dude you do know that capitalism is oppression of minorities right? or are you that frickin brainwashed by the corporations...
>>72235023
Why do you think I support it much?
>>72235023
Says the guy wearing full corporate stuff... idiot
>>72235023
and that the leftist denies this truth while pulling the same sting. yeah, so what?
Nice strawman. Capitalism is the oppression of the proletariat. We do not need your cultural Marxist cancer in our ideology. Take off the red hat, dye your hair blue and fuck off to the gulag. You are not wanted here.
If you want a (you) out of me you are going to have to shitpost harder
Identity politic fags belong in gulag. GTFO.
>>72235023
Capitalism will be dead soon, thanks to people like you.
>A majority of millennials now reject capitalism, poll shows
>In an apparent rejection of the basic principles of the U.S. economy, a new poll shows that most young people do not support capitalism.
>The Harvard University survey, which polled young adults between ages 18 and 29, found that 51 percent of respondents do not support capitalism. Just 42 percent said they support it.
>It isn't clear that the young people in the poll would prefer some alternative system, though. Just 33 percent said they supported socialism. The survey had a margin of error of 2.4 percentage points.
>>72235023
Step into my helicopter and tell me more.
>>72237860
>51 percent of respondents do not support capitalism
90% of this group also owned Iphones
>>72235023
Thats ADF, He is a tranny now...well wants to be and lies about being raped every fuckign day
>>72235023
Cam someone please post the video that's from, I've been trying to find it for years
>>72237860
>33 percent said they supported socialism
Too high. Marx was probably right about many things, but socialism was not one of them. In practice, socialism is just another name for capitalism with more authoritarian state influence and less of a meritocracy. It does nothing but weaken and disillusion workers. Communism needs a different economic system than what every country currently has. It needs to be decentralized, it needs to remove supply and demand as a system for determining value and instead determine it via contribution and labor, and it needs to prioritize and incentivize socially useful work.
Communism in the past has been far too focused on state authoritarianism and sacrificing productivity at the altar of equality, while in practice not being equal at all. It needs to dispense with the presumptions of equality and reward those who do useful work above all else.
>>72239052
>Marx was probably right about many things
Holy shit fuck off
>>72239324
Nice try, but I'm actually a Trump supporter. I'm one of the few leftists that realize that under capitalism, you have to play by capitalism's rules in order for it to work properly. The young are probably so disillusioned with capitalism because the government has been doing it wrong in the US since LBJ and probably earlier.
>>72239052
supply and demand isn't a system, it's natural law
>>72240349
It's how capitalism determines the value of everything, and the arbitrary nature of it means that it only serves itself and not the needs of the people.
As a communist, I support an alternative for determining value, such as the amount of time spent producing an item or working at a job, and I support a currency based on that, one that is generated upon completion of the work by the laborer and destroyed upon the first transaction the laborer uses it in. Governments, corporations, etc should have no currency of their own, only to recognize the labor of individuals and generate said currency. The ability of governments and corporations to appropriate resources needs to be based not on how much they can afford, but how they are going to use these resources and whether they will be competent at using them as determined by a neutral third party.
I do not deny that there are problems with this, but it removes the majority of barriers into the labor force, which I believe are the primary problem with capitalism.
>>72237242
This. We need to purge this petit burguoise cancer.
>>72241635
Under communism why should I start up a business if I will not profit from it?
>>72235023
I detect some double think here.
Most people are poor. Rich people are a small minority. Leftists usually tell me that capitalism works in favor of the rich, rather than oppressing them.
Hey maybe you're right though!
>>72241956
You will profit from it. The business itself will gain no currency, but you will. And should you wish to expand it, all you need do is submit an application to do so to a government or trade organization so they can make sure you are doing good work and serve enough people for the expansion to matter.
Additionally, you do so because it is what you wish to do with your life. Money is no barrier for you to start a business, so you are free to choose whatever you want.
Again, however, some undesirable jobs must be incentivized or no one will do them. Similarly, certain jobs that are attractive under capitalism must not be paid in communism. People are free to pursue modeling as a hobby, but if we paid everyone to stand and look pretty and there are no barriers in place to get a modeling job, everyone would do it.
