I work for a very high tech machine shop that manufactures custom parts from all sorts of materials – stainless steel, aluminum, titanium, and nickel alloys. When we cut metal, flakes are removed and put into barrels. These flakes are a secondary output; with the part being the primary. The material is the original input.
So why is that relevant? For one, the chips represent a loss on the environment – a raw material was extracted but no longer used. Additionally, it is an added cost for us and our customer because we have purchased more material than necessary. We will attempt to recover this loss by sending it to the scrapyard for pennies on the dollar, but that does NOT mean it is the most profitable use of resources.
In other words, the environment was impacted during the extraction of material that will not be used for its primary and most value-add function – machined parts. That is the definition of “waste” and, more broadly, increases “pollution”.
>>68348324
At this point, two things should be clear: 1) the pollution is not a net gain to anyone in the process, and 2) it would be in everyone’s benefit to reduce the amount of waste.
As a matter of fact, we do everything we can to reduce that waste. For one, a cost savings to our customer is good for business. If we can use less material or generate less wasted material, everyone wins because everyone will save money and there are no additional processes to scrap the material.
We design new processes and engineer tooling to reduce material loss. For example, we might buy a larger chunk of material, saw cut the profile of one part, and use the excess to make other parts. Although we have bought more material, we ultimately waste less material.
The main point here is that firms have incentives to reduce their waste because it represents a loss and thus a corresponding reduction in total pollution.
Just because something might be better for more people doesn't make it moral or the right thing to do.
Property is the most important thing we have. Even when we die we should be allowed to say who can have what was ours.
>>68347693
> Inheritance is a good thing because if someone has to be wise and productive to make himself rich, there's a good chance he'll pass those values on to those children.
No. Lots of families inherited wealth from grand-grand-grand parents and those got rich by accident(owning a land or smth like that)
> That's because capitalism generates vast wealth and productivity, dropping prices for everyone.
Why do you assume communism wouldn't generate that much wealth. Also, my argument wasn't about communism/capitalism. Be a capitalist as much as you want but give equal opportunities to everybody. And getting the money from rich and sharing it with everybody is one way of doing it. Keeping vast amount of wealth is massively unproductive.
>Who do you want to have lots of money, the child of parents who spent and invested wisely and worked hard, or the child of parents who relied on handouts and squandered what chances they had?
Equal amount to all who are trying (going to universities and stuff)
Jelly poorfags lmao
>>68346384
>marxism with computers
as if capitalism isn't doing this already through HFT
also:
communists can't calculate
>>68348507
>Why do you assume communism wouldn't generate that much wealth
He doesn't have to assume shit
>inb4 muh communism hasnt been tried
>>68348402
Morality is relative. Just a century ago or two, it was immoral to be gay but now it is immoral to be against it. In the same way, I can argue, it is too selfish to leave everything to your child.
>>68344976
So who gets the money?
The State? They have such a great track record of spending
>F-35
>>68348734
Forget about communism vs capitalism argument. This thread is not about it.
>>68348734
Hey look more memes
>>68348769
State gets it and gives it to children who need it. Even if they pocket some of it, it will still be more productive than leaving everything to one guy
>>68344976
If that were the case I wouldn't bother working hard to build anything, as the state will just take everything after I die. Pointless.
>>68349002
You wouldn't work for yourself? So you live only for you children?
>>68347373
I'm going to go against my own advice and tell you.
Ever thought why the rich are rich?
Nobody just suddenly finds a gorillion of shekels while walking down the street. Someone had to earn that money - how did that happen is none of my concern, but it is certain to have included a copious amount of work.
Be it work by securing the rights to rich land, work by raising a company from nothing, work by investing the wealth already possessed - it needs to be done.
But nobody wants money for the sake of money. They want it for all the things it can buy, too, but once you have enough to buy all you need in life, what is your incentive to keep working? For any father, any mother, any person who'd ever truely loved anyone; it's to provide. Provide for your kids so they have a better start, your family so they need not suffer poverty, anyone that you like so their life is brighter.
And if you take away inheritance, you take away that single incentive. If you can have money only for yourself and cannot give it to anyone; generosity is dead. And with it's death greed, real greed is the only incentive left for those who work to keep working. You want to make people unable to share money with those they love the most; how can you cay you are not selfish?
>>68348121
Different anon, but it's true. I walked by the housing project yesterday. Every unit has a window ac. They have iphones. They have cable tv. Free wi-fi. Judging by their corpulence they have more than enough food. But hey, sweet Star Trek picture. It was a riveting argument.
>>68349253
Exactly. Robbing a man of his legacy like that is unnatural.
>>68344976
>Armenia
You literally have no wealth to distribute. So fuck off you commie faggot, lay down in a gutter and die.
Enver was right.
>>68344976
>How can we ban rich families from giving away their wealth?
By taking it for ourselves by force! As long as we wear uniforms proclaiming that we're taking it in the name of the state, and we share some of it with the proletariat, it will be completely ethical.
How dare one man have more wealth than another! All assets (including labor) must be seized and redistributed according to our utilitarian equation for maximum fairness.
Posting on your internet forum again OP? Your Social Credit Score says you must work another hour to earn that luxury. Comrade Anon worked an hour more than you today, you are stealing his labor like a capitalist dog! Back to work!
>>68344976
everything but nationalized money and telling the banks what they can or can't do is false dichotomy shit
>>68344976
>muh zero sum fallacy
>>68346384
Cooperation makes everyone wealthier
Reminder
>>68344976
Jesus you're insane.
>>68349253
Finally a constructive argument.
So the first part: If you worked hard for you billions, it's all good. You can enjoy it. If I was a communist I would claim that you shouldn't enjoy your billions, but I am not.
The second part:
>They want it for all the things it can buy, too, but once you have enough to buy all you need in life, what is your incentive to keep working?
There are two flaws with this logic. 1. This assumes that your only incentive for working is money. This is clearly not true. I love my job and even if I was a millionaire I would work. 2. Money has never been enough. Most rich billionaires have earned enough money to pass to many many generations but they still keep on working, so the incentive is still there.
>>68349442
Completely irrelevant
>>68349851
Yeah, let's take the example of union of many poor countries with fucked up system, done completely wrong to prove a point. Good job Kasparov.
>>68349894
Nice, more people would keep working then just the greediest bastards.
What about selfishness then? What about completely turning upside-down the way men are for some notion of """economical justice""" and equal opportunity?
>>68347855
You what? You're telling me Communism isn't the end-all-be-all of wealth redistribution?
>>68344976
>Children stop being able to inherit
>Parents either:
>1. Lose all incentive to have any money when they die.
>2. Use Swiss banks.
>3. Go on spending sprees before they die, leaving their kids with lots of non-liquid capital.
>4. Buy real estate.
>5. Gift their children before they die.
Literally there is no way to enforce what you propose. People will end up just using cash all the time and physically giving it to their descendants.
>>68344976
In the US you can only inherit something like a quarter million dollars unless it's in a trust fund.
So what you're saying is you want your country to be a plutonic shithole like the USA where when you die your children get nothing and your estate is literally seized by the government?
What should happen to my money when i die then?
>>68350368
yes, my thread was about being about to do that theoretically. Of course there are 100s of ways of overcoming that enforcement in practice.
>>68350270
You only consider the points that you can act out against it seems. You didn't even read the part about the nature of socialism, did you?
>>68350458
My country is a lot worse than USA politically.
>>68348734
I mean, sure, Communism hasn't been tried. But it can't be, either
>>68349851
all great inventions from USA were created by NASA and the military, kids don't know how reality works
>>68344976
>ban inheritance
>every single rich family leaves the country
wew
You selfish Jew assholes are ruining the world.
