*blocks your path*

*turns 360° and walks away*

you say "freedom"
he says " AAAHHHH MY SKIN!!! IT BURRNNNSSS!!!"
burnie melts into a bucket of jizz.'


it was my jizz

>>726193357
Give me free shit.

>>726194028
Dumbest shit I've seen

This thread is bad and you should feel bad.

File: bernie laughs at your ignorance.jpg (42KB, 959x639px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 959x639px

>>726194333
how does it feel to get bern-cucked, beta shitlord?

>>726194333
I agree. Bernie sanders was very dumb.

>>726193947
Bernie makes less hence lower taxes, he has one home. The three vacation home rumor is bullshit. He sold he house to buy the 10 bedroom to have a place for his extended family to stay,

>>726194433
Socialism is destructive to nation states intending to do anything other than starve their own people.

File: IMG_0980.jpg (28KB, 236x241px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 236x241px

>>726194407
How does it feel to look up to the king of cucks Trump?

File: Bernie's Boys.jpg (69KB, 953x1006px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 953x1006px

>>726193357

File: IMG_1123.jpg (122KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 680x680px

>>726194541
Yeah, okay.

File: bernie crusade.jpg (565KB, 1200x1496px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1200x1496px

i'm having a great time posting these old memes, great thread OP

>>726194561
>implying someone who makes fun of bernie must absolutely unquestionably love Trump
nice try, back to the ole FB with this faggy nonsense my friend - o

File: Screen Shot 2017-03-18 at 12.17.06 PM.png (249KB, 515x301px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 515x301px

Sanders is a sell out bitch. He almost tricked me but then his true colors came out. Hypocrite of the highest order. He's even trying to cuck us for a sharia loving islamist. Fucking guy, so full of shit.

File: berniecookies.jpg (572KB, 1004x1004px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 1004x1004px

i miss the bern meems

File: list-of-grenade-attacks-in-sweden-into-a-soolalo-attacks-14846203.png (154KB, 500x499px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 500x499px

>>726194628
Detroit consistently votes for democrats who abuse the people's trust to embezzle and promise socialist policies that do everything other than seize the means of production. Sweden has slowly been going down the shitter and is only maintained because of a surplus of wealth generated by nationalized industry/taxes, as all socialist governments are. Socialism doesn't work. I'm sorry if that hurts to hear. If you want to live in a socialist country just go live in one. They all fail when the nationalized wealth runs out. And then everyone cries that it wasn't real socialism.

File: berniecyberbull.png (1MB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1920px

>>726194968

File: sweden-riots.jpg (57KB, 640x335px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 640x335px

>>726194628
That's what it used to be. A wonderful place. Now it's infested with roaches of the Islamic faith and it's quickly becoming a shit hole. So sad.

File: berniefightclub.png (642KB, 585x569px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 585x569px

>>726195050

>>726194802
Same. I'm starting to doubt he wasn't controlled opposition from the beginning.

Anyone who's still a Bernie supporter is a retard of the highest magnitude. Just sit back and watch the thread. They'll just keep deflecting on to Trump for some reason even if nobody mentions him... like good little brainwashed pawns.

dude fuck you

>>726194433
It was based on percentage. Berny is a fucking fraud. You know it and i know it

File: bernieweedman.gif (1MB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 384x384px

>>726195144

GO BACK TO /POL/ GET THE FUCK OFF /b/ REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>726195124
That's not even why it's becoming bad. It's a symptom of pathological socialism, where socialism becomes the end goal rather than a means to the end of improving people's lives. Sadly socialism is always spearheaded by pathological types in every movement who have a religious devotion to the ideology, so it's only ever successful at gaining power with those people at the reins. And moderate socialism quickly becomes either state capitalism or radical socialism because of competing internal forces.

>>726194994
Love how Trumptards are all meme and no facts. Making America Racist Again

File: IMG_0979.jpg (215KB, 500x683px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 500x683px

>>726195289
Yeah well you know it and I know it that Trump is Putins bitch

File: bern voter speaks.jpg (166KB, 1024x1493px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1024x1493px

>>726195359
>>726195427
love how berntards are all hypothetical and absolute zero basis on reality

god this thread is wonderful

it has truly reawoken the clinical autism of yesteryear

post on my friends, post on

>>726195427
1) I didn't mention Trump at all.

2) I gave a logical rebuttal that you chose not to address.

3) What about my statement was racist?

>>726195599

See >>726195258

Called it.

>>726195747
Fuck your trump is a Nazi and so are you for supporting him fucking newfag I remember when this was a polite and non racist commmuntiy

File: trump tickle.jpg (122KB, 887x671px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 887x671px

>>726195780

>>726195531
Problem is that i got facts, and you have tin-foil tier rantings. Wanna give us a citation?

