Who here wishes you were born in a socialist country so you could get free neetbux? We don't have anything as neetbux here so if we get kicked out without a job we straight up go homeless.
Communism/ socialism> capitalism
no such thing as socialism in one country, red bourgeois!
>>27123855
>socialist country
>free neetbux
You'd be drafted into army or go to jail if you'd be avoiding getting job.
>>27123855
In practice you wouldn't like socialism, it sounds very good and comfy but in reality it's shit and self destructive.
Just because you're country can't into capitalism doesnt mean capitalism is bad. Just like how a toddler can't drive a luxury car, it doesn't make the car bad
>>27123875
army is better than going homeless desu. i couldnt get into the army even if i tried.
Sharing? Don't make me laugh, it's not sharing if you are forced to share. That's theft.
I'd like to live in a capitalist country with extensive welfare programs, but that isn't socialism.
>>27123855
I wish i were. I hate the normies and i want to leech and live off their hard work.
>>27123866
There is social democracy in the best countries to live.
>>27123875
If the army is well supported it's fun unless you are a huge faggot.
>>27123881
Really how is it destructive? I would admit that's the case of the soviet socialism entirely because of Russia's subhuman influence and theft of the property of other countries and silencing them with force, but social democracy countries are generally the best to live and the most developed, like Denmark or Norway. Sweden was as well before their politicians started serving EU agenda and flooded their country with migrants. It was next to paradise before.
>>27123882
Army can give you a career too if you can't find anything else in life. If it has enough budget, that is.
>>27123893
You know what else is theft? Rich fat faggot thinking i owe him my life because i wasn't born in riches. Rich people exploit other people's lives and pay them pennies for it, then take all the money and take it out of the economy to save it for the afterlife. Rich people are cancer that needs to be removed.
>>27123893
so what do you call being forced to share your labor?
>>27123940
>Implying the producers own the means of production in social democracy
>>27123930
>wants extensive welfare program
>not a socialist country though
topkek
>>27123955
Of course they do. Are you fucking stupid?
>>27123940
>You know what else is theft? Rich fat faggot thinking i owe him my life because i wasn't born in riches. Rich people exploit other people's lives and pay them pennies for it, then take all the money and take it out of the economy to save it for the afterlife. Rich people are cancer that needs to be removed.
You're not forced to do that. You're free to find a way to live without working for rich people. If you can't do that however, that's nobodys problem but yours.
>>27123941
Theft also. But that doesn't happen very often, not since slavery stopped existing. Working normal job is not the same at all. You're not forced to work. You're free to do something else. Just because you can't, that's not my problem.
>>27123976
>You're not forced to do that. You're free to find a way to live without working for rich people. If you can't do that however, that's nobodys problem but yours.
What a faggot. Can't even argue like a man, just plays games like a woman. This is the apologist of the rich people. People like you have been and will be shot.
>>27123976
>You're free to do something else. Just because you can't, that's not my problem.
>you're free to do something but you can't
capitalist logic
>>27123974
Social Democracy is what happens in Sweden and Norway, there's no soviets or any kind of worker control.
>>27123987
Care to bring up any actual points? Of how you are forced to work for rich people? How you're being held at gunpoint where you will be shot if you start your own bussiness? How you will be shot if you move somewhere else where it's more to your liking and where you don't have to be "exploited"? Please tell me.
>>27123994
>capitalist logic
Do you have any reading comprehension? It's YOUR fault that you can't do it, maybe you're too dumb, too incompetent, too lazy. Either way it's not my fucking problem. If you're mad about the life you're living you can change it. You can go live somewhere secluded where laws pretty much don't exist. But no, instead you sit here and whine, thinking you're entitled to taking from people who don't have a problem with being "exploited" to use your rhetoric.
>>27124020
If I can't do something, I'm not free to do it. I can't change my life without other people. I can't have healthcare, good food, good transportation and so on without being held at gunpoint for not having "earned" it. When you're forced to do more work than needs to be done to survive, and when you're forced to work for reasons other than doing that thing, you're not living in a free society.
>>27123961
>believes those things are mutually exclusive
>doesn't know what socialism is
>>27124000
Are you fucking kidding me? I have to travel the fucking world and hope for some alternative, leaving behind people that might need my help? What kind of lowly dog are you exactly?
>>27124020
it's not HIS fault the game was rigged from the start. Democracy is rotten and corrupt, it creates the biggest disparities between people because it's a shit regime. You need to talk to an actual rich guy for 2 minutes and you will know all your shit about "being good enough" flies out of the window because yeah, you are full of shit. All of the rich people i know are fat, lazy retards that have been born in riches and just waste it away while countless people around them struggle to get by. Fuck you i hope you get the rope one day.
>Amerifags being this buttblasted over welfare programs that make millions of people's lives better off
Really it's p sad when you think about it desu senpai
>>27124050
>If I can't do something, I'm not free to do it.
But you can't do it because you don't work on it. If I can't do 50 pushups now does it mean I will never be able to do 50 pushups? No, I'm just lazy to train now. It's nothing external. Just my laziness. You see the point I'm making?
> I can't have healthcare, good food, good transportation and so on without being held at gunpoint for not having "earned" it.
Well why should you be expecting things for free?
>When you're forced to do more work than needs to be done to survive, and when you're forced to work for reasons other than doing that thing, you're not living in a free society.
You can always leave and go live in some cabin in Alaska. Doing things just to survive and nothing more. You can abandon society. You're free to do that, you certainly wouldn't be the first or the last.
>>27124067
The red scare fucked our politics hard. There's a sizable amount of people here that would consider Keynes a socialist.
>>27124054
>> What kind of lowly dog are you exactly?
You are the one that wants to live off other people's work and property.
>>27123940
>If the army is well supported it's fun unless you are a huge faggot.
You probably never heard of Russian Army
>>27124079
How old are you kid. You sound like you are 18. Let me guess, you think you are probably gonna be the next steve jobs billionaire guy right. All kids pls go.
>>27124086
And you are the one that wants the many to slave away their existence for the few's privilege to be born in riches and nepotism. It's not your work or property if you need other people to work all day for you and they don't receive even a tiny fraction of their real work's worth.
>>27124079
>But you can't do it because you don't work on it. If I can't do 50 pushups now does it mean I will never be able to do 50 pushups? No, I'm just lazy to train now. It's nothing external. Just my laziness. You see the point I'm making?
That only applies to work that:
>has to be done
>is done voluntarily
Working for money is not working to accomplish what's meant to be accomplished by that specific job.
>Well why should you be expecting things for free?
Because I have certain basic needs as a human being. We know people need food, clothing shelter, water and other people. If we aren't entitled to those things, we aren't entitled to live and nobody is punished for murder anymore.
>You can always leave and go live in some cabin in Alaska. Doing things just to survive and nothing more. You can abandon society. You're free to do that, you certainly wouldn't be the first or the last.
People who do that go crazy, I also need to buy the land. I don't WANT to go live in a cabin in Alaska, a free society offers me the chance to NOT do that.
>>27124096
I have, Russia is a huge shithole which became even worse after their shitty attempt at socialism because the handful rich guys at the top of it became capitalists and sold out the manufacture to private players, leaving countless people without jobs to starve while they became billionaires and started buying yachts and shit.
>>27124054
>Are you fucking kidding me? I have to travel the fucking world and hope for some alternative, leaving behind people that might need my help? What kind of lowly dog are you exactly?
What the fuck are you talking about? I'm just saying if you don't like the life you're "forced" to live then change it or live somewhere else where the rules are different. It's that simple.
>it's not HIS fault the game was rigged from the start.
That much is true. No arguing there.
> Democracy is rotten and corrupt, it creates the biggest disparities between people because it's a shit regime.
Depends on what you mean by disparities. One could argue that in the past, in the primitivist societies the disparities were huge too. Only reason they weren't bigger was because at that time the technology was nowhere near as advanced. Can you imagine tribal society if WMDs were involved? You would have one strong Chad ruling all. The system we have now is tame compared to that.
>All of the rich people i know are fat, lazy retards that have been born in riches and just waste it away while countless people around them struggle to get by
It's their riches. Even if they got born into it(not to mention you're ignoring most "rich" people and working with a stereotype to help your point). They're free do whatever they want with them. It doesn't belong to you. If they choose to just burn it all, that's none of your fucking bussiness. Because it doesn't belong to you.
>>27124132
rich guy apologist faggot. kill self.
>>27124129
I'm not talking about current Russia status but the army itself.
>>27124112
> slave
Nobody in the western world is a slave you moron.
> real works worth
if their work was worth more they could be selling it for more - and wouldn't need to ask the Government to artificially raise the minimum wage.
>>27124067
I'm European working hard on moving to the US. So jokes on you m8
>>27123855
>Socialism
>free money
we had socialism here and it works like this: you go to work for 10 hours a day to get worthless money/ration cards. then you stand for literally a few hours in a line to a store only to find out today they have nothing aside from vinegar
socialism was the absolute cancer and i'm happy to see it died
>>27124122
Your point about work is entitlement. Do you think you're entitled to having a life that is exactly how you want it to be without putting any work towards it?
>Working for money is not working to accomplish what's meant to be accomplished by that specific job.