Just because you didn't inherit money you want everyone else to be poor. Fuck you.
Everyone has to be poor just because your dad couldn't buy you a car. Eat shit.
>>68344976
I actually agree with this. There should be a law that if someone dies without personally giving up some or all of their money to relatives, then that money should either be given to the government, or distributed to people who are less fortunate.
Or, at the very least, if the person who died was rich, only half a million should be given to relatives. Let the fuckers work for their money like their parents did instead of being given the easy hand in life.
This needs to happen.
>>68349253
>Someone had to earn that money - how did that happen is none of my concern, but it is certain to have included a copious amount of work.
Quite the assumption.
>>68348906
>State gets it and gives it to children who need it.
Which will be all children since they stole it from some kids parents who just died in a plane crash.
So children are now everyone's children?
If thats the case, they are effextivenly wards of the state and they should be sent to military, gender separated boarding schools so LaFawnduh can't fuck them up.
>>68350888
>distributed to people who are less fortunate
>Let the fuckers work for their money
ahhh
>>68350320
I don't get this point. Do you mean people would stop trying knowing that they have some minimum amount of money?
>>68350843
You are an idiot. Go read the whole thread, as I obviously didn't mean that.
>>68351039
Hurr
I'm referring to people who have almost nothing.
>>68351140
So?
>>68351064
you didn't mean this?
>>68344976
>>68346487
>>68346713
>>68346916
None of it?
Fuck off, retard.
>>68350956
Give me one way of becoming amazingly rich without either being born into money or winning a lottery. Whereas the second one, might I add, would require work to keep that money for any longer time than it immidiately provides.
>>68350958
Not all children. Children who are either extremely poor or children who are trying do something with their lives. Many many people are unable to study or get shit tons of loans just to study.
>>68344976
You're Armenian. Don't you remember your own history?
>>68351265
Work to acquire marketable skills. Use those skills to sell goods or services that others are willing to pay for.
My grandfather grew up dirt poor. He's a millionaire now.
>>68351213
If you have almost no money, how are you going to be productive and make more? College costs money. And assuming places like Mickey D's even hires you, you can't work there forever.
You need a good amount of money to just get your foot in the door, otherwise you're lost.
>>68346487
If he works and he is smart he will get rich.
If the rich man's child is not smart and does not work he is not rich.
>>68351218
No I didn't mean that I am selfish and I don't want people to be rich. I meant that the poorest and the richest newborn kid should have equal opportunities, which is completely different from what you are saying.
>>68351424
see >>68351424
>Wah! Getting rich is hard!
No shit, faggot. Doesn't mean you are morally justified in theft.
businesses shouldn't be allowed to make a profit either
>>68351470
Why should they have equal opportunities?
>>68351437
>If he works and he is smart he will get rich.
Do you actually believe this?
The only people who get rich are people who are smart and are extremely lucky. Without luck, it doesn't happen.
>>68351552
Oh, you're just shitposting. Carry on.
>>68351586
Because both are newborn and both deserve the same. The poor kid hasn't done anything wrong to deserve to starve, in the same way the rich kid hasn't done anything to deserve to live in luxury environment.
>>68346149
This was made buy a guy who never saw a socialist store.
2 types of bread and you had to go buy jeans in a neighbouring capitalist country(Italy)
>>68351405
I meant "Give me one way of becoming amazingly rich (that does not include copious amounts of work) without being either born into money or winning a lottery."
It was in the context of my previous post, to which Cyprus was replying.
>>68351064
And I don't get where did your assumption come from. Everything is clearly stated within the first post. Your logic seems to be too leftist for me to apply my knowledge unto it.
>>68351265
>Give me one way of becoming amazingly rich without either being born into money or winning a lottery.
Okay
>start working as message boy when you're 12
>Learn to translate Morse code by ear, cutting out the interpreter
>build relationships with local businessmen who appreciate your timely and accurate delivery
>one hires you to manage a section of his railroad
>hear about "sleeper cars" from a friend
>mortgage your moms house to invest in sleeper cars
>take your sleeper car money and invest in iron mining
>take some more of it and build steel plants
>invest profits in engineering and technology
>have best steel process
>????
>PROFIT
Andrew Carnegie
>>68344976
What does capitalism have to do with inheritance? Anyway, inheritance is here because of it's practicality, once we start giving birth without parents and raising kids without parenting it will go away naturally.
>>68351323
So do you give it to the children and expect their shit parents to not spend it on Colt 40s and weed? Because that's what they do right now
>>68344976
Gommunism: The Post
>>68351938
I admit, the picture is misleading. My thread is mainly about inheritance.
>>68351470
Why should they have equal opportunities? One has a better parent than the other, so obviously one is going to have more opportunities than the other.
There is no such thing as equality. If I can make more money than someone else I will use that money to raise my kids and ensure they will be able to live comfortably.
We can't make everyone equal. All we can do is give everyone equal opportunity under the law. That's why we have public schooling and all sorts of programs that allow poor kids to attend college for free. Both the rich kid and the poor kid are pretty much going to attend the same school. They can both become successful. Just because one of them has more money doesn't mean it should be taken away from them and given to the poor. That makes society worse for everyone.
>>68351788
>>68351470
And how do you implement that?
Without drastically changing the mindsets of all people on earth, including a complete rewrite of culture, this is effectively impossible.
Also, they might from some "moral highground" deserve the same, but think about what the rich father deserves - does he deserve to have his kid brought down low despite his work to elevate the kid above others?
>>68351610
I believe this because I have seen it happen with my own eyes.
Smart people went to work abroad made money came back and started a business and became rich.
>>68351788
>Both are newborn and both deserve the same
You haven't explained why.
Also the reason the poor kid is starving is because the parent decided to have kids when he was dirt poor, so it's his parents fault, so do you want us to jail them?
Also the rich kid got that money because his father wanted to invest money in him and give it to him. If you don't allow him to do that then you don't respect the right to propriety and more over you claim to know how to spend money better than the guy who earned it.
>>68351857
>american reading comprehension
Look there:
>>68351850
>>68351954
Pay for their education (any university/school they get admitted), healthcare, then give them some money for studying hard. Don't let them get under massive loans. You don't have to directly give them money.
The transference of wealth from parents to children is the kickstarter of most of the generators of wealth, and I'm not talking about millionaires, I'm talking about regular people.
For the rich, most of the wealth transferred isn't in the form of money in a bank account, it's in the form of companies, in order to distribute that wealth you would need to sell the companies at their stock prices, which would plummet given that stock prices are based on future earnings. In the end you would redistribute shit, and in the process you would need to fire so many people that the redistribution would cause a spiral of destruction of wealth.
Also, incentives. If my children won't get my money, what stops me from doing cocaine, hookers or casino the moment I get diagnosed with cancer? Let's not even talk about how much money governments would need to spend in order to police this, and let's not even begin about how only one country going against the tide can fuck up your idea because communism doesn't work without barriers to lock people inside.
>>68350956
Κανε 5 βηματα πιο περα να σε φανε οι σkατοτουρkοι βρωμοkομμουνι
>>68346384
is this a picture of communism?
>>68352118
>We can't make everyone equal.
>There is no such thing as equality.
Note that equality is different.
I mean equal *opportunities*, not equality.
>>68351788
Survival of the fittest. There is a reason that white people created empires while others made mud huts.
If you want to eat every day have the agency to go and work for it. Making everyone in the country poor isn't a solution.
t. 3rd world nigger
>>68351788
>the rich kid hasn't done anything to deserve to live in luxury environment.
