Hey /r9k/, just a reminder of what's wrong with you and where your real problem lies.
First of all, realize that you live in a neoliberal capitalistic nihilism, where nothing has value other than money and power.
Then realize that in this ideology, cooperation between humans is only encouraged when they're losers, so that they can band together and topple a winner. Otherwise, between winners and against losers, competition is what's encouraged instead. This is of course also the case in interpersonal relationships. This means that every relationship is a power struggle with a clear winner and a loser.
What you want, is for two losers (you and your gf) to band together to survive this harsh world. However, this is impossible because of the biological imperative which says that women are winners by default, they can never be as much of a loser as you are purely because they have a vagina.
You might dress it up in some other ideology, which has concepts such as true love, loyalty, empathy, altruism, decency, and so on, but in the "real" world, this is how it is today.
Thank you and goodnight.
Gulag yourself, commie.
>>24846834
Well, it's the truth, what you do with it is up to you.
>>24846745
>neoliberal capitalistic nihilism, where nothing has value other than money and power.
Money is just a means of measuring value, after all. It seems harsh that "If you have no money, you have no value", but it's true. If I was valuable to someone, that'd command money. Women being valuable because they have cunts, that, though, is true, and I can't argue against it.
>>24847840
>t seems harsh that "If you have no money, you have no value", but it's true.
Do you remember where there were different parallel value systems that didn't all come down to money? I do.
Women aren't default winners. Women in the U.S. just seem to have an undeserved sense of "I should be treated like a princess." If you want a good relationship get a woman from another country, seriously.
the only way to beat the system is to choose the system that rules over you in a way that benefits you the most
>>24849205
This is a biological fact that's the exact same in every country. Which country do you think women aren't parasites in?
>>24849312
thats not the point hes making, hes saying find a gril from a country where grils are allowed to be beaten
>>24849967
There are no such countries, what are you on about?
>>24849990
lol if there weren't why would we need feminism
>>24851018
Not being beaten doesn't exactly mean you're equal.
>>24846745
you view economics as a zero sum game. therefore you are retarded.
Do you need an explanation? sure.
I have a dollar, you want my dollar, you have two options
if you're zerosum: you take my dollar, and you're a thief
if you're not: you create something I want that I will pay a dollar for, and I will go get more dollars by creating something somebody wants for them, and they'll get those dollars by....., and you're not a thief, because each person voluntarily gave dollars to the next person.
I know this is hard for you, because you're probably retarded, but economic systems are NOT a zero sum game. Now that you get it, you also understand why inflation must exist. Congratulations, you're half way to being competent in economics.
>>24849122
this
dfdfdg
>>24852256
>economic systems are NOT a zero sum game.
Only because you're not looking at the whole picture. There is always an underclass being exploited, from the personal level to the global level, whether it's the person who loves the other person more in a relationship, whether it's the slave caste from Utopia and Republic, or the third world sweatshop workers and diamond miners.
Zero sum is just a nice fantasy that allows sociopaths to exploit without repercussion.
>>24852256
creating things is the less economical option for people in positions of power
>>24852352
Ah cool, thanks for cutting to the chase comrade.
Ok, so there's always a losing caste. Whether it's within the "winning" community or outside, there's always a caste that "gives up" so that other castes can "gain"
I have two questions.
1. Can you explain the mechanics of it? Can you prove this mathematically? I want to know that the practically enslaved African diamond miner LOST X units of money so that the western diamond seller GAINED exactly X units.
if it's not EXACT, it is not by definition, zero-sum. If it's not zero-sum, your entire premise is retarded as fuck because that implies that the concept of wealth generation actually exists, which implies that capitalism is still the most fair system, even if there are subjective "winners and losers".
2. Ideologically, can you work to counter the human condition with an economic system, and more specifically how do you answer for each failed communist state?
I would argue no, and then pre-emptively say "no true scotsman"
Any ideology that doesn't account for the human drive for self-preservation and self-aggrandizement doesn't understand humans at all. Want to know why capitalism has routinely btfo you guys? because it's the system that actually understand how individuals operate, rather than focusing on how they "should" operate.
>>24852406
I mostly agree with that assertion. I think capitalism is fantastic, so long as capitalism protects the working the class. I'm actually the rare economist here... I think keynes was right about a lot of things, and I think that we should bolster the FDA and EPA and that unions can be good for people.
In my world view, there's 3 people in a room: the worker, the politician, and the CEO. The worker should work for the CEO and be protected by the politician from the CEO. I think the politician doesn't have many other functions aside from that.
What does that mean specifically?
The politician should block monopolies, the politician should prevent false claims from CEOs (in terms of what a product can/can't do), the politician should make sure any positive claim by the CEO is factually accurate, the politician should ensure that the worker can address grievances against the CEO, and the politician should ensure that the worker cannot ensure that the CEO can't act of his own free will in enacting standards of his product or workers.
In my mind, it's a tug of war between capital and labor, and politics should aim for ensuring it's a fair tug of war.
Unfortunately, capitalism has run amok in America and it's turned into corporatism. Worse yet, faggots like OP see themselves as anti-capitalist without thinking things through and going full blown retarded commie without realizing capitalism has given them the multitude of products to shitpost on.
>>24846745
That's a sweet and innocent idea.
So, I'm a loser. Where is my anti-capitalist, anti-feminist gf willing to date me to undo the evil that is the modern world?
>>24852805
>so long as capitalism protects the working the class
But anon, there is no working class in capitalism. There's only human resources.
>>24852805
Wait, sorry, I'm missing something here, why would someone who is by nature a sociopath obsessed with, as you so nicely put it, self-aggrandizement, protect the worker, instead of tag-teaming him up the ass with the CEO?
>>24852879
In the mountains with Chad Guevara.
>>24852997
because the mob doesn't realize it's own strength. Maybe if you'd expand more on your personal beliefs we could have a more meaningful conversation.
>>24852946
what do you mean by this? pretend I'm autistic. It shouldn't be hard, we're on arrninekay.
>>24853016
Undercapitalized post companero