Wait. So let me get this straight. You're hired to do A. And so the goal gets accomplished. But if you're hired to do A and you also get money for it, suddenly A is not accomplished? Give me a break.
>If we aren't entitled to those things, we aren't entitled to live and nobody is punished for murder anymore.
On the risk of sounding like an edgy faggot, you're not entitled to live. You've never been. But just because you're expected to put in some work towards staying alive does NOT mean you are getting murdered. You should be able to understand this much.
>People who do that go crazy, I also need to buy the land.
If they go crazy it's usually because they're alone. So make a commune. Do something.
>I don't WANT to go live in a cabin in Alaska, a free society offers me the chance to NOT do that.
Well if you don't want it, then you don't want the consequences either. The consequences being that you will not be "exploited". That's your choice then. And honestly I don't understand why you're whining then if you choose to be "exploited" by not doing anything to stop being "exploited".
>>27124132
>What the fuck are you talking about? I'm just saying if you don't like the life you're "forced" to live then change it or live somewhere else where the rules are different. It's that simple.
Look i don't buy into your free will illusion. You either work for the richer than you or starve and die. You are trying to romanticize and illusion but only a retard that is sheltered by the real world would believe you. You are probably such person yourself.
>Depends on what you mean by disparities. One could argue that in the past, in the primitivist societies the disparities were huge too. Only reason they weren't bigger was because at that time the technology was nowhere near as advanced. Can you imagine tribal society if WMDs were involved? You would have one strong Chad ruling all. The system we have now is tame compared to that.
Even in those societies there was nothing like what we have today, there were no chads making other work for them while they do nothing. Even the most important people had something to do and were also constantly threatened by others that want their position. It was always a struggle and if you get old or fat new chads come and fuck your shit up. Nowdays you get fat, old senile fucks that tell you you aren't good enough because you don't make enough money for them to buy another boat or sports car.
>>27124147
Any points? You're not gonna win your arguments by shouting insults. That's what women do. And socialists apparently.
>>27124151
The army is needed and can be a nice thing but in Russia everything is shit and so is the army.
>>27124179
>muh free market rules
yeah fuck you rich guys influence the market's rules so they keep the wages low with for example importing foreing workers
the average person can't do jackshit to get adequate payment for his work's worth
you are the moron here
>>27124187
What you are describing is soviet style state capitalism, it failed because it's a stupid form of socialism. Social democracy on the other hand makes people work 6 hours a day like in France or get basic income like they will in Norway.
>>27124195
I agree about free will being an illusion. This brings an interesting view on the matter. I believe that
>You either work for the richer than you or starve and die.
Is generally true for most people. But there are some exceptions. The few people who are strong enough that they can do something else. The hermits, cult leaders, god knows what. Point is, they live differently. And you just weren't born to be one of them obviously, otherwise you wouldn't be here whining. So once again, that's how it is. I take it you also believe in determinism. You've been determined to be a weak slave. You can whine however you want. But that's how it is. Or you can prove me(and ironically also yourself) wrong.
>there were no chads making other work for them while they do nothing.
Really? So there were no tribe leaders, no kings, no royalty, nothing like that whatsoever?
>Even the most important people had something to do and were also constantly threatened by others that want their position. It was always a struggle and if you get old or fat new chads come and fuck your shit up.
How many people like that do you know? How much do you actually know about their lives? Or are you just assuming? I think you know nothing.
>>27124132
>It's their riches. Even if they got born into it(not to mention you're ignoring most "rich" people and working with a stereotype to help your point). They're free do whatever they want with them. It doesn't belong to you. If they choose to just burn it all, that's none of your fucking bussiness. Because it doesn't belong to you.
It's not theirs because their riches come from other people's work. I keep saying that and you just don't want to realize it because it would shatter your illusion. If it was theirs, no rich guy would have any worker doing work for him. Since it's not theirs they can't do whatever they want with it because other people depend on them to give them their wages.
Also as evident from the history, one swift move in the ruling centre can do a good job of deciding what belongs to whom. Rich people are always a hairs away from the government taking their shit and giving it to whoever needs it. You are not stronger by the state.
>>27124191
>Your point about work is entitlement. Do you think you're entitled to having a life that is exactly how you want it to be without putting any work towards it?
Yes, I think I am. I think everybdy else is also entitled to this and that working towards it should be the goal of our political discourse.
>Wait. So let me get this straight. You're hired to do A. And so the goal gets accomplished. But if you're hired to do A and you also get money for it, suddenly A is not accomplished? Give me a break.
It has to do with intentions. Intentions affect everything about the way something is being carried out. A doctor is defined by his being a doctor, I don't want to live in a society where we're doctored by moneymakers.
>On the risk of sounding like an edgy faggot, you're not entitled to live. You've never been. But just because you're expected to put in some work towards staying alive does NOT mean you are getting murdered. You should be able to understand this much.
If I'm not entitled to live, who decides what I'm entitled to? What's the criteria? How is a captain of industry a justified authority over the thousands he relies on every day to make his profits? Shoulddn't it be the other way around, since his status would mean nothing if there was nobody to fill those roles?
>If they go crazy it's usually because they're alone. So make a commune. Do something.
This has been tried, it involved barricades and blood every single time because proprietors don't appreciate it.
>Well if you don't want it, then you don't want the consequences either. The consequences being that you will not be "exploited". That's your choice then. And honestly I don't understand why you're whining then if you choose to be "exploited" by not doing anything to stop being "exploited".
I can only make the choices that are available to me.
>>27124237
Do the workers not get compensation for their work? Whether you belive it's adequate or not is beyond the point. But if you believe it's not adequate you can always quit. Learn something else. You can. If you don't want to then you're a lazy fuck and that's on you. If you can't because you're just too damn incompetent, you better get used to it.
>Rich people are always a hairs away from the government taking their shit and giving it to whoever needs it. You are not stronger by the state.
That's true. It's also some major bullshit.
>>27124233
I am not whining i just hate capitalist apologists faggots such as yourself. I only speak to you to open other people's eyes to your lies. I am not here to prove anything nor do i need to. I believe every human in the today's technological and progressive era has the right to basic income and be truly independent rather than having to slave for some other person just to survive. But what i hate the most about sheep like you is that you try to force your shit on others like it what is natural or meant to be. It's not and through history many times people like you have been massacred for a good reason. I have been determined to be a slave but i have never been nor i will be. I don't need you to tell me that.
>Really? So there were no tribe leaders, no kings, no royalty, nothing like that whatsoever?
All of those under constant stress of being replaced and doing work all the time, nothing like what we have today. Also those rulers were systematically removed from all territories until today were they barely exist anymore and have little to no influence.
>How many people like that do you know? How much do you actually know about their lives? Or are you just assuming? I think you know nothing.
I just told you what i know from first hand experience you might think whatever you want but it's just you thinking, that doesn't change the truth. Rich people will always look down on you and try to make you slave for them.
>>27124277
Why the rich don't pay more? Why won't they learn new things and learn how to do that?
Why should i do all those things and not them? Why should i be born "competent" enough to survive a vicious elite trying to get the best out of me?
Fuck that shit, take the power out of those people, they only make others suffer anyway. My life choices shouldn't be dictated by profit driven people. This is modern age slavery and we should drive these cancerous people out of existence. Take their money and power and give them to people that can do good with it.
>>27124241
>Yes, I think I am. I think everybdy else is also entitled to this and that working towards it should be the goal of our political discourse.
So do you want more people to agree with you? To see it the way you do? I think you do. But then if EVERYONE was like this. Everyone would want to be handed out things without working for them. Where would the things come from?
>It has to do with intentions. Intentions affect everything about the way something is being carried out. A doctor is defined by his being a doctor, I don't want to live in a society where we're doctored by moneymakers.
So when you accomplish something, for example build a house. But you build it with "bad intentions" does that mean the house is not built? Also who cares where you want and don't want to live? Why should I be concerned with what you want?
>If I'm not entitled to live, who decides what I'm entitled to? What's the criteria?
Nothing as far as I am concerned.
>Shoulddn't it be the other way around, since his status would mean nothing if there was nobody to fill those roles?
It shouldn't. Everyone even retards can do work if someone tells them what to do and how. But to lead? That's not as simple as just being shown "Sit here, do this".
>This has been tried, it involved barricades and blood every single time because proprietors don't appreciate it.
Do you know what proprietor means? Holder of a property. And if you create a commune on someone elses property, you get what's coming to you.
>I can only make the choices that are available to me.
And for some of these you have to put in some extra work. If you don't want to put in the extra work it does not mean you can't do it. It means you don't want to.
>>27124309
>But what i hate the most about sheep like you is that you try to force your shit on others like it what is natural or meant to be.
Just like you are. Two sides of the same coin. Except my side is the one that's actually turned upwards in most of the civilized world. Go figure.
>All of those under constant stress of being replaced and doing work all the time, nothing like what we have today. Also those rulers were systematically removed from all territories until today were they barely exist anymore and have little to no influence.
And you think the rich today don't have that fear? For example small bussiness owners who have let's say 5-10 employees(I know personally one man who owns a bussiness like this) and let me tell you, he's nowhere near calm because so many things can go wrong.