But their parents deserve to give their money to their kid.
You're one fucked up jew.
>>68346405
A bit late to this, but capitalism is indirectly responsible for low quality goods.
Imagine:
>make product
>lasts forever
>customer will buy once
vs
>make low quality product for half price
>breaks 4 years in
>customer potentially buys new ones
>extra profit
This combined with the savings in resource costs by using cheaper resources is the reason I have to repair my car every 3 years because it's littered with electronics that break constantly.
Also lightbulbs are a prime examples of this, as explained in the following link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
>>68344976
id rather burn it all than let the government and some job dodging bong smoking welfare deadshits get it.
>>68352397
It's stupid mentalities like this that prevent the human race from progressing towards a literal utopia. It'll never happen with great people like this leaf around.
>>68352186
>And how do you implement that?
I don't know.
>>68352190
>Smart people went to work abroad made money came back and started a business and became rich.
If it happened to one guy, doesn't mean it will happen to every hard working smart guy.
>Also the reason the poor kid is starving is because the parent decided to have kids when he was dirt poor, so it's his parents fault
Exactly, it's parents' fault. Why should the kid suffer because of his parents?
>>68352383
I know what you mean, retard. Try reading the post.
>>68348121
he is right, you fucking danskjävel.
>>68349097
I'd only work for myself at a subsistence level
>>68352623
> All we can do is give everyone equal opportunity under the law.
Who said that it's all we can do? Equal opportunity under the law is not even close to being enough.
>>68352575
>If it happened to one guy, doesn't mean it will happen to every hard working smart guy.
So just because some fail it's impossible. Doesn't that completely rule out Communism then?
>Exactly, it's parents' fault. Why should the kid suffer because of his parents?
So we should jail his parents and have the poor kid cared for by the state?
>>68348324
Here's a different example of pollution and corporate malfeasance: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/magazine/the-lawyer-who-became-duponts-worst-nightmare.html?_r=0
Now I don't think that means we should dispense with capitalism, for the most part it has done good. But we do need strong regulations and enforcement thereof to make sure these kinds of dickheads don't go pissing in our drinking water and tell us its lemonade.
>>68352254
>doesn't realize I started my answer before he changed the question
>>68352537
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
>In the late 1920s a Swedish-Danish-Norwegian union of companies (the North European Luma Co-op Society) began planning an independent manufacturing centre. Economic and legal threats by Phoebus did not achieve the desired effect, and in 1931 the Scandinavians produced and sold lamps at a considerably lower price than Phoebu
Capitalism, bitch.
>>68344976
>Strive to make something of myself all my life
>decades of sacrifices so that my children could have the best life possible
>every parent's dream
>finally comes time to pass on everything that I will be leaving to my son
>this hurts the feelings of retards and invalids, so my son is cast onto the street as my estate is divided up between junkies and gamblers who lose it all in a day anyway
If the child is a worthless shit, the money re-enters circulation anyway. If the child is capable, they have an opportunity to create jobs and keep the economy going. You're literally only hurting the economy if you set the estate tax too high.
>>68344976
It's their money to give, not yours to take.
>>68352473
>But their parents deserve to give their money to their kid.
Fine, but it's more important to give enough money to the poor, so he can go to school than give one more lamborghini to the rich.
>>68352822
We need real private property to avoid pollution issues.
>>68352537
That is entirely true, however with no such thing as capitalism we would not have the product at all altogether; or if we did, it would be available to a small portion of the population.
And even then, were it not for crony capitalism taking lead over it's better brother, we'd see companies raising on the sheer point that their products, unlike the competition's, last forever. But for that to happen we need a more moral society and much more freedom from govt and forced regulations, which unfortunately isn't going to happen anytime soon.
>>68352816
No, we should not jail anybody. We should pay for the poor kid's education and healthcare.
>>68352874
Given the right advice and education, every human being can be capable. It's not exclusive to rich people.
Money just makes the process easier.
>>68352775
Your suggestion is literally taking rights away from rich people for being rich.
Your suggestion is fundamentally discriminating and creating inequality under the law, jew.
>>68352938
>he said, while defending taxes
>>68353023
It's his money so you have to convince the rich guy why giving money to the poor is any good.
Considering how many people go to University and flip burgers it doesn't sound like a good investment to anyone.
Also why does the poor kid diverse to go to school?
What if he is dumb as bricks?
>>68346380
Fucking people I swear, honey I want new bath tile$ the old ones reflect too much light. How's your mother? I want the ones she has, is she doing OK? You only get one mother you know! When she's not around any more your going to do more around the house! She's not going to to live free honey! Honey what are we having for dinner?
>>68353106
Why?
You haven't given me any reason besides "it's not fair"
>>68352854
The question was never changed, you were just too lazy to read the context. So you answered a question that wasn't there, but your lacking ability to read caused you to think it is.
>>68353023
More important to who? If I have money it's more important for me to give to my kids. What isn't important for me is giving money to some idiotic Armenian jew who is going to use it to push Socialist agenda.
I'd rather burn all my wealth that give it to you.
>>68353057
You should read the article, the problem was that DuPont bought some land to store their waste...seems fine but the waste leached out these very harmful chemicals into the local creek and the farmer who was downstream had heaps of his cows fall apart and die.
Becuase of the way the regulatory system works over there the chemical that was doing the damage was not even classified as harmful, they had to do heaps of legal wrangling to find out that it was, and DuPont fucked with them every step of the way. Ended up something like 70,000 people had health problems due to this.
>>68353208
as I said, give it to people who are trying to do something with their lives. Dumb as brick guys won't be trying and there won't be need.
>>68353457
There is something called charity and scholarships that do this already.
>>68344976
How about you suck my fucking dick. I'll do with my wealth whatever I please.
>>68344976
What the fuck gives you the right to take away my freedom of choice? Why should you determine what I do with the fruit of my labour?
Fuck off commie scum.
>>68353393
For the entire humanity.
>>68353321
It's good enough reason.
But also, no good minds will be lost because of poverty and inability to develop.
The fact that there is wealth and rich people at all is a direct result of capitalism, you ungrateful fuck. You would rather everyone working 80 hours a week, including children like the 16th century?
I feel like you don't really understand economics or history but are just spouting liberal buzzwords that you heard from smarter people
>>68353526
Is that why many graduates are covering their university loans for 20 years?
>>68353721
>The fact that there is wealth and rich people at all is a direct result of capitalism
Fuck off, with you irrelevant and completely wrong arguments.
>>68353686
These minds are lost in spite of wealth all the time.
Truly great minds will get the scholarships they need to coast through school
If there's one thing you can't argue here its that exceptional minds will be lost because America and capitalism is all about exceptionalism
>>68353686
No it's not. By your logic we should take all money from the rich and give it to all the poor so everyone has the same amount of money because it's not fair.
Because most people stay poor and also they are lazy and don't seem to change much with the next generation.
Also there is charity and scholarships so the people who want to get out will get out.
>>68353865
>Truly great minds will get the scholarships they need to coast through school
You can't possibly prove this.
>>68353064
>tfw I'll never have a refrigerator that lasts 25 years again
Then again, in compensation, I have a PC and a comfy house
>>68353774
>graduates are covering their university loans for 20 years?
This isn't because the loans are unfair and impossible to pay back, its because the graduates haven't been able to find a good job. That is down to many factors including their degree/background, general ability, connections and nepotism, etc.
And that's completely orthogonal to wealth.
>>68353774
That is the US. Where most people go to college for no real reason, they take loans to pay for it because they are mediocre students so they can't get scholarship nor do they want to go in the army to earn one that way.