File: bait another dimension.jpg (13KB, 282x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 282x300px

>>726195863

File: bait trump.jpg (46KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 640x640px

>>726195863
>>726195924

Socialists are people who covet the possessions of others and demand that the government protect them from failure. It is inherently an ideology that leads to oppression. You must oppress those with more to achieve equality or "even out the wealth". You cannot give to someone what you don't have. You must take it from others or make it yourself. If the economy is planned it necessarily means that those who go against the plan must be punished or otherwise discouraged. Built into the very foundation of the movement is the framework of servitude to those who draft the plans. Even if everyone has an equal vote in what the plans will include, that only means that you will have many masters unless you are the majority in each issue at the time of legislation. All animals are equal, however some animals are more equal than others.

>>726196160
good luck getting the following people to read and understand that statement
1. bern supporters
2. literally every minority

>>726196365
thanks hadn't seen this bern meme before, saving all bern memes

I bet you shitlords don't even know what socialism is, read a dictionary and then maybe you can come back and try to take on this dick.

>>726196089
love how bern appears as he is inspired by the forsaken race in WoW in this one. very effective

File: 1488591202044.jpg (10KB, 380x296px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 380x296px

OP here

>Posted something to meme
>Memes were posted
>Everything went in a different direction than expected
>Watching it all go down
>No regrets

Im a classical liberal and I cannot stand how you parrott BS ideas like the wage gap that is easily debunked. What's up with that?

>>726196160
Seriously how do so many people continue to confuse communism with socialism? This isn't even that difficult, and most people don't want to get rid of capitalism, they just want to regulate it and have higher marginal tax rates on the upper income brackets.

File: 1451226710929.jpg (181KB, 680x881px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 680x881px

>>726193357

File: economics_101.jpg (40KB, 552x638px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 552x638px

>>726196481
I have more, trying to find them

Blow my trusty Hitler youth whistle and have the SS take him away

File: mein-neger-meme-932x1004.png (266KB, 932x1004px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 932x1004px

>>726196972

>>726195289
Dont get how taxes work do ya? Oh well get your dad to explain them to you

File: 1449629140726.jpg (47KB, 479x461px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 479x461px

>>726193357

File: file.png (849KB, 800x560px) Image search: [Google]

849KB, 800x560px

>>726194628

>>726196160
so·cial·ist
ˈsōSHələst/
noun
1.
a person who advocates or practices socialism.
synonyms: left-wing, progressive, leftist, labor, anti-corporate, antiglobalization; More
adjective
1.
adhering to or based on the principles of socialism.
"the history of socialist movement"

>>726195427
Down syndrome spotted>>726195427

>>726196160
so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/Submit
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; More
policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
synonyms: leftism, welfarism; More
(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

File: dubalublubs.png (251KB, 494x493px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 494x493px

>>726196855
dubs checked

File: VHwdHMl.jpg (49KB, 835x721px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 835x721px

>>726197496
>the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
not sure what you're trying to prove there, bud

>>726195568
>nose ring
Of course.

>>726196795
Too much regulation and taxes defeat the purpose of capitalism and prevent important works from being undertaken due to cost/benefit imbalance. Taxes and the law in general should treat all citizens equally. Welfare should be restricted to emergency assistance only. The state must not be too large to the point of controlling peoples livelihoods. Economics is the means by which all things in human interaction take place. At a certain point too many regulations levied become a sort of soft despotism wherein the regulatory agencies need only to evade review by government bureaucrats in order to hold the same monopoly power that businesses have to break laws to get, and that is assuming the parent government doesn't already approve of the regulation body's actions. The problem with the vague statement of "more regulation" is that it doesn't really have a definite goal and scope other than the goal of regulation its own sake, and the scope of everything that can possibly be regulated. And then if you come with a comprehensive list of regulations, then you're just planning again. The plan is for everything to fit within your framework of regulations. Freedoms that do not factor into the plan must be curtailed. This can be a good thing, for instance in curtailing the freedom of a factory to pollute the local soil. No such right exists and this will lead to damages to others, the same as a pulled trigger since it's only due to negligence that the material ends up in the soil in the first place. Furthermore, the factory could not be trusted to dispose of the waste properly without oversight, as it is a significant drain on profits. There is, however no need to regulate things which do not curtail the freedoms of others through negligent or malicious action, especially in the context of economic competition between non-state actors. As for taxes higher ones decentivize achievement.

File: 1478213011429.png (91KB, 211x207px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 211x207px

>>726197496
>a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
My friend...

File: 1449285600520.gif (2MB, 500x275px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x275px

>>726196795
Spoken like a true socialist.

The government doesn't need more regulations they need less. We don't need to take money away from people and feed a giant bureaucracy.

Free market means more jobs, more competition and more opportunity for everyone to WORK FOR A LIVING.

File: 1463970731424.jpg (35KB, 594x394px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 594x394px

>>726195863

>>726197726
The proletariat has no time for making graphs and illustrations, get ready for the fucking gulag, Буржуазия свинья

>>726197956
yeah, you repeated the definition of socialism I just posted, good work, my friend...