>I just told you what i know from first hand experience you might think whatever you want but it's just you thinking, that doesn't change the truth. Rich people will always look down on you and try to make you slave for them.
Well there is no arguing with experiences. You should reflect a little though. Aren't there by any chance bias in the things you're saying?
Why should I feel any kinship with all these fucking parasites? They don't feel any for me, they're just out to help themselves. The whole country is filled with immigrant groups that place their own groups interest ahead of everyone else. We have people who feign disabilities to get money, NEETs, scammers etc. They're everywhere.
>>27124344
>So do you want more people to agree with you? To see it the way you do? I think you do. But then if EVERYONE was like this. Everyone would want to be handed out things without working for them. Where would the things come from?
The things would come from necessary and voluntary labor.
>So when you accomplish something, for example build a house. But you build it with "bad intentions" does that mean the house is not built? Also who cares where you want and don't want to live? Why should I be concerned with what you want?
No, but it means that a house is not built to build a house, and we usually wind up with pic related.
>Nothing as far as I am concerned.
So why are you arguing that anything that I'm saying isn't justified, when following this logic it should just be another method of asserting one's influence over something?
>It shouldn't. Everyone even retards can do work if someone tells them what to do and how. But to lead? That's not as simple as just being shown "Sit here, do this".
Why dogmatically follow other people? The only justified leadership is the leadership of correct ideas.
>Do you know what proprietor means? Holder of a property. And if you create a commune on someone elses property, you get what's coming to you.
What makes property justified? What makes proprietors *entitled* to it?
>And for some of these you have to put in some extra work. If you don't want to put in the extra work it does not mean you can't do it. It means you don't want to.
But why do I need to put in the extra work? And, more inportantly, why should I need to?
>>27124342
>Why the rich don't pay more?
Because they don't have to. If you want more money, you're free to negotiate for it or leave. If you can't get it, that's once again YOUR incompetence.
>Why should i do all those things and not them?
Because one person with knowledge of 100 people can't do the work of 100 people. There is this thing called time you see. Let's say you have a welder, plumber, carpenter, driver and forklift operator. All of these people are employed by the boss. The boss is extremely talented so he learns all of their trades and fires them. He is able to do things they do. But that doesn't change that he can't just do the work of 5 people on his own. I feel like this shouldn't even need to be explained.
>Take their money and power and give them to people that can do good with it.
Now we're getting somewhere. Who would these people be? Or even better, you talk of sharing. How would it be done technically? Wouldn't you need some authority? Someone strong to do the redistribution? Someone in power?
>>27124419
Take 90% of the top 1%'s wealth. Distribute it equally among all your citizens. Have a 70% tax rate for rich people, use that money to pay every citizen a basic salary.
>>27124442
>basic salary
Sounds perfect!
t. lazy nigger
>>27124398
>The things would come from necessary and voluntary labor.
And you think voluntary labor would be enough to maintain a nation? To feed billions? I think you're having too much faith with humanity.
>No, but it means that a house is not built to build a house, and we usually wind up with pic related.
But the house is standing. Also what's wrong with pic you posted? If people buy these houses and live there. What's the problem?
>So why are you arguing that anything that I'm saying isn't justified, when following this logic it should just be another method of asserting one's influence over something?
Because you're trying to get things without doing anything for them. You're a lazy leeching cunt as you just admitted.
>Why dogmatically follow other people? The only justified leadership is the leadership of correct ideas.
What does that mean exactly? Seems to me like you're throwing around phrases that sure sound nice, but no practical example. So give me an example how these correct ideas would run a company.
>What makes property justified? What makes proprietors *entitled* to it?
Oh, so you're one of these special people who don't believe in property. I would say paying for it makes them entitled to it. Exchaning their work for property. You haven't exchanged your work therefore you are not entitled to it.
>But why do I need to put in the extra work? And, more inportantly, why should I need to?
You don't need to. But then you're not allowed to whine because you don't get the advantages that come in from doing the extra work. It's your choice.
>>27124442
Okay, nice idea. And now who would be doing this? The redistribution? Who exactly would be going around, collecting money and giving them to others?
>>27124457
A developed country should be able to guarantee a basic standard of living for its citizens. If everyone got enough to live on, the crime would go down as the niggers wont need to deal dope to survive any more.
>>27124488
The government. Just like how they collect taxes.
I think the Rothschilds alone own an estimated 500 trillion $
They could keep 1 billion and still give everyone on earth ~60000
>>27124493
>If everyone got enough to live on, the crime would go down as the niggers wont need to deal dope to survive any more.
They would take their benefits and keep selling dope just to get more money.
>>27124507
Nice. So you would have a government. Which will have control over the money. Don't you see how would this ever go wrong? You take power(money) from the rich people and you give it to a single entity. The government. Don't you see how this could ever fuck up real bad?
Don't know about you, but I live in a postcom country. And central distribution failed horribly. It sounds nice, just take more taxes and give more to people. But it doesn't work.
>>27124519
Some will yes. But if they arent forced to do it because of poverty, many will stop.
>>27124540
Why do you think they would stop? They are niggers it's what they do.
>>27124469
>And you think voluntary labor would be enough to maintain a nation? To feed billions? I think you're having too much faith with humanity.
Necessary labor, which is done voluntarily because people usually want to stay alive and happy.
>But the house is standing. Also what's wrong with pic you posted? If people buy these houses and live there. What's the problem?
Suburbs are completely devoid of individuality. It's just an endless sprawl of nothing, there's no beauty or utility there. That kind of place is born out of conflicting interests, of the interests of the builders to make money to survive instead of to build a house fit for living in, and of the interests of each of those people to own their own house, which ironically makes them live all together. It's just a generally unsustainable and hideous way to build things. It's something that's forced on everybody by the conflict of interests that disregard eachother.
>Because you're trying to get things without doing anything for them. You're a lazy leeching cunt as you just admitted.
Of course I want to get things without doing anything for them, that's economy. You want to get the best result for the least effort.
>What does that mean exactly? Seems to me like you're throwing around phrases that sure sound nice, but no practical example. So give me an example how these correct ideas would run a company.
I mean exactly what I said, there are limitless ways in which people could work together to follow correct ideas without coercion or governance. We do it everyday when we agree on anything with friends. The purpose of this discussion where having now is to reach a correct conclusion, this wouldn't be possible if one of us was enforcing our preferred opinion on the other, we'd end up hurtling away from reason and into fixed ideas and despotism.
1/2
>>27124519
Exactly. I think the problem with socialists is they have too much faith for humanity. They think deep down people are good. But that's not true. It's a fight, it has always been. And people are not good. They've never been. Give niggers more money and they will just start robbing others to get even more money. They think that not having enough is what makes people greedy and corrupted. But that's not true. It's people who make people greedy and corrupted. It's who we are.
I remember during the communist era there was a saying "Whoever doesn't steal from the state is stealing from his family". That sums it up pretty well. And that's not coming from some theoretical "socialist" but someone living in a country that has been under soviet union for over 40 years.
>>27124469
>>27124574
>Oh, so you're one of these special people who don't believe in property. I would say paying for it makes them entitled to it. Exchaning their work for property. You haven't exchanged your work therefore you are not entitled to it.
How do you define the value of somebody's labor in the same way that you can define what people need to live? Furthermore, if this is to be done at all it can't happen if more or less labor than necessary is needed. This is the same thing with the doctors and construction workers.
>You don't need to. But then you're not allowed to whine because you don't get the advantages that come in from doing the extra work. It's your choice.
But what makes the conditions of these choices justified? If we don't always look towards better conditions, society will stagnate. There'll be no scientific or artistic progress.
>>27124574
>Necessary labor, which is done voluntarily because people usually want to stay alive and happy.
And you think the labor people would want to be doing would also be the labor that needs to be done? You think many people would voluntarily want to be garbagemen? Welders? The guys who take care of sewage? Do you think important things would get done if you give people freedom to do what they want irregardless of how useful it is?
>It's something that's forced on everybody by the conflict of interests that disregard eachother.
So you don't like it, so you're forcing your opinion that it's shitty on us. You're forcing the opinion that suburbs are forced on them. How ironic.
>Of course I want to get things without doing anything for them, that's economy. You want to get the best result for the least effort.
Exactly. Then you shouldn't be surprised when people oppose you. Because obviously not everyone can get things without working for them. And why should YOU be the cunt who gets to do nothing and not someone else? It's not gonna happen.
>this wouldn't be possible if one of us was enforcing our preferred opinion on the other
That's what you are doing. Forcing these ideas on people because you don't want to work for you bread.
>>27124585
Soviet union wasn't socialist at all. It was state-capitalist and created huge shortages of all goods because you can't make an accurate prediction what goods people will need each 5 years. This created a second, hidden economy of deficits. People had to sell goods other than money because money were worth nothing when you can't buy anything with them. So they sold goods they had at their work, like hiding apples and selling them to their friend for other goods and apartments, cars whatever they had at their disposal.
This has NOTHING to do with actual socialism or social democracy. Even Marx said that to have a proper socialism, the country needs to go through prosperous capitalist state to be able to provide for socialism. Russia was a peasant shithole prior to socialism and of course failed in creating actual socialism.
>>27123855
Why the fuck should I share what I earned through hard work to a nigger who has done nothing but done drugs and stole from other people who has also gotten everything they have through hard work? All socialism is is legalized theft.