Also they choose the wrong field so they don't earn the money to pay back the loan.
Also there is Community College that one can study for first few years than transfer to a good college and pay less than half for education.
>muh rights
By giving your fortune away to your children all you're doing is making life worse for everyone else but him. You worked for that money, but now you're dead, and for all you know your offspring could be spending that money on hookers and booze. But it's okay because he's your son, right? It's perfectly okay that, when you were alive, you had a business and made money off of other people. But what if those people weren't around? What if you were the only person on earth? How would you make your money then?
It's only because of other human beings that you got as rich as you are, and you should be obligated to give back to the people that you took from. By hording money you're not doing anything except making this planet worse for everyone else who has to live on it.
/end rant
>>68353887
You misunderstood. I am not saying give everything to poor. I am saying take it and give enough opportunities to everybody.
To slightly better off, there is no need to take all of it but there is also no need to let somebody pass billions to one guy.
>>68354054
That's no true. Loans could be avoided with the money coming from extremely rich.
>>68353774
The reason many uni graduates are covering the loans for fucking ever is because all of those who do, are, without exception, utter fuckwits with no imagination or a gramme of brain matter.
Any thinking being which takes a loan PAYS THAT LOAN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Live for as little money as you can - take a side job while on uni - take a full job as soon as out of it - spend all of your spare money, save the black hour savings for the loan.
So many people do this and they have no fucking problems with loans. They paid them.
Meanwhile, the loud, obnoxious, utterly worthless shits are the ones who pay only the monthly minimum of their loan and then find out that the loan has an interest rate after twenty fucking years.
>>68354170
You gave no valid reason as to why.
Also opportunities don't magically appear out of thin air you have to work for them just giving people money is not creating opportunity.
Even if you just give them education they can chose something like Art School so they will stay poor and now you wasted money on their useless education.
>>68354111
This.
>>68353857
Read "The Wealth of Nations" and then maybe, just maybe, you will understand what Netherlands are on about. And chose a less retarded pic for OP next time.
>>68354337
>Any thinking being which takes a loan PAYS THAT LOAN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
No. So many ratbags out there who take loans with no intention to pay. Used to be a rort here in Aus, people would get their uni degree via HECS loan then fuck off overseas. Govt stopped that loophole now though.
>>68351788
I don't know what the average lifespan of commies in commie countries but in real countries people tend to die after their offspring has matured. Are you suggesting that the parents should keep their children in squalid conditions despite having the ability to better provide for them to "make them equal" to poor kids? What is the bar here? If there are children starving in the country should your children be forced to starve too? They haven't done anything to deserve food after all.
>>68354389
100 poor kid in art school is better than one more jet for the rich.
I gave you the reason. Many great minds can possibly be lost just because they couldn't afford to develop. I never said throw money at the poor coming from rich, which the real communist would say. I said, pay for the school and healthcare and don't let them take loans.
>>68354603
That's just exploiting the govt system rather than legit loan taking.
>>68352547
I'm just stating facts! It's a law of nature, People will fight until there is nothing left to fight over.
Until there is excess that can provide for everyone, people will be fighting. This isn't even achievable yet in first world countries let alone the world.
Besides the worlds problems can't just be solved by moving around numbers that represent money. There are logistics, but i don't expect you to understand.
t. faggot retard
>>68344976
most politicians are children with power.
ergo, lost wealth upon death cannot go to the government.
Now where does it go?
>>68354111
>child spends all the money on hookers and booze
>meaning that the money re-enters circulation and helps the economy
Oh hey look at that. Maybe those weirdos basing laws off of crazy things like logic and reason know something you don't.
>>68354688
>100 poor kid in art school is better than one more jet for the rich.
No because the 100 poor kids will not get a job while the jet will make jobs as it requires a pilot, fuel and an airport to function. While to poor art students get no job and start draining welfare.
One is creating real opportunities for people one is not.
Also if those minds are so great they will require no help in getting out of poverty. And if it makes economic sense to support them then many companies and rich people will support them.
>>68354765
>People will fight until there is nothing left to fight over.
I realize that. It's just the way our brains are hardwired. But, we can change that. We can stop listening to that little voice in the back of our head that keeps says "Take it all, fuck everyone else", and make the world a better place. We can do it.
Taking away people's freedom to control their capital, now that's the socialism I'm used to. Now, about this fewer choices comment. Have you seen a picture of Soviet era automobiles? Or what was stocked on store shelves before the fall of communism. And quality? Enjoy your Yugo. Also, news flash, we don't want to make rich families give away their wealth. We respect the right of parents to work for the betterment of their children. You don't because your dad is a fag and your mom a whore. And anyway, most wealth is pissed away by the second generation so your argument could only really apply to a fraction of a percent of the population. Go hang yourself.
Simple, just tax it progressively. So if you inherit a small amount like 100k the state takes some 10%, and 75% above a bilion. These are just example values though.
>>68354939
The money goes to people who sell liquids that slowly kill other people and the rest goes to people who sell their body. How does that benefit anyone?
>>68354945
If you are suggesting that art schools are waste, you are an idiot. I am far from studying art but you are an idiot for thinking that we don't need people connected with art.
>>68344976
Yeah, capitalists don't actually like capitalism
>>68354989
If you think that you can do it, then first go for a new planet and populate it only with likeminded people, second don't let anyone new join and watch the things unfold.
No, you can't do it in any realistic scenatio. You can merely make more people like you, but those from the other side will always be there. Just like lefties will never die out.
>>68344976
>that image
>Boris Yeltsin being amazed by what the average American has access to in a grocery store.png
I want time travel to exist for one single reason and it can only be used for this on single reason.
To send leftist faggots back in time to see just how fucking terrible life was before capitalism brought us all the wonderful things it has.
>>68355110
I don't like categorizing political systems just like you do. I would be up for captalism if it provided equal opportunities. Since it doesn't, it loses its point. Now, I am suggesting one way of providing equal opportunities. Everything else in the system can be capitalist.
>>68355155
We don't. Especially with modern art which is utter shit. Plus if people are really talented they can make art on their own and can be self thought. Art is mostly repetition of fine motor skills to the point where one can produce fine looking art.
Plus nice deflection you got there moving not the goal post but the whole argument.
>>68355149
Explain to me what's stopping the parent from spending all his money buying stupid shit for his kid before he dies. Why would anyone save money if anything happens it all disappears?
>>68355278
I don't mean to offend you, but you need to reread what you just said, and then take a good hard look at yourself in the mirror.
If you're only on this plane of existence simply to earn currency and spend/horde said currency, while not caring about your fellow man, then what's the point?
Really, what is the point. Think about it.
>>68348507
>Why do you assume communism wouldn't generate that much wealth
:^)
>>68346564
But in communism you still inherite you parent's things. Why do burger throw that word around so much? Are the obsessed with Communism?
>>68355372
>Plus if people are really talented they can make art on their own and can be self thought.
You can make that argument about any profession.
>Plus nice deflection you got there moving not the goal post but the whole argument.
I pointed out the flaw in your argument
I consider 100 art students better for the humanity than 1 jet.
>>68354989
Of course! No one wants the world to be a worse place. The only way I imagine this happening though is through the excess of wealth, it can't be by the use of force. It just doesn't work that way.
>>68353188
Cool red herring bro.
>>68355609
No you can't.
To be a mathematician you need a math teacher to explain things to you that would take to long to discover yourself, though there are some people capable of that but they are one in a billion. But to be good at art you just require fine motor skills and some talent. Only things that might require some teaching is Instrument Playing and some trades part of arts like sculpting.
>I consider 100 art students better for the humanity than 1 jet.