>>72242582
>You will profit from it.
No I won't. If my workers are getting the whole value of what my business enabled them to produce that leaves nothing for me.
>The business itself will gain no currency
So it can't invest and become more efficient. No R&D. No progress. Business economics 101.
>And should you wish to expand it, all you need do is submit an application to do so to a government or trade organization
Because governments are so trustworthy and have perfect knowledge right? Look up government failure. This is why corporations exist, by paying governments to give them competitive advantages and uphold barriers to entry by force.
I'm sorry but communism is for the economically illiterate.
>>72243019
>that leaves nothing for me
Would you deny that you are also contributing something by enabling the workers? You seem to assume there is a finite amount of currency that could be awarded for effort under this system. There is not.
>So it can't invest and become more efficient.
It can. It simply cannot due so through currency. It is the company's ability to attract workers and researchers that will allow it to become more efficient. You may persuade others, you may offer them assistance in the form of labor, you may do whatever it takes to attract talent. You simply may not use currency.
>Because governments are so trustworthy and have perfect knowledge right?
Did I ever say they did? I don't view the current system as any better in this regard. Additionally, expansion is mostly a personal choice. I would say it allows for a one-time award of more currency, but it also makes logistical management more difficult. This system mostly favors small businesses.
>>72242582
>>72244056
If your only way to invest in capital improvements is to apply for a government grant, then there is no longer any link between serving your customers and being able to grow. It's just about your relationship with the government now. So instead of focusing on the customers, businesses now focus on sucking up to the government.
Nah man, we got that here already, and it sucks. No thanks.
I have to agree with >>72243019 you need some remedial economics before you start trying to engineer an economy.
>>72245022
Well again, for the vast majority of businesses, there is little incentive to expand in the first place, rendering that largely moot. The only exception I would make for this would be for supply chains. It would make sense to heavily incentivize those into expansion
>>72245515
>Well again, for the vast majority of businesses, there is little incentive to expand in the first place, rendering that largely moot.
No, that's completely wrong. Virtually all businesses seek to expand at least at the same rate as the market they currently serve, and even if that were not true a level of infrastructure investment is still required just to maintain current services.
>>72245872
This is assuming that all markets expand, which is not true, and even for those that do, there will be new businesses in the same field that serve the expanding market. Even so, I don't necessarily believe that you must appeal to the government. The supply chain or a trade organization are more important because expansion affects them more.
The infrastructure thing should not be a problem so long as you can prove to your supply chain that your business is still at least as useful as it is when you began.
>>72247046
I'm sorry but this is just a perfect example of why you can't have a government run an economy. Well-meaning but completely ignorant people will do what they think is best (the sorts of things you are saying here) and the end result will be starvation.
>>72244056
>You seem to assume there is a finite amount of currency that could be awarded for effort under this system. There is not.
Wealth comes exclusively from the production of a good/service. You cannot simply produce money from nowhere to reward people you see as deserving.
Efficiency is gained by incentives. Money is the most effective incentive. By removing ""currency"" you are removing the incentive for a business to expand and become more efficient. Workers in the soviet union were unproductive because the government essentially pretended to pay them whilst they pretended to work, meaning everyone was less well off in terms of goods and services, in addition to being under a tyrannical government.
>>72247321
You could argue that these people aren't well-meaning in the first place, since they think that government force against people who disagree with them is fine.
Though then again, it could be argued that everyone was well-meaning. Hitler had good intentions. He thought he was doing the right thing exterminating slavs.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
>>72241635
you've fundamentally shown you do not understand the concept of supply and demand. Supply and demand is not an invention of capitalism, it is how nature functions. Scarcity was not invented by capitalism. Scarcity is a basic reality of nature.
>>72248184
For every thousand striking at the leaves of evil there is 1 striking at the root.
>>72237913
hahahahahahahaa le epicccc dank meme XDDDDDDDDD
>>>/GULAG/
>>72235023
>pistol belt
>absolutely nothing on it
Why?