Socialism BTFO.
>be born into billionaire family
>inherit the company and all the money
>tell people to keep doing the same thing and invest my money carefully or they get fired and have their livelihood and career ruined
>they make me more billions out of fear
>i sit back and do coke and fuck whores for the rest of my life
>party enough to be bored forever
>decide to learn what the fuck business is about
>after 10 years of being a jackass finally do some productive work for my super company
LIBERTARIAN VERDICT: self made man, inspiration to everyone, important member of society, productive gentleman, great person, would suck his dick for promotion 10/10
>be born in ghetto
>study like a motherfucker, straight A+
>school gets closed because goburment needs money to bailout the banks and buy some more coke for wall street
>fine, get a job at mcdonalds
>work like a motherfucker, 12 hours a day, impeccable work ethic and quality
>they close the restaurant because ghetto doesn't produce enough profit
>be black, no education, no work experience, no safety net, no wealth in family
>wait, libertarian smug shit white college kiddo told me on the internet that i just have to negotiate a good job
>negotiate that i work like a motherfucker, i learn like a motherfucker, and i suck everyones dick for 2 dollaridoos a week if they hire
>no one does because lol institutionalised racism
>go home, get shot because it's bronx
LIBERTARIAN VERDICT: not a true ayn rand follower, disgrace, lazy commie, worthless person, not entitled to stay alive and get by, trash, not worked hard enough for them billions mang
capitalism and free market doesn't, that's why if you live in the states, depending on where you're born your life could be paradise on earth or afghanistan, meanwhile in yurop/canada you can't fall into poverty if you're not the biggest bellend on the planet, people are rich and happy, everyone is chilling the fuck out, comfy as hell
tip harder libertarian kid, read that atlas shrugged errday
>>27124619
>How do you define the value of somebody's labor in the same way that you can define what people need to live?
It's what people are willing to pay(or barter) for it. It's that simple. Your work is as valuable as it's valuable to society. And work is as valuable to society as society needs it.
>But what makes the conditions of these choices justified? If we don't always look towards better conditions, society will stagnate. There'll be no scientific or artistic progress.
What makes you so arrogant to think that you are the one who gets to judge whether they are justified or not.
>>27123855
You don't actually want to live in a socialist country. You want to live in a capitalist country with generous welfare programs.
Socialist countries: China, Vietnam, Bangladesh
Capitalist countries: Germany, Denmark, Sweden
>>27124665
>Germany, Denmark, Sweden
not a socialist democracy with free market
bet you don't even live in yurop fagtron
>>27124641
>And you think the labor people would want to be doing would also be the labor that needs to be done? You think many people would voluntarily want to be garbagemen? Welders? The guys who take care of sewage? Do you think important things would get done if you give people freedom to do what they want irregardless of how useful it is?
Why do people do those jobs now? They do them to survive and to thrive. How will it be any different when those jobs take less and progressively less effort and time?
>So you don't like it, so you're forcing your opinion that it's shitty on us. You're forcing the opinion that suburbs are forced on them. How ironic.
No, I believe that when housing is brought into question, peole should come to a consensus about how it is to be done.
>Exactly. Then you shouldn't be surprised when people oppose you. Because obviously not everyone can get things without working for them. And why should YOU be the cunt who gets to do nothing and not someone else? It's not gonna happen.
It shouldn't necessarily be me, but the average person or "the individual".
>That's what you are doing. Forcing these ideas on people because you don't want to work for you bread.
I don't want to work for it, but neither do most people and I'm not forcing anybody not to work. I'm also not saying I wouldn't do necessary work.
>>27124660
The story of your nigger is nice. But as always, something gets left out. I mean you can't expect an idealized story to make your argument for you. Hyperboles don't mean shit.
>>27124661
>It's what people are willing to pay(or barter) for it. It's that simple. Your work is as valuable as it's valuable to society. And work is as valuable to society as society needs it.
So the individual should be completely subjugated to society, regardless of who's correct? Why are property rights justified to you again?
>What makes you so arrogant to think that you are the one who gets to judge whether they are justified or not.
It's generally accepted that progress is better than stagnation.
>>27124685
>Why do people do those jobs now? They do them to survive and to thrive. How will it be any different when those jobs take less and progressively less effort and time?
I think mostly since they have no other choice. But if suddenly they didn't have to do these jobs and knew they would be getting the same amount of money for being for example an artist or whatever else. Then they would just stop.
>No, I believe that when housing is brought into question, peole should come to a consensus about how it is to be done.
You call it forced while forcing your opinion. You're retarded. I could see coming to a consensus about that.
>It shouldn't necessarily be me, but the average person or "the individual".
Well if most people get things for free then who is gonna do the work?
>I don't want to work for it, but neither do most people and I'm not forcing anybody not to work. I'm also not saying I wouldn't do necessary work.
So what's the problem exactly?
>>27124694
What you delusional shit?
You think no nigro has ever followed the rules?
You think no negro has ever learned in school?
You think no negro has ever worked hard?
Lot of them do, actually if you step out of your middle class bubble, most of them do
They never make it though, the game is simply unplayable for them
Meanwhile you sit on 4chan and jack off to chinese cartoons while your parents pay for your college, and you get hired because you're a cumskin
congratulation, now please know better than anyone the key to success
>>27124660
>straight A's
>school closed and "forced" to work fast food
Guess what dumbass? If you get good grades during high school, grew up poor or just be part coon, universities will actually PAY for you to come to their school. There is literally no excuse as to why a lower class person couldn't get into college and earn a degree.
>>27124734
>I think mostly since they have no other choice. But if suddenly they didn't have to do these jobs and knew they would be getting the same amount of money for being for example an artist or whatever else. Then they would just stop.
So nobody would care that everything stinks and so on?
>You call it forced while forcing your opinion. You're retarded. I could see coming to a consensus about that.
I'm not forcing you to do anything, I'm arguing for free discussion which depends on disagreement.
>Well if most people get things for free then who is gonna do the work?
Most people, if the work needs to be done. People who want to do it if it's based on passion.
>So what's the problem exactly?
Are you asking me what the problem with that statement is?
>>27124713
>So the individual should be completely subjugated to society, regardless of who's correct? Why are property rights justified to you again?
That's how it is. You can whine about it all you want, but you can't change society and if you work against it, it will destroy you. Being correct is nice and all, but in the end being correct doesn't matter if the other guy has a bigger stick. And boy does society have a big stick.
>It's generally accepted that progress is better than stagnation.
But it's not generally accepted that your ideas are what leads to progress. Actually anyone who lived under communist rule where your ideas have been put into reality(redistribution, solid social network, central planning) know how it doesn't work and actually leads to stagnation. You wouldn't believe what happened in the 90s when our market opened to the goods from the capitalist countries. The things produced here in my communist isolated country? They couldn't compare. Not at all. So don't talk to me about progress and stagnation.
>>27124743
>They never make it though, the game is simply unplayable for them
Just as for many whites. What's your point?
>and you get hired because you're a cumskin
It's easy to blame everything on external things. It's an easy way out. For a nigger that is.
>>27124759
proof? you talk about affirmative action i assume, the program that rustles every libertarian kid jimmies in all the us of a
the program that proved that not only entitled middle class libertarian kiddos have the brains to get a fucking degree
it's a glorious program
however hypothetical nigro from bronx is eligible because he couldn't finish high school, it closed when he was 18
what should he do now?
>>27124782
>That's how it is. You can whine about it all you want, but you can't change society and if you work against it, it will destroy you. Being correct is nice and all, but in the end being correct doesn't matter if the other guy has a bigger stick. And boy does society have a big stick.
What does this bring to the argument if I happen have a bigger stick?
>But it's not generally accepted that your ideas are what leads to progress. Actually anyone who lived under communist rule where your ideas have been put into reality(redistribution, solid social network, central planning) know how it doesn't work and actually leads to stagnation. You wouldn't believe what happened in the 90s when our market opened to the goods from the capitalist countries. The things produced here in my communist isolated country? They couldn't compare. Not at all. So don't talk to me about progress and stagnation.
I've never said anything about arguing for "actually existing" socialism. I actually disagreed with the LTV too,
>>27124779
>So nobody would care that everything stinks and so on?
They'd be like you. Thinking "Something should be done about this, but why should it be me?". Never been around people have you?
>People who want to do it if it's based on passion.
And you think people will be passionate about things that need to be done? Like for example cleaning the sewers, plumbing, heavy manual labor. I think you're being wishful here.
>Are you asking me what the problem with that statement is?
You don't want to work and then you say you would work if it was necessary. I don't get what you're whining about I really don't.
>>27124854
>They'd be like you. Thinking "Something should be done about this, but why should it be me?". Never been around people have you?
People can only rely on others when there are others to rely on.
>And you think people will be passionate about things that need to be done? Like for example cleaning the sewers, plumbing, heavy manual labor. I think you're being wishful here.
No, that's what I mean by there being both voluntary and necessary labor.
>You don't want to work and then you say you would work if it was necessary. I don't get what you're whining about I really don't.
If work as done to do the job in the best way possible with the least amount of effort needed I'd be a workaholic.