Based on what?
And if you consider it doesn't matter if other don't.
>>68355609
At least they will starve to death fingerpainting.
>>68355510
There is no higher points, we make points of our own and live by them, for the sake of sanity. Carry on.
Some live just to hoard money. Some, like you, want to change the world. Is it for the better? There is no definite answer.
And really now, that response of mine was much more fueled by the sheer hate I have towards people like OP and his complete fuckwittery than anything else; you just provided a post I could give a negative response to and let some of the negativity out of me. Sorry m8.
>>68351832
>tfw fruits or jeans from german uncle were like xmass
>>68344976
>>68346487
Sure, you have to tell people what do with the money they ear in their lifetime!
If 100 generations ago one of my relatives was smarter than the rest and he made relatively more money and my whole family keeps working that money generation after generation that's bad because the spoiled children are enjoying the money, but the smart members of the family keep working the money and that's a bad thing right?
>There is very little chance that the poor kid will get rich while it's almost certain that the rich kid will remain rich
Holy shit welcome to capitalism
>>68344976
STOP HAVING WHAT I DON'T HAVE
The thread
>>68355609
>humanity than 1 jet.
>a device that allows anyone to trade and move quickly across the entire world is not valuable compared to a bunch of artist.
The rise of air commerce has increased the world gross product by roughly 3.5 trillion dollars
>>68355907
>To be a mathematician you need a math teacher to explain things to you that would take to long to discover yourself, though there are some people capable of that but they are one in a billion.
See there are people.
>But to be good at art you just require fine motor skills and some talent. Only things that might require some teaching is Instrument Playing and some trades part of arts like sculpting.
I don't really know how hard it is to learn sculpting, so I can't argue. I suggest you do the same. Any ignorant argument is just waste of characters.
>Based on what?
Sculptures of 100 art students will make cities look nicer at give jobs to them at the same time.
>>68353442
>waste leached out these very harmful chemicals into the local creek and the farmer who was downstream had heaps of his cows fall apart and die
Ok, so he broke the law, and damaged another person's private property, which regulation did you say we need to prevent this other than the enforcement of respect towards private property, that is part of capitalism itself?
>Becuase of the way the regulatory system works over there the chemical that was doing the damage was not even classified as harmful
So it required investigation to prove the damage, again, no regulation can prevent this from happening, but capitalism contemplates that DuPont gets dickslapped for being jerks.
Not everything companies do is meant to be blamed on capitalism, sometimes they break the law, and that would happen under any system you could imagine.
>>68356151
except the jet that a billionaire owns serves only himself and his family.
>>68353622
You're not the entire humanity. You're a gibsmedat jew.
People care about their children first.
>>68355149
>the money goes to a business that creates jobs and consumers in the market
>how does this benefit anyone
Gee I sure wouldn't be able to tell you.
>>68344976
>the primary motivator for gaining wealth should be ended
you're a special kind of stupid, no wonder you're still in a third world shithole. the roaches should have finished you all off.
>>68356320
What if they are post modernist sculptures that are ugly as shit. And they would only give more to work to the city cleaners.
>>68344976
>Armenian
poor muslim
>>68344976
Inherited wealth is one of the if not the best way for liberty and high standards of living to thrive. One of the main reasons why africa is a shithole is because there is no middle class and no saved up capiral to invest. The reason why this forced meme exists is because the kikes want each generation to re-set, rootless mongrels with nothing from the past, a slave class to toil each generation while of course they remain loyal to the tribe.
SAGED AND FLAGGED
>>68356456
That would imply that artsy boys would be NEEDED (different from WANTED) by everyone.
>>68356456
That's why they are studying in art schools in order to understand which sculpture goes well with the city.
>>68356422
nice argument mate.
>>68355907
>>68356151
To be fair, he said humanity.
Net happiness?
>>68356431
The prostitutes or whatever you wanna call them are only in that position because they can't afford anything else. So there's that.
And people who sell anything that isn't wine are just as bad as people who sell cancer sticks. Why would you want to work for a company who is making money off of slowly killing other people? I wouldn't.
>>68356094
>while it's almost certain that the rich kid will remain rich
This is actually a flase statement.
Around 2/3rds of kids that inherent wealth absolutely squander it and are sent right down the the middle class.
Currently over 75% of the extremely wealthy (top 500 wealthiest) in America made their own fortunes most of them coming from middle class lives.
The only way to make this argument of "muh rich keep getting richer" is to assume that it is the same rich people over the decades. It quite simply isn't. From 1990 to 2010 roughly 70% of the top 500 wealthiest people were no longer on that list replaced with other people.
It would be like being told "A man gets hit by a car every 40 mins in NYC" and replying with "Well he must get awfully tired of that".
>>68356574
My comments are about rich only. Inherited millions and billions serve no purpose most of the time.
>>68356620
Are you serious, jew?
Are you seriously suggesting people care more about strangers than their own kids? You're mentally ill.
>>68356724
The Rich Kid could just fly 200 people with his jet. So same result.
>>68356946
I never said that. Your argument is irrelevant and stupid. I choose not to response.
>>68356795
"No purpose"
According to whom? You?
Remember to SAGE AND REPORT all kike threads.
>>68357049
nice argument mate.
>>68357049
>I chose not to response
He said as he sent the post.
>>68356588
Considering the art projects of art universities, not really.
But we are arguing the wrong thing. How do 100 sculptures help humanity?
That jet could save a life if given to a humanitarian cause while the sculptures during an earth quake can squash someone. Neither the jet nor sculptures have an innate good or bad to them but at least the jet can be used for utilitarian and good purposes.
>>68357077
To anybody. I am talking about the money which just literally sits in somebody's bank account.
>>68344976
are you aware of the free rider problem and natural selection as well as group-evolutionary theory?
if you where you would understand why this wont work
>>68356410
>the jet that a billionaire owns serves only himself and his family.
Pr o tip
Nearly all commercial jets are owned by billionaires.
They are billionaires because the jets they own provide 3.5 trillion dollars to the world economy.
Again the "muh greedy rich hoard everything like Scrooge McDuck" is just wrong. The vast vast vast majority of their wealth is tied up in investments and nonliquid assets that are constantly cycling through the economy.
For example King kike George Soros has a net worth of 23billion dollars. Let's say you won some form of lawsuit dictating that he had to pay you 12 billion in damages. He absolutely would not have thag sum in liquid form that could be transferred to you and he would be put into a panic mode selling off his non liquid assets to pay your ass.
Kinda like how gawker has been thoroughly killed by hulk Hogan and they have no means to pay him
>>68356795
>Inherited millions and billions serve no purpose most of the time.
not even you believe that
>>68357210
By your logic, we don't need art schools, we don't need sculptures or pictures or music.
Is this what you are trying to say?
>>68357049
nice argument mate
>>68357216
Except money doesn't just stay in a bank account you doufus.
Because it is in a bank that money is used to lend money to other people by the bank( that is how a bank works) and more over a rich guy must make money by investing otherwise he won't stay rich.
>>68350956
>all wealthy people are scheming cheaters
When will this meme die? It's like you retards cant comprehend the idea of superiority. Some people do better in life than others. That's all there is to it.
>>68357370
Cause we don't need them. We have them because we like them enough to either make them or pay people to make them.
They serve no real purpose.
Yes you can say the rich guy might not use his plane for anything but that plane is still a tool with multiple uses.
>>68357216
Yes we already know you don't understand how economy works. Yes we already know you don't understand that rich people have companies, not money. Yes we already know you don't seem to be able to grasp that money in banks is money that goes towards investment, yes we already know you don't seem to get that rich people have their money moving around constantly in stock bonds, yes we already know you can't fathom that redistributing that wealth is actually done through the destruction of the companies that the rich own, which ends up in massive firings and poverty.
But can you at least stop talking about what you don't understand?
>>68357314
>>68357484
Anyways, that's irrelevant to the argument. Some part of that money can still be "invested" in poor children who can't study.
>>68357638
We absolutely do need art.
>>68357669
It is invested in poor children, you jew idiot. It's called taxes.
>>68353857
Before capitalism, there was poverty and slavery. Now, there is freedom and wealth. What you're complaining about is the fact that you personally aren't as wealthy as rich people.
>>68357712
Why?
>>68357669
If it makes sense for the money to be invested in kids it will. And if you look at the real rife you see rich people and companies giving scholarships to poor people.
>>68353959
You can't prove any of your claims either so don't start with that shit now
>>68344976
the degeneracy of the Eternal Armenian knows no bounds
you might as well go all the way and argue that children must be confiscated from their parents and raised in government controlled nurseries to remove all privilege
second armenian genocide when?
>>68357740
Tax more from rich, which will result in my initial proposal.
>>68357843
Which claims are you talking about?
>>68354317
Sure it could. But why is that better than the current situation? Why should we punish hard-working or intelligent people with taxes so that less intelligent people or those who work less get money? The reason an education is expensive is because its supposed to earn itself back in the long run. Highly educated people get paid more than uneducated people. So it's a tradeoff that favours smart, hard-working people.
>>68357370
These things are luxury items made available by excessive wealth. Which capitalism is the system which generates the most amount of which allows more people to do non essential things like music and art.
There is a very specific reason that there aren't famous artists and musicians(obvious rare exceptions) coming out of their world shitholes and Communist States and it is the very thing you're spitting on.
>>68357955
Go fuck yourself.
>>68357873
Good job purposely misinterpreting my arguments, idiot.
>>68358084
That would work in the world where the rich are smartest and the most hard working people.
>>68355609
>I consider 100 art students better for the humanity than 1 jet.
You already said that but it was criticized and you gave no reason for it. It's just one of your beliefs, which is fine but obviously you can't convince people that way. You didn't respond to the criticism either.
>>68344976
>I am fucking retarded and ignorant
yeah no that is not how our economy work or capitalism for that matter. You should go back to school or perhaps find a good school and start over.
After this thread im glad we genocided Armenians.
>>68357963
The rich are already taxed too much.
We can make sure no kid in UK and Murica is starving and we can give them all a place to live, and we can give them public schooling. The problem is that some parents are drug addicts and it's not that easy to take their kids away.
You should shut up for a second and let people explain things to you. I know you're 16 and you think you know how the world works, but we've been over this already. You need to catch up.
>>68358247
I already did explain but people decided to give retarded responses. I said sculptures make cities look nice.
one guy said "what if sculptures are ugly"
the other said "what if earthquake destroys the sculptures"
I also asked a question which pretty much proved the point, that was:
"Do you really think that we don't need architecture, music, scultpures, paintings?"
so what would be the point in making a better life for your family and children if they can't inherit? you would just live selfishly and spend as much as possible and leave your kids up to fate or something
>>68344976
Hahahaha wow thats so retarded. Fuck you I'm going to keep the apartments and money my grandparents left stay mad poorfag
>>68358339
Thanks for proving how inhuman animal you are, I almost forgot.
>>68344976
Inheritance is a God given right. Our heavenly Father encourages leaving land/riches to children.
Only a fool that has not lived many years would be naive to think any government would handle other people's money appropriately.
>>68357669
It is nigger.
Just because people want to keep some of their money is of no concern to you.
Men like Andrew Carnegie's charitable actions have done more to help the poor and downtrodden than any amount of fags like you bitching about some people having more than others have since he has died and this is ignoring the massive increase in living standards brought forth because of their industrial advancements.
Oh and BTW private charities provide 75¢ to every dollar donated to the needy while government gets less than 30¢ of every dollar spent to the needy and there is a wealth of data out there showing tax increases meant to go to "charitable" government directly lowers the amount of charity people give out.
>>68344976
>commie flag
lol fuck off commie
>>68358578
and again, I don't mean your apartments and money. I am talking about rich people.
>>68357963
>Which claims are you talking about?
That taxing rich people more will improve the world. That wealth disparity comes from inheritance being legal. That we now have less choices than in the 16th century. That life quality is now lower than in the 16th century. That inheriting money is unfair. That morality is relative. That sharing rich people's wealth among poor people will be more productive. That socialism/communism has been done wrong every time until now, now that you're here.
I'm 30% down the thread and just quoting some of your claims. Please prove even one of them
>>68358631
>>68358672
Don't throw in governments in the argument. I don't care about the means of distribution. I am only talking about the results.
>>68358234
That is currently the case. Is it not? Why not?
>>68358599
Better than being an Armenian.
>>68358876
>I don't care about the means of distribution. I am only talking about the results.
Spoken like a true Marxist.
>>68358525
They're nice, but we don't NEED them to survive. But before those things, we need wealth, liberty, choices, education and everything that is provided by capitalism. "Need" implies something bad happening when it isn't met. Without pretty buildings and statues our cities would look worse, but they'd still work, and they'd still provide the aforementioned things
>>68357963
Taxing the rich does not help the poor if the redistribution is incorrect. Taxing the global one percent and transferring it to the global top ten percent does not bring equal opportunity to the 90%. Everybody in the west is rich relatively speaking, what you are doing is giving from rich to bit less rich. If you want to help the poor you should help the poor, not expect government to do it because it doesn't.
>>68344976
Why don't you go all the way in and free the land off of your ancestors who were living there just because they happened to be inherit it from their parents, you shitskin socialist cuck.
>>68346405
Because it's true.
Capitalism means one thing: making as much money as possible. I've had the opportunity as a chemist to make products for a variety of consumer and private applications, and it always comes down to price, ESPECIALLY with consumer goods.
Let me give you an example. We currently make a carpet adhesive that sells for $25/4 gallons, and has sold for that amount for quite some time. From when it was first formulated to now, the product quality has degraded immensely. This is because the goal is to create something that works only as well as it needs to. It has been filled with clay to increase volume for minimal cost, latex has been removed to save money while losing adhesion, and raw materials are sourced from the cheapest vendors possible. My ongoing work is to make my line of products even cheaper.
This is the essence of capitalism. And I could tell you a million stories like it from my time working.
>>68344976
>capitalism produces worse products
Wew lad
There's a lot of issues I could find fault with over capitalism, but production is not one of them
At what point should your money be taken away and not inherited? 12 years back my great aunt died and left my parents $300k so me and my two sisters could go to college. That money is the only reason I can go to college. Is $300k to much to inherit?
Questions for the OP and other pinkos:
You say you want an equal start for all kids: How does that work when my parents are beautiful as sin, resulting in me being beautiful too, so beautiful I can just pose and earn in a hour what you will earn in a year? Do we throw acid to my face to compensate? Free cosmetic surgery for you?
Another case: My father was a serious charisma-less person who barely had any friends, he never did anything to find me a job because nobody liked him enough to propose it. How do you achieve equality here, do we make other people's parents less nice? The amount of opportunities generated by a well-connected parent are way better than those generated by rich parents and that is a fucking fact.
Another example. Kids may not inherit, in your system, but they already get kickstarted when the parents are alive. Now, we know one of the main reasons of inequality is marriage: Women tend to marry men with similar or superior purchasing power, which often leads to very rich family units. Do we regulate marriage?