>>27124831
>What does this bring to the argument if I happen have a bigger stick?
You don't though. That's why wherver socialism is, it fails. Really, what can you say? China? Which is communist only in name really. Scandinavia which is getting raped by hordes of mudslimes and/or niggers. North Korea?
>I've never said anything about arguing for "actually existing" socialism.
So you're arguing for socialism but you don't want it to actually exist? You could have said so an hour ago. I wouldn't be having this dumb fucking discussion.
>>27124884
>You don't though. That's why wherver socialism is, it fails. Really, what can you say? China? Which is communist only in name really. Scandinavia which is getting raped by hordes of mudslimes and/or niggers. North Korea?
I don't believe those places were ever really socialist. Production wasn't commonly owned, it was state owned.
>So you're arguing for socialism but you don't want it to actually exist? You could have said so an hour ago. I wouldn't be having this dumb fucking discussion.
No, I mean I'm not a ML or USSR supporter.
>>27124881
>People can only rely on others when there are others to rely on.
Another feelgood phrase, when in reality it works like I said.
>No, that's what I mean by there being both voluntary and necessary labor.
So people would be forced to do the necessary labor?
>If work as done to do the job in the best way possible with the least amount of effort needed I'd be a workaholic.
I don't really understand that sentence.
>>27124818
>Just as for many whites. What's your point?
be nigro, be poor, sick and dead
but hey, poverty is bad for some white people too so i guess there's nothing wrong in the world!!!!!!
do you even logic? why is it okay to create a system that makes it impossible for some to live a decent life, if it punishes a diverse group of people? you have a brain? you consumed too much ayn rand now your brain is made of cum and ignorance
>It's easy to blame everything on external things.
fun fact, black women are the most educated demographic in america, still no one ever hires them, and their average earning is half of what a cumskin male brings home
go libertarian logic your way outta that, kid
>>27124904
>Another feelgood phrase, when in reality it works like I said.
Example?
>So people would be forced to do the necessary labor?
Of course, they would be forced by necessity.
>I don't really understand that sentence.
read it again I guess that's the simplest terms I can put it in
>>27124902
>I don't believe those places were ever really socialist. Production wasn't commonly owned, it was state owned.
Moving goalposts already are we? How would commonly owned production work? And save your nice phrases, let's talk concretely. How would a commonly owned nuclear plant work. Commonly owned security agency? Commonly owned bank(oh wait you're gonna say we won't need those). Commonly owned army? Police? Firemen?
>>27123940
It's not like the shit in Sweden has progressed far enough for more than a tiny part of the people to notice any consequences or like the other Scandinavians don't have kebab.
>>27124660
>he didn't join any of the THOUSANDS of programs that gets children out of the ghetto to give them a good lot in life
Bed. Made. Lie.
>>27124925
>Moving goalposts already are we?
They were never there to start with.
>How would a commonly owned nuclear plant work. Commonly owned security agency? Commonly owned bank(oh wait you're gonna say we won't need those). Commonly owned army? Police? Firemen?
I don't know because I'm not a fireman, nuclear expert etc, but I do know those people are the most knowledgable and best equipped to do that job.
>>27124908
>why is it okay to create a system that makes it impossible for some to live a decent life
Because people aren't born equal. Easy as that.
>fun fact, black women are the most educated demographic in america, still no one ever hires them, and their average earning is half of what a cumskin male brings home
Being educated doesn't mean shit with community colleges and memedegrees. Guess what, Shaquenda, your degree from indian bastet-weaving doesn't impress anyone. Being educated doesn't mean being competent to do the job.
>>27124929
>THOUSANDS of programs that gets children out of the ghetto
oh yeah tell me one that works and lifts out large amounts of black kids out of the ghetto
there are millions of kids on the ghetto, never forget that, and we never even touched illegal spics fighting for survival, and white kids born into fucking trailer parks with abusive alcoholic parents
oh and yes your libertarian utopia is so great some needs to depend on charities if they would prefer not to die
good one m80boi, just don't forget that safety net is the devil, and watch that fox news all day every day
>>27124919
>Example?
Most people don't go out of their way to do things because it helps the community. They don't want to do the unpleasant things, rather wait for someone to do them instead. Just like you are with your arguing.
>Of course, they would be forced by necessity.
And what if no one wants to do them? Let's say you have a small group of people(a hundred for example) and no one wants to be the garbage man. What do you do?
>read it again I guess that's the simplest terms I can put it in
Okay what does "If work as done" mean? I never heard that before.
>>27123855
Socialism at this point isn't really about free neetbux anymore. It's the point that the four richest members of the walton family own more wealth than the bottom 40% of Americans combined.
The things that money could be doing other than lining their greedy little pockets are astronomical. They, and so many like them do everything in their power to bend the system to their advantage and avoid sharing and helping others as much as possible. Their charities are the bare minimum amount they need to get the biggest tax cuts, it's just a numbers game to them.
Socialism is the radical idea that we can tax people who have more money than they know what to do and use it to improve the country and benefit everyone.
>>27124940
So you propose something but you don't know how it would work. You just have faith that it would because why exactly?
>>27124971
>Most people don't go out of their way to do things because it helps the community. They don't want to do the unpleasant things, rather wait for someone to do them instead. Just like you are with your arguing.
But again, there needs to be somebody else doing it for them to not do it.
>And what if no one wants to do them? Let's say you have a small group of people(a hundred for example) and no one wants to be the garbage man. What do you do?
I don't want a small group of people, I want social revolution.
>Okay what does "If work as done" mean? I never heard that before.
It means that my fingers didn't want to hit the W key.
Why do socialists always only care about people from their own countries? You kids go "black women earn half of white men in the US" while blissfully ignoring third worlder hard working white men earn at best maybe 10% of a first world black woman, nevermind the abyssal infrastructure and government support they have to deal with
yet no socialist cares about them
>>27124994
Because experts at a given discipline know more about it than me.
>>27125006
>But again, there needs to be somebody else doing it for them to not do it.
Exactly. But according to your logic no one could be forced to do it.
>I don't want a small group of people, I want social revolution.
Dodging the point? Let's say something needs to be done but no one wants to do it. How would you handle that situation in your hypothetical system?
>It means that my fingers didn't want to hit the W key.
Oh now I understand. Honestly I usually can read it despite the typos but at this time my brain just couldn't autocomplete. I wasn't trying to be a nitpick(I'm not even native english speaker).
>If work was done to do the job in the best way possible with the least amount of effort needed I'd be a workaholic.
You do realize that this is never gonna happen? It's one of the unreachable ideals. It's just a cop-out for you. Because there is always gonna be some effort wasted. You're saying you won't work unless everything works 100% smoothly which is not achievable in real life. Just as 100% effecient power source isn't. Just as perfectly effecient program isn't. That's the world, it's not perfect. You can scream and kick like a little child, but it's not gonna change it.
>>27125022
Just kek. Being able to operate a nuclear plant has nothing to do with your point. I'm talking about things beyond. Like who would be protecting the facility, who would be suplying it, who would be managing the people working there. Who would be responsible in your world where people own everything for the power plant blowing up?
>>27125051
>Exactly. But according to your logic no one could be forced to do it.
They should only be forced by necessity or their own choice, I said.
>Dodging the point? Let's say something needs to be done but no one wants to do it. How would you handle that situation in your hypothetical system?
Such a broad question, if it bothers you, you do it. If it affects more than one person, you convince others to change their mind.
>You do realize that this is never gonna happen? It's one of the unreachable ideals. It's just a cop-out for you. Because there is always gonna be some effort wasted. You're saying you won't work unless everything works 100% smoothly which is not achievable in real life. Just as 100% effecient power source isn't. Just as perfectly effecient program isn't. That's the world, it's not perfect. You can scream and kick like a little child, but it's not gonna change it.
I mean in relation to the given situation. I don't want to reach a conclusion because I don't ever want things to stop getting better.
>>27125072
>Being able to operate a nuclear plant has nothing to do with your point.
But that's literally the point you're making. I can't say how a nuclear power plant would work because I don't know how they work. That's why I think they should be run by the people who do.
>>27125076
>They should only be forced by necessity or their own choice, I said.
But they don't have to do these things. There could easily be a situation where no one is doing things that should be done. How would you deal with that? If the necessity of their own choice wasn't enough?
>If it affects more than one person, you convince others to change their mind.
Kek. And if they still can't be convinced? Seems to me you're expecting things to magically work somehow. Through some kind of self-organisation in the community. Which is naive to say the least. Even more if the community is large. I can imagine it working in communities with 30 people(maybe) but what about cities with millions where people don't know each other and can't convince each other?
>I don't want to reach a conclusion because I don't ever want things to stop getting better.
Things get better through work, not suggesting how work should be done without actually doing any. Which is what you are doing.
>>27124949
>Because people aren't born equal. Easy as that.
OH YES LIBERTARIAN MICROPENIS LIL FUCK, THERE IS IT, SOCIAL DARWINISM
that's why if you take identical twins, give one of them to parents in lichteinstein, and give one to parents in somalia (libertarianist utopia btw, no evil goburment, straight race to the top, no fucking around!!! go live there!!), they will have similar lives!