The only thing you're achieving here is to fuck up capitalization and wealth construction, you will never achieve equality. Ever.
No money given to anyone. No welfare, no "basic income", no minimum wage, no birthday gifts, nothing. Everyone needs to make it on their own.
>>68359324
But that's wrong, you retard.
And sellings things for more than what you bought it for is the very essence of capitalism. It's how wealth is generated. Nobody gets richer from just passing the same amounts of money around
>>68358876
>I don't care about the means
>as he said
>>68357963
>Tax more from rich, which will result in my initial proposal
You're a fag and I'm not talking to someone directly contradicting themselves within a couple of post and what you've been saying the entire thread.
>>68358931
No, it's not better to be an animal.
>>68358915
Donald Trump is one example.
>>68359151
That's nice too but is out of context. The context was 100 art students vs 1 jet.
>>68359227
Hm I agree. I didn't want to discuss the means of distribution. Governments are far from being perfect, I agree.
>>68359243
>shitskin
Spoken like a true fascist Russian. Protip: first become something valuable, then try to bash skin color, retard.
>>68354005
Yeah, but good luck trying to get your PC to last 25 years.
Your house too, for that matter, if it was built recently.
Capitalism is about ripping people off. If you sell a product for exactly its worth, you make no profit, you just break even. If you pay a man exactly what his labor is worth, again, he makes no profit, but merely breaks even.
Capitalism consists entirely of trying to sell something for more than its worth, or trying to underpay someone for goods or services. There is no other way to profit.
>>68359444
Fallacy. I disagree with the Armenian but your logic that "the limit is hard to define so there can't/shouldn't be one" is incorrect
>>68359324
>my company is aiming the product to be affordable for the low-end market
>waaah capitalism is FLAWED
>>68359579
Again I didn't want to discus the means. My whole argument wasn't about it. I only said after lots of them pushed me.
>>68348324
Too bad additive manufacturing is nowhere close to meeting the standards of reductive machining
>>68359627
It's impossible to sell something for more than it's worth because worth is subjective. Another pinko with 0 understanding of economics.
>>68359587
>Trump
>an example of a dumb richman
He is a literal genius, meanwhile you are busy being braindead.
>>68359587
lol stay buttmad anita sarkeesian that racist rich folks wont fund your misogyny studies degree
>>68359805
>It's impossible to sell something for more than it's worth
>>68359856
I have enough to fund my own studies mate, don't worry.
>buttmad anita sarkeesian
Mate, believe me, I hate them more than you do.
>>68359706
If you're going to suggest something should be law you should have concrete numbers or else what's the point?
>>68360014
The numbers can be derived from various studies. But there can be a number
>>68359805
>worth is subjective.
No it fucking isn't, though. It's quantifiable. If an Apple iPhone costs $85 to manufacture, that's what it's worth. Just because you're stupid enough to pay $700 for it doesn't make it worth that much.
People like you are the entire reason for the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.
>>68344976
socialists are like niggers. they talk big game about how everyone should be equal, but really they just want to punish those they perceive as above them and drag them down to there level.
>>68359587
>Donald Trump is one example.
Prove that he is not smart and hardworking. He's a businessman who turned a loan of 1 million dollars into his 4 billion net worth. Trust me, that's harder than earing that first million which a lot of people can't even do. That proves to me that he's smart.
>>68359587
>That's nice too but is out of context. The context was 100 art students vs 1 jet.
The argument was that one jet would give jobs to a pilot, a few engineers, a few airport employees. So that billionaire provides several people with jobs, by owning a jet. That's several people who are now employed and can provide for their families.
>>68359587
>Hm I agree. I didn't want to discuss the means of distribution. Governments are far from being perfect, I agree.
Your proposition is that inheritance should be made illegal. Only the government can do that. So you need the government for your plan.
>>68359827
lol. hope you will get a president like Trump one day.
>>68353249
Sounds like my ex-fiancé
I wised up and we broke things off. Shame too. She started off a fairly independent person, but the longer our relationship lasted the more she tried to make me into her Dad.
Sex was great tho and she was a great gal. I just couldn't see spending a good portion of my life with her
>>68359324
>Capitalism means one thing: making as much money as possible.
Which means that Capitalism is not the reason for low quality products or a lack of choice, retard.
There are many ways of making money. Some companies will create high quality clothing that they sell for hundreds of dollars, other companies will mass produce much cheaper clothes that are made of cheaper materials.
You are not forced to buy the cheap stuff.
In a Communist society what your company does would be the standard and I couldn't go somewhere else to buy a much better product. Once people realize your shitty product is crap they will buy the adhesive from next door where it costs a bit more.
>>68360162
>manufacture is the only cost
Not even Marx was this retarded.
>>68344976
while inheritance is bad it's really not that bad, most heirs squander their inheritances (good for economy) and the tax is something like 40% (good for guvmnt)
the problem is when you don't have your money yourself, instead you put it in a foundation to support the family, which acts as basically a bank account, even gaining interest, and isn't affected by the deaths of any individual members
>>68360014
Sure, I agree. But it's besides the point. We're arguing about whether or not there should be a limit. Once we've reached a conclusion we can decide on that.
>>68360140
I'd assume the most fair way to do it would be some sort of bracket where you keep everything under a certain amount and the rest is taxes at increasing amounts as the wealth increases.
>>68360200
>Trust me, that's harder than earing that first million which a lot of people can't even do. That proves to me that he's smart.
This again is based on the assumption that you have to be smart to earn money.
>The argument was that one jet would give jobs to a pilot, a few engineers, a few airport employees.
Sculptures in cities/buildings give jobs to a lot of people too.
>Your proposition is that inheritance should be made illegal. Only the government can do that. So you need the government for your plan.
If you gave me the choice of making it illegal, I would refuse, knowing how corrupt the governments are. I am talking about ideas.
>>68359765
And again you're a backtracking lying nigger.
Capitalism is the most effective means to what you want with a massive wealth of evidence backing it. So you clearly don't care about that since you're opposing it
>>68360181
Capitalism has a lot of flaws. There's no reason not to admit that, and look for solutions.
Yes, socialism has a lot of flaws, and replacing capitalism entirely with socialism is probably a very bad idea, but that doesn't mean there isn't a way to improve capitalism, even if some of the improvements are taken from the otherwise failed socialism.
Eg. What if we socialize essential industries only? Food production, Housing, Healthcare, Education. Everything else stays under capitalism.
Arguing entirely for one approach or the other is stupid, because they're both flawed. Pick the bits that work best from each strategy and combine them.
Socialism, if done properly, would be better for essential industries. Capitalism, if done properly, would be better for everything else.
>>68360677
Hm, does the money have to be concentrated in order for capitalism to work?
If no, my point still holds
If yes, I am against capitalism.
>>68359587
Trump is a literal genius, idiot. If he wasn't in business, politics, TV and literature he would be in STEM and Mensa.
You have to be incredibly stupid to not see how smart Trump is.
>>68360570
>assumption that you have to be smart to earn money.
You're assuming you don't have to be smart to be rich because you think Donald Trump, a rich man, is not smart. But why is he not smart?
>Sculptures in cities/buildings give jobs to a lot of people too.
No, it just stands there. A sculptor makes a statue, it has to be moved from the studio to the location but that's one afternoon work.
>>68360570
>I am talking about ideas.
But you're using practical examples to support your idea so that's not entirely true. And I'm speaking mostly from a practical viewpoint so that may be why we're disagreeing.
>>68360796
This. I hate the argument of capitalism vs socialism. The system shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
>Armenia
The Turks did some things right
>>68344976
Inheritance should not be taxed.