WAIT THEY WON'T! but it's not like there is a problem with the whole fucking system, noooo it should work on paper so it must be flawless!!! ayn rand told me !!!! no instead of being objective and recognize obvious fucking flaws, i will just come up with a blank term that was made up by a scientist 200 years ago to describe ANIMALS, and apply it to HUMANS
see its only logical because it was in atlas shrugged!!!!!
>Being educated doesn't mean being competent to do the job.
don't flip flop libertarian kiddo, your butt buddy rand paul told me that education is the way out of poverty! so now it's also not enough to be educated!! what else
oh wait bleach skin, isn't it? that's the answer
grow a dick! EZ PZ
got you libertarian friendo, thanks for the help!!! /s
>>27125090
And you think being owned by the community wouldn't change anything in the way they are managed? Or do you just hope so?
Also I like how the nigger apologist never responded to >>27124949
>>27123855
>Mfw picture related to topic
>>27125110
>But they don't have to do these things. There could easily be a situation where no one is doing things that should be done. How would you deal with that? If the necessity of their own choice wasn't enough?
If I can't convince them it's better that I just deal with it instead of forcing them.
>Kek. And if they still can't be convinced? Seems to me you're expecting things to magically work somehow. Through some kind of self-organisation in the community. Which is naive to say the least. Even more if the community is large. I can imagine it working in communities with 30 people(maybe) but what about cities with millions where people don't know each other and can't convince each other?
Same as above, there are ways of doing it. One that was popular was having assemblies where
recallable delegates represent syndicates that would run various industries.
>Things get better through work, not suggesting how work should be done without actually doing any. Which is what you are doing.
You have to know what to do before you do it.
>>27125019
nice libertarian logic again, how can people be so fucking narrow minded
>le don't mind that your house is burning, let it go to shit, go douse your neighbor, he's house is burning twice as much
>oh btw don't mind the billionaire arsonist that's setting houses on fire, he's doing nothing wrong, you have bigger problems ;^)
>>27125133
No I'd hope they'd be run by the experts and not proprietors.
Sharing, or stealing?
>>27125141
class warfare is communism, socialism has nothing to do with that shit
get your ideologies straight
>>27125115
You sound pretty mad, also I've never read Rand so you can stop with that strawman. It's getting embarasing.
Also how does your example disprove that people aren't born equal? You think if you take average 85IQ nigger and make him live in white neighborhood he will turn out just like the others? Of course he won't but then you will just blame it on racism. Always something external to blame it on instead of taking responsibility. Typical nigger.
>your butt buddy rand paul told me that education is the way out of poverty! so now it's also not enough to be educated!! what else
It's the way. Just because something is necessary doesn't mean it's also sufficient. If you're confused about this concept I reffer you to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency
Most people who are not in poverty have eduction, but that doesn't mean that getting education alone will get you out of poverty. Has education alone ever been enough to get a job? Maybe in the 50s. But that's long gone. Deal with it, my mad, entitled, shit-eating friend.
I enjoy NEETbux as much as the next guy but socialism is objectively retarded. Luckily for us, many people buy into it. I don't really care if the world goes to shit as long as I can live a comfy life desu.
>>27125144
>I just deal with it instead of forcing them.
And if it's something you can't do alone?
>recallable delegates represent syndicates that would run various industries.
And these people wouldn't be something like leaders? People who have more responsibilities compared to the rest?
>You have to know what to do before you do it.
You also have to have an idea of how to do it, otherwise you might fail horribly. And you usually do.
>>27125155
And once again, how would you enforce that?
Socialistanon here, I'm going to bed so read The Conquest of Bread by Peter Kropotkin if you want more
>>27125193
hmm nice but dont lie to me atlas shrugged is under your fucking pillow right now
or you're trying to shove it up your ass, or mating with it, don't lie, i can smell the cum on it from yurop
and no if you take a 85iq negro and put him into white neighborhood, life will be hell for him and will probably be left behind, but if you take a 85iq white dipshit like yourself, put him into a white neighborhood, that dipshit is likely to get a degree and live like a happy dipshit for 85k+/year
nice social darwinism you got going there
such fair race to the top, very good
take formula 1, let's tell every team with a red car that it's a shit color and no matter how hard they try even if they win they will be disqualified
great race you got going there, bruh, ferrari will surely understand your middle school reasoning
>ost people who are not in poverty have eduction, but that doesn't mean that getting education alone will get you out of poverty.
GREAT, AND TRUE!! so let's give some tips to poor people shall we!
play by the rules, never ever be lazy, learn as much as humanly possible, respect everyone, be opportunistic, be cut throat competitive, get a degree IN THE RIGHT FIELD
THAN YOU MAY HAVE AN OK LIFE, MAAYBE, NOT GUARANTEED BECAUSE CHECK THIS SHITTY WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE, GET IT NOW POOR PEOPLE? NOW FUCK OFF
ok sounds right, good idea, it's a race and not everyone can win, neat
but wait
be not competitive, be a beta shitlord, be a fat fuck, be lazy as shit, be basically trash in every way possible, inherit your daddies coca cola stocks
congratulation for your hard work, you've won!!!!!!! you now drive around in a bugatti and do coke and whores for the rest of your life
NOT SEEING ANY PROBLEMS THERE, MY DEAR LIBERTARIAN GENTLEMAN? ACCORDING TO THE FREE MARKET THEORY THIS SHOULD HAPPEN OR AM I WRONG
please educate me with some carefully selected lines from the bible khm i mean atlas shrugged
>>27125390
You are fucking crazy. And not because of what you said, but because of the way you present yourself.
>take formula 1, let's tell every team with a red car that it's a shit color and no matter how hard they try even if they win they will be disqualified
Yeah because that's happening with niggers in real life. Not like the guy who is in charge of formula 1 at the moment is a fucking nigger. Listen to yourself. Your hyperboles don't prove you wrong.
Just keep blaming external sources, it will make you feel better.
Also your example with a guy who inherits money. It's not wrong at all. His father(or one of his ancestors for that matter) earned that money. What should they do with the money if not pass it down to the next generation? You can't deny that somewhere in the past someone must have earned it by
>play by the rules, never ever be lazy, learn as much as humanly possible, respect everyone, be opportunistic, be cut throat competitive, get a degree IN THE RIGHT FIELD
Then what's the problem here? I don't get it. If using this money they want to help their children, who are you to judge them for it? Oh wait why am I even asking, retarded commie nigger-lover. How simple.
>thinly veiled bernie sanders thread
Nah, ill take capitalism
>and i still get neetbux
This way i can be comfy and don't need to be a faggy socialist loser :^)
>>27123855
I fixed the image for you, you fucking degenerate cuck.
>>27123855
>taking private property at gunpoint
>sharing
fuck off bootlicker
>>27125452
ok, i get it
in your world, failing because of discrimination is ok, nothing wrong with, useless people inheriting a good life is ok, nothing wrong with it, you're blaming every victim, and you defend the powerful with all your might
just accept it, you're not smart, you're not objective, you know jack shit
you have your ignorant shitty stupid biased world view, you try your damnest to rationalize it and everytime you hear something that would open up your narrow fucking mind, you apply dat dere three wise monkey strategy, or use them thought terminating cliches you heard on fox news
you are my friend, a blind fucking sheep
go have a successful life, because according to the "free market" and this great system we have you deserve it
just want you to know, in a real race, in anarchy, you would be buttfucked by "scum" "low class" nigger, who is accidentally better than you in every single fucking way imaginable
pray to god that it won't happen and your pseudo free, unequal, oppressive, discriminative shitty system that protects you from reality will hold out till you die, otherwise one day you will woke up in a place in society that you actually deserve, degenerate cumskin
>>27125603
>a bunch of kikes
lol
>>27125581
>>27125603
>everyone providing the same amount to society
>stealing
how
In true socialist regimes NEETs are considered worthless leeches though. You wouldn't get any neetbux.
>>27125659
only 2 out of 6 are jews and who even cares
>>27125618
Not same poster but feeling compelled to trash this liberal filth.
>go have a successful life, because according to the "free market" and this great system we have you deserve it
I do make six figures.
>in anarchy, you would be buttfucked by "scum" "low class" nigger
Not likely. The white man forged superior weapons using their superior intellect and then used them to dominate the world. Without the law, we'd just outsmart you at every turn and probably wipe you off the face of the earth.
>>27125618
>failing because of discrimination is ok
It's not. Just as pretending that you failed JUST because of discrimination and not also other things, like being a lazy cunt, not working hard, being incompetent etc.
>useless people inheriting a good life is ok
Exactly.
>just accept it, you're not smart, you're not objective, you know jack shit
I do accept that.
>you have your ignorant shitty stupid biased world view, you try your damnest to rationalize it and everytime you hear something that would open up your narrow fucking mind, you apply dat dere three wise monkey strategy, or use them thought terminating cliches you heard on fox news
And yet you haven't disproven anything I've said.
I do wonder though. Who do you think you're talking to? Do you think I'm some privileged cunt from USA? No. I'm from eastern europe. I come from poor family, none of my parents even finished high school. I got bullied heavily when I was young, beaten, burned, suffocated. The middle school I went to, many people there were drinking, smoking weed, some even did meth. We're talking middle school here, no one older than 15. You think I come from privileged background? Think again.