Wealth belonging to rich families has already been taxed as income when earned. They should be able to with it as they please. Their kids should be able to inherit it, tax free.
any other position is a Bernie tier retard
>>68360872
How do you think companies expand, generating more wealth in the process (better technology, for example) if not by concentration of capital? Why do you think Germany is so rich?
This sounds like a good way to get the rich to blow all their money on hookers and crack right before they die.
>>68360977
>But why is he not smart?
The words that he shouts, I don't consider smart.
Now, in a sense smartness is relative. A mathematical genius is arguably smart and hard-working but he might not be able to earn money.
Trump in the same way, may be a good businessman but he is not smart. At least by my standards.
>>68361321
>A mathematical genius is arguably smart and hard-working but he might not be able to earn money.
Then he's not smart, he's just a robot. Being smart is more than knowing how to do something, it's knowing how to capitalize those skills.
>>68361321
Literally kill yourself.
>>68344976
If you abolish inheritance, people will simply utilize their wealth in other ways and try to have as little personal property as possible nearing death.
Home ownership and personal emergency funds will tank. There won't even be an upside, since close to nothing will be left to distribute. Less than that if you account for the additional bureaucracy and control.
>>68361430
No robot can do mathematics. It demands abstract reasoning and problem solving skills.
Let me ask a question:
Who is smarter: Albert Einstein or Donald Trump?
>>68361109
These people can't think in long term. It's all ''gibsmedat! gibsmedat! u rich! I want rich! gibsmedat!''.
Of course the rich would not simply give their money away like that. It's insane.
If I was really rich and I was getting old I'd invest all my money, give it to charity of my choice and spend it. I would not let the government simply take it and spend it on inefficient gov programs that will further the welfare state and make the world a worse place for everyone.
If this was a thing I would simply move out of the country. If I couldn't move out of the country with my money, I'd buy my kids hundreds of expensive cars that they could sell when they get older.
Would the government take the cars away? I'd find a way to preserve my wealth and pass it down to my children.
>>68361321
>The words that he shouts, I don't consider smart.
You're retarded.
Read Art of the Deal.
>>68361486
see my last point in here>>68360570
>>68361660
No thanks. If he really means what he speaks then he is not smart. If he doesn't, still isn't worth it.
>>68361583
Who is smarter: Albert Einstein or you?
Proof you're an idiot right there. Stumped.
You're a complete idiot. Einstein had an estimated IQ from 160 to 190. Donald Trump has an IQ of at least 155, but it's estimated to be over 160. He's no Einstein, but he's a genius.
>>68360872
>Hm, does the money have to be concentrated in order for capitalism to work
Again read
>>68357314
Wealth has to be concentrated to do anything of large scale in any system you absolute retard.
The difference with capitalism it is actually done voluntarily and benefits the most people
>>68344976
where I live you have to give 50% of your inheritance to the state
it is 100% working though since people here are richer everyday and there are no hobos anywhere
>>68362014
>Who is smarter: Albert Einstein or you?Proof you're an idiot right there. Stumped.
lol that's not the point.
The point is, Trump is a lot richer than Einstein and by your reasoning, he has to be smarter.
>>68361583
>Who is smarter: Albert Einstein or Donald Trump?
Hard to tell because they lived in different ages and there might be some external intervention (government) in the fortune building of Trump, and maybe if Einstein lived today he could use his skills to build a fortune, given that society is more capitalized today and it's easier to make money.
One thing for sure, Einstein was a better physicist, but everything seems to point out Trump is smarter.
Being good at something isn't what smartness is, being smart is also recognizing if the skillset you're acquiring is useful for society and can be remunerated.
I could be the best flute player in the world, a genius, but if there's no demand for someone playing a flute, I'd starve, how smart of me not to recognize that learning how to play the flute would lead me to starve, right? Would you say someone who starves, even when surrounded by obscene wealth, is smart?
>>68362109
Ok, still, taxing some percentage of inheritance won't kill businesses.
>>68362355
>>68362129
Answer this faggot, poor people keep getting poorer and there are less middle/high class people every year
>>68344976
It's called inheritance tax and the reason it's at the rate it is, is to maximise the amount the state can hope to acquire with it.
If it's too high people just move their wealth out of the country before they die. If you make it illegal to do that then you create a prison state and society collapses.
>>68362341
That's what I mean. I consider earning money to be a skill in our society. Just because you are good at it, doesn't mean you are smarter than the guy who is unable to earn more.
>>68360872
>Hm, does the money have to be concentrated in order for capitalism to work?
As far as I understand it, that's the essence of capitalism. So yes. There have to be rich people that have the means of production that not every single poor man can have. In the 16th century, every man had his own means of production. One farmer had one farm and some sons who helped him, and he could feed his own family, and only his own family. Later, one farmer would employ some farmhands who help him, and who in turn can move into the attic or the shed and can eat with the family. Then the farmhands want to live on their own, so he buys a small house nearby, keeps working on the farm and gets salary from the farmer.
>>68362433
Are you saying that just by removing that tax, everything will magically work better?.
>>68361321
>The words that he shouts, I don't consider smart.
But the plans that I read, I consider smart. I think you're biased against him by consuming too much liberal media.
>>68359577
To be fair, that picture doesn't include military development, not only including weapons of war, but even the internet, itself.
>>68362211
Einstein was neither a businessman, nor was he interested in wealth, retard.
>by your reasoning, he has to be smarter.
You're talking out of your ass. I don't see anyone in this thread saying that the smarter you are the more money you will make.
What I see is people saying that you have to be smart to make money, which I don't fully agree with. It's a very general statement. Trump being rich doesn't prove or disprove that he's smart, it simply means that it's not that very likely that he's dumb, which is completely irrelevant, because we know for a fact that he's a genius. Forget about his fucking money. He's one of the smartest men alive in America, period.
You might want to check who you're responding to. I know you're dumb, but try figuring out who you're responding to. It's not that hard to remember a few flags.
>>68362662
No,
but you are saying that by imposing this tax, everything will
stop being jealous of other people's fortune, you fucking kike
>>68362534
Earning money, at least in capitalism, is done through serving society in the way society wants.
I consider that someone who serves society is smarter than someone who doesn't.
>>68362579
Ok. I agree. I will back up a bit and just say that I am up for inheritance taxation.
I guess the real problem is tax utilization, which government fails to do correctly.
>>68362809
I am not. I am a middle class guy, who wouldn't benefit from inheritance taxation in any ways. We are just discussing on way of wealth distribution, why is there a need to go complete /pol/ extreme.
>>68362863
>Earning money, at least in capitalism, is done through serving society in the way society wants.
I will give you an example. There is a guy who buys and blends stuff on youtube and is most probably earning lots of money. Is he really serving the society?
>>68361691
Then you get a part of that effect, it still sucks, it still messes up incentives. Having children is a strong source of motivation for many, and they build something/deprive themselves for DECADES purely for their children's interest.
And if it's about "fairness" material wealth is only one sort of thing to inherit - one kid inherits a million dollars, another kid inherits million dollar looks, another - million dollar athletic qualities, another - million dollar musical ability. Some are raised with very intelligent parents, world star artists and athletes by their side, others are not. You punish the parents that earned money for their kid, while the others keep their similarly unearned genetic advantage, specific home environment advantage - it's pointless.
>>68363256
Entertainment is really valued in today's society, so yes. Maybe not me and you, but he's certainly serving a lot of people is he's capitalizing on that.
>>68363350
Hm, you are right. I won't go that extreme any more.
>>68362355
Itbis already taxed very high coon
>>68362433
>poor people keep getting poorer a
This is objectively false