You think niggers would succeed in anarchy? If they can't even succeed in this world that we have now? Think again.
>>27125661
>15% of $20k is $3k
>15% of $200k is $30k
>tax brackets ensure that higher earners pay even higher percentages (That idea comes from Marx originally), in my country that's 45% on income, plus other charges
>everyone providing the same amount to society
>>27125661
What if i dont voluntarily give the state my property? Are they going to send men with guns and coerce me?
You could also read the law by bastiat or anatomy of the state by rothbard
>>27125786
>What if i dont voluntarily give the state my property?
What is it that makes it "your" property if not the law of the state?
>>27125661
Stealing my life by making me work more decades before retirement, using my money to help low quality genes create more degenerate offspring, eroding the incentive for a women to rely on my affluence by supplying her with daddy state support.
>>27123855
>tfw you weren't born in a simpler time into a wealthy family when you could just have literal slaves work for you all day and have a 14 year old virgin get married off to you to clean and cook for you whilst you stay in your room and read fancy imported Japanese books.
>>27125603
>le property meme
>>27125830
Earning it with my labour.
>>27125865
How does that make it yours though?
>>27125830
I own my body with that my labour and the fruits of my labour. There also is the homesteading/first user principle. You can make both the natural rights and utilitarian case for the free market.
>>27125884
>Natural rights
>>27125879
How are you going to solve conflicts about scarce ressources without property rights?
>>27125903
Because scarce resources only exist because of artificial scarcity drummed up by property rights.
>>27125879
Without a state, I would earn material goods through my work and then buy weapons to keep it mine. Now fuck off you liberal twat.
>>27125933
>It's mine because I say so and will kill anyone who disagrees.
Ancaps are the ultimate statists.
>>27125911
How are potatoes artificialy scarce? You need time and labour to grow them. You think its fine to come over at harvest time and just take what i want because the potatoes the farmer grew are not his property?
>>27125963
>it's not yours because I say so
What would you do if someone didn't agree and wanted to keep their property? If someone didn't want you taking what he considers his? Wouldn't using weapons be the most rational thing to do?
>>27125963
thats not how property rights work. read a book nigger
>>27125987
If I just walked on his property and started messing around I wouldn't be using force. If he then tried to get me out of there then that's where the force starts. In other words he started it.
>Wouldn't using weapons be the most rational thing to do?
No, because saying "this is mine and everyone who disagrees deserves to die" is not rational. It only seems rational if you accept the inherently irrational premise.
>>27125991
Except property are made up, anon.
>>27126014
And saying "This is mine even if you invested your work to get it and I didn't" is rational?
Like the example with potatoes that someone mentioned here? If I grow potatoes somewhere and you come and start harvesting them, am I not allowed to use force on you, despite the fact that you didn't do any work?
>>27125740
whities settled in the best place on the world when you consider how much raw material they could find, weather and yurop always had great agricultural possibility
so first of all it was blind luck, typical cumskin strategy
you had great weapons because whities never in history could stop killing eachother, understandable because they are arrogant and obnoxious by nature
that's it, btw muslims and turks almost wiped you off the face of the earth anyway, imagine it, your great civilization almost vanished because some angry assholes from some desert without water
gg whities
>>27125766
>not also other things, like being a lazy cunt, not working hard, being incompetent etc.
ok mr. goldfish with shitty memory, we just agreed that working hard and being educated doesnt mean will make it, so but now it does again?
>Exactly.
oh so you can be incompetent and lazy and a shit person if you're parents were rich
so in your world life quality should be a lottery basically, good you're not a sheltered stupid shit at all
>defending the arrogant super rich and greedy leeches who could eliminate 95% of human suffering in 2 years, even though you are yourself had a shitty life
>I do accept that.
yeah ok, Jon Snow, we agree on something, btw don't mind me i will stand up and fight against the oppressive and strong oligarch class while you jack off to chinese cartoons, look in the mirror, say i'm doing the wrong thing and judge me
it was nice talking to you (not really but hey)
>>27125775
proletariat earns 100 dollars, gives 15 to goburment, spends the rest on not dying, bourgeois earns 100 million dollar so yeah he could give even 95% to goburment because who cares if he can't buy another aircraft carrier, life quality of the super rich would not be affected even if they would tax 99%, the poor will starve, that's how progressive taxation works, try with something better
the poor always gives more because he gives from less, not a hard concept
>>27126041
But I'm not saying "it's mine", I'm just saying no one can possibly "own it" without using force.
> If I grow potatoes somewhere and you come and start harvesting them, am I not allowed to use force on you, despite the fact that you didn't do any work?
But I am doing work, I'm working to harvest these potatoes.
>>27125786
why you think in socialism you have no right to own shit?
are you mental?
you people know absolutely nothing about socialism, it's not the same as a communist authoritarian dictatorship, fucking educate yourself
>>27125846
>low quality genes create more degenerate offspring
so that's why you're on celibate eh neo nazi? i get it now
>>27126030
so is every other ideology including socialism?
people like aristotle and aquin tried to justify property on a natural rights basis there also is utilitarianism
>>27126042
>ok mr. goldfish with shitty memory, we just agreed that working hard and being educated doesnt mean will make it, so but now it does again?
I never really said that. If you didn't make, there is a chance you wouldn't have made even if you worked hard. But if you never even tried, you first have to try before you start complaining. Otherwise you're a lazy faggot.
>oh so you can be incompetent and lazy and a shit person if you're parents were rich
Basically yes, you can. If your parents decide to support you despite being incompetent, lazy and shitty person. That's their decision.
>so in your world life quality should be a lottery basically, good you're not a sheltered stupid shit at all
I'm not saying it should be like that. It would be nice if it wasn't. But that's the way it is. Whining about it accomplished nothing.
>yeah ok, Jon Snow, we agree on something, btw don't mind me i will stand up and fight against the oppressive and strong oligarch class while you jack off to chinese cartoons, look in the mirror, say i'm doing the wrong thing and judge me
Oh you will stand up and fight? Nice. I want to see that. But in reality you're not gonna do shit. Just like most self-proclaimed socialists. You talk about standing up and doing things, but what are you doing really? Tell me, I would really like to know how exactly have you fought the strong oligarch class during last let's say three months.
>>27126100
Except natural rights are not natural.
>so is every other ideology including socialism?
The difference is socialism takes steps towards a system that requires minimal force.
The most natural system possible would require no effort at all to sustain itself, yet as it stands both statism require massive amounts of effort from everyone involved.
>>27126070
>But I am doing work, I'm working to harvest these potatoes.
And if you've ever grown potatoes(or anything really) you know that you need much more work to get to the point where you can harvest the potatoes than what you need to actually harvest them. That sounds fair to you? Why should I accept this unfairness and not just shoot your fucking ass?
>>27126088
socialism is the social ownership(read state) of the means of production. i dont have the right to privately own means of production.
Even social democrats use a lot of coercion to violate my property rights like minimum wage. I dont have the right to sell my labour at a voluntarily agreed upon price. I dont own myself in that case the state does
>>27126137
>minimal force.
How? If i dont do what the state thinks is right they are going to coerce me. Send men with guns, put me in prison or outright kill me also see>>27126155
>>27126141
Because shooting people isn't nice.
If you think this is a great injustice then maybe you can just organize a system where in exchange for doing the easier part of the work, I get a much smaller share of the harvest. This way everyone gets compensated. Is that not a bit easier than instantly resorting to murder?
>>27126181
Except that also happens right now in capitalist society.
As I've already said the state requires massive amounts of effort to sustain itself so is very unnatural. I haven't been defending the state.
>>27126195
Or maybe I could organize a system where if you didn't work on growing the crops you get NOTHING from the harvest. That's what sounds fair to me. That's a system I would support. And that's a system I am going to support. And if you try to take my potatoes irregardless I will shoot your fucking ass.
>>27126195
>Because shooting people isn't nice.
living of the labour of others is? How sustainable do you think this behavior is? Will the farmer grow potatoes again if he knows someone will take them come harvest?
>>27126137
>The difference is socialism takes steps towards a system that requires minimal force.
Bullshit. The state is just bigger force with a massive threat of ruin that makes it ridiculous to oppose. People don't challenge the state because the state can utterly destroy them if it wills to. That doesn't make it a better system.
>pretend to speak durkadurka
>get a deep tan, use bronzer if you have to
>pretend to be muslim
>go to sweden
>get buxx just for being a refugee
>tell them to deposit your refugeebuxx into an american account
>there's literally nothing they can or will do to combat this because investigating fugees is raysiss
>>27126228
Companies using the monoply of force of the state to enrich themselves at the detriment of others isnt exactly capitalism.
How can you have socialism or anything based on redistribution without a state?
>>27126235
Okay, so why don't you just be a self-sufficient farmer where you do all the work yourself rather than getting a job?
I thought capitalists thought employment was a good thing.
>>27126239
Hey, man, why shouldn't I be compensated for my labour in harvesting potatoes?
>>27124079
This nigga right here is ignant
>>27126118
>But that's the way it is. Whining about it accomplished nothing.
didn't it?
progressive countries have small inequalities, very good life quality, prosperity, etc,
blacks whined against the status quo with the million man march, they now can vote and are not openly discriminated against
suffragettes have whined, now they can vote
rationalizing the status quo is the idiotic thing, but trying to shape is noble and will make the world a better place, hopefully one day you will realize that
also you talking me about being lazy and not doing anything, good joke, fucking hypocrite
>Just like most self-proclaimed socialists. You talk about standing up and doing things, but what are you doing really?
personally i already live in a socialist democracy so i don't have to do anything, i'm very happy with how things are
but what are socialists doing? look at the us of a, look at the bernie people, they're out there, loud as hell, they facebank, phonebank, donated more people than the estabilishment and the rich did to hillary, they shifted the whole democratic partys ideology 5 steps closer to social democracy that the previous middle class liberalism shite it was before
change is constant, and socialists are out there, fighting like hell, but thanks to your confirmation bias of course you see jackshit
open your fucking eyes
>>27126155
the means of production is owned by everyone
so you can't have a super company and make a pool of money, whoooa
you still can have a house, car, helicopter, private jet, jacht, race track whatever the fuck, is that not enough?
oh no because you're probably a billionaire CEO inventor, or you will be in the next 10 years sorry i forgot /s
>>27126155
>m-m-muh NAP
Too bad ethics is a shit field of philosophy that to this day has yet to prove kicking puppies is wrong, much less some milquetoast no-really-its-not-a-backwards-justification-for-unbridled-capitalism "the initiation of the use of force"
>>27123855
This is what happens when you let fucking millenials get in this board. Fucking faggots don't know shit about economy and they were pampered all their fucking lives.
>>27126273
It is, unlike communism which is based on the hypothetical writings of Karl Marx the term "capitalism" was invented to describe what's already happening.
>How can you have socialism or anything based on redistribution without a state?
Because if the state doesn't exist anymore to enforce private property everything naturally redistributes itself.
>>27126277
Because it's an analogy, that's why. Is this really question you needed to ask? Seriously?
>>27124179
Look at history. No democratic society has existed without slavery, or a 'slave' class (e.g. wagecuck service industry)
>>27126319
If you need to mention that it's an analogy to defend it from having holes poked in it then it's probably a shitty point you were trying to make.
>>27126277
>Hey, man, why shouldn't I be compensated for my labour in harvesting potatoes?
natural rights or utilitarianism like i said in>>27126239
If you dont think any of these two are good enough justificatins i dont think we can agree on a society we both want to live in
>>27126318
At that point it just becomes might-makes-right. We're not gonna sit around the campfire in the Garl Margs Memorial Anarchy Park and sing kumbaya, it will be more like this:
"As Caesar once said, pay your soldiers first" - some business owner turned warlord
>>27126292
>also you talking me about being lazy and not doing anything, good joke, fucking hypocrite
Well so far you've mentioned what other people did in the past. So I'm right.
>personally i already live in a socialist democracy so i don't have to do anything, i'm very happy with how things are
Just as I said. So you have done nothing. You're not fighting for anything.
>change is constant, and socialists are out there, fighting like hell, but thanks to your confirmation bias of course you see jackshit
Typical socialist. Talking about others accomplishments as if they were yours. Here is what you said in your other post
> btw don't mind me i will stand up and fight against the oppressive and strong oligarch class while you jack off to chinese cartoons, look in the mirror, say i'm doing the wrong thing and judge me
So who is the hypocrite here?
>>27126355
Of course, because the state can never be defeated.
>>27126318
>naturally redistributes itself.
can you explain what you mean by that? like if a relatively rich guy doesnt want to give anything to a poor person would that still be naturally redistribution? That behavior may be morally wrong but does the rich man have the right to not give?
>>27126334
Except the holes are in the analogy. Not in the underlying principle. And that is that you are not entitled to the fruits(or vegetables going by the analogy) of someone elses labor without their consent. You haven't poked any holes in my point.
>>27126195
>maybe you can just organize a system where in exchange for doing the easier part of the work, I get a much smaller share of the harvest.
This is the current system. For example, you could just work at McDonalds for your "smaller share of the harvest", as opposed to the much more challenging prospect of providing McDonalds with the raw materials it requires to make its product. Can't you see what you are arguing for already exists? You are just mad you are not in charge of the show.
>>27126388
I mean the only way there could be no state is if there was no force.
If there was no force no one could claim anything as their property, thus you can only have what you need. With everything more or less being public domain. Of course that could never happen, but the greater point is the state is always going to exist where force exists.
>>27126425
I'm perfectly content with capitalist life.
I just think it's blatantly obvious that anarcho-communism is the most natural and consistent system possible even if it's unattainable.
>You are just mad you are not in charge of the show.
Why do you think that.
>>27126406
>And that is that you are not entitled to the fruits(or vegetables going by the analogy) of someone elses labor without their consent
Why?
>>27126376
oh so social justice work my ancestors did for this country is nothing, but the wealth rich assholes ancestors stole with slave labor is great and perfect
got ya
>You're not fighting for anything.
i don't have to, but i would be politically active if the other party would have a chance to win or something, fuck off
oh so you're nitpicking, that's everything you got
oh but you're right, i do fuck all, i said i do because i believe in socialism and socialism is making this world a better place in lots of countries, but i myself do nothing, you're right
so that's all? does that mean you agree with everything else i said? good see that means now you know that you like socialism and therefor i spread the message of equality on the internet, see i did something
oy me - you, 2-0
>>27126425
>You are just mad you are not in charge of the show.
>>27126466
They spent their time expecting results. They could have spent the time differently but they didn't and instead of this they worked towards some goal. And then you think you are just entitled to take that goal?
>>27126499
Yep.
Why wouldn't I be?
>>27126475
I didn't get anything. You explicitly said
> btw don't mind me i will stand up and fight against the oppressive and strong oligarch class while you jack off to chinese cartoons, look in the mirror, say i'm doing the wrong thing and judge me
Only for you to admit that you don't personally do anything. You're a liar.
That's the point I've made. And that's only thing I really have to say.
>>27126523
Because you didn't put in the time and effort. You spent your time doing something else. You could just spend whole day walking around harvesting potatoes. And you would have much more potatoes than the rest of people. Obviously your naive ass thinks this wouldn't happen for some reason. But that's what your retarded ideas enable.
>>27126524
lets talk semantics
i spread an ideology that tries to shift the status quo
that means just by being a socialist means that i'm an activist
you bow down to your overlords and lick their boots
see me>you
>>27123855
>live in denmark
>neetbux
>$1200+$100 a month after tax
Its amazing. My mom is pretty rich so she got me a 1200sq feet apartment and i pay $500 rent. $800 a month for food and entertainment is pretty nice
e
>>27126570
That's just your opinion that I don't care about.
On the other hand, you being a liar, that's a fact.
>>27126540
Yep, that's right. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing that if they want to.
Or you could just organize a system where everyone does a little labour in exchange for a proportional share of the potatoes. Kind of like a job. If you could still eat for minimal work why would you even bother going around harvesting the potatoes everyone else planted?
And more importantly everyone would think you're an asshole.
>>27126585
> If you could still eat for minimal work why would you even bother going around harvesting the potatoes everyone else planted?
So you could have more potatoes. For more potatoes you could hire people to protect you(because you can give them more potatoes than the minimal potato wage). And then you could just beat up whoever thinks you're an asshole. Do you not see them problem still?
>>27126584
whatever helps you sleep at night, atleast my views are not complete bullshit
>>27126619
Well you haven't managed to defend much. You kept insulting, strawmanning and...that's about it really. In the end you're just lazy lying socialist scum.
>>27126611
But that's force. And the whole point of this hypothetical scenario is how society would function without any force.
If we can use force now then I would've just gotten shot for trying to harvest those potatoes to begin with.
>>27126640
And you think force will go away? What makes you think that?
>>27126657
Nothing, as I said in a different post force (and by extension the state) can never go away.
I'm just defending anarchism as the more rational and natural system, even if it's unattainable because humans aren't particularly rational or nice.
>>27126639
its okay if you deny it long enough you can convince yourself that you've won the argument
no pressure, maybe read some ayn rand
helps you reinforce all the crazy shit you believe in
>>27126690
Why defend something that you know will just end up terribly? Hypothetical scenarios are useless.
>>27126701
You can repeat yourself as much as you want. And it doesn't matter if you think you won or not. In the end your argumentation speaks for itself. So let the robots decide which one us is the lying retard here.
>>27126702
It wouldn't end up terribly, it would just never end up.
> Hypothetical scenarios are useless.
Imagination is a good thing, anon. It's fun to consider utopian ideologies.
>>27123855
>I want to live in a country that encourages neets
come on op
>>27126746
Normalscum get the fuck out of here.
>>27126743
Oh right. Sorry I thought that most socialists/leftists in this thread actually wanted this to happen.
If we're talking theoretically I am a fan of ancap, but theory is all that it's good for saddly.
>>27126715
i lie
you're a retard
what's the problem? why you gotta be so buttblasted? go away and be wrong on /pol/ maybe, no one will argue with you there no matter how stupid you are
>>27126715
you are the lying retard you maniac
>>27126772
Saying this despite throwing insults around the whole time and never being able to back up anything that was said. Pretty funny. Even samefagging. Seems to me you're the buttblasted one.