>>726198008
wow! you sound really intelligent!! I bet you dont watch fox news all the time and think for yourself, you must be proud!

File: 2016 presidential election political compass.png (29KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x400px

>>726197726
defining terms

>>726198319
I'm more confused as to the reason for posting it.

>>726198430
That compass is to wrong it hurts.

>>726198355
the Democrat hobby kit
1. ur a racist
2. u watch fox news!
3. ur a RACIST!
4. u are not as smart as me!
5. U R A FUKIN RACIST!
6. i have like 2 black friends
7. FUCK YOU RACIST!!!!!!!!!

>>726198532
Is to what?

>>726193357
I'm finally rich. That must be why he did it.

>>726198590
Sorry meant to say is so. It was a typo.

>>726198532>>726198672
I guess you could go to the compass site, then to the policy pages of each of the candidates and figure it out for yourself. Have fun.

>>726198505
Mostly to correct the definition posted by>>726196160, because it annoys me when people flagrantly misrepresent basic concepts.

>>726193947
You're just jealous that a communist makes more money than you.

requesting more bern memes

>>726198829
So explain to me how you can abolish private ownership of the means and distribution of wealth without central planning or relieving those who already own it of their property.

>>726193357
I simply walk around him while saying "hello" because he's polite and rational. I resist the thought of saying something positive about super-clown Trump to get him to rant about how reality really works.

>>726198572
kek, you say that right after repeating a typical right wing talking point.

free markets is double speak for outsourcing and oppressing the worker all for the profit of the very few rich (no need to debate this is there?)

>>726199052
>without central planning or relieving those who already own it of their property.
Why do you think such an explanation would exclude these?

>>726199052
you are right, that is troublesome, if only we could find an example of this happening and working out for the good of everyone.... (look at germany's factories and norway's oil industry)

>>726199317
You do realize that bringing facts and reason to someone like that, that libtards are actually the minority of liberals, is akin to feeding online trolls, right? Facts provoke them, not change their minds or clear things up.

File: 1449804737727.jpg (116KB, 526x750px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 526x750px

>>726198355
Yeah I guess I should watch CNN instead...

>>726199317
Democrat hobby kit #2
1. you just completely proved me wrong
2. i'm gonna bring an entirely unrelated point
3. hah! i said some real important stuff!
4. HAH UR DUMB! I SED IT FIRST!
5. hah! i am smart and ur dum!
6. i have an associates degree frum community collige!
7. also fuk u racist

>>726199317
But he wasn't the one who said that. Furthermore, a company has no obligation to continue employment of their work force unless there is a prior contract that forbids it. The worker isn't oppressed by a business making a decision that isn't in their best interest. And finally why is it that the rich do not have a right to seek profits? And if they do why is it not so in this case? Is it the responsibility of the corporation to exist for the benefit of the worker rather than the goal stated in the corporate charter? Should they, in that case be dissolved and redistributed among those who have been employed there at some point? Why or why not?

File: zlibfags.jpg (239KB, 600x849px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 600x849px

>>726199317
>oppressing the worker all for the profit of the very few rich

>>726199484
Because if they don't then you don't have an argument that isn't an appeal to pathos.

>>726199494
Both deprive the private citizen of opportunity in those industries by state sponsored monopolies. But such monopolies become more and more necessary as you transition from state capitalism to a more true socialism as people are progressively divorced from the economic circumstances of a good or service with relation to the price and supply. If you'd like an example of what happens when such a venture hits a hard time, as they always do, look to Venezuela.

>>726194628
Do we tell him?

File: 1478213440545.gif (45KB, 560x582px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 560x582px

>>726199794

File: file.png (71KB, 492x322px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 492x322px

>>726199317
>oppressing the worker all for the profit of the very few rich
.

>>726199938
when debating what kind of society we should make for ourselves, why do you think human emotion/suffering/wellbeing would not be the main focus of argument? Do you think that there is some more absolute ideal or goal for society other than the pursuance of better lives for the people it consists of, and if so what is it/why sould we care about it?

>>726199659
you are right, a company has no need or reason to do anything for the worker. HOWEVER, you must agree that predatory capitalism has led to the impoverishment of the working class, particularly in the US, and the redistribution of wealth to absurd levels (8 people own more than half of the world). At one point it must behoove us to limit the greed of the capitalists because one's rights end where the others begins right? a clear example would be to seek profits by ramping up the price of medicine, this should not be allowed just because rich people want to get richer. The marxist philosophy states that the work a worker does is not properly compensated (production has gone up to its highest levels ever, but the minimum wage has not kept pace) and instead, the capitalist's "profit" is just another word for this stolen work or compensation (the wage gap has increased and the rich have, of course, gotten richer).

File: giggelgiggelLOLXD.jpg (133KB, 591x397px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 591x397px

>>726199794
>mfw not a single Democrat has the attention span to read the entire graphic

>>726199794
It's impossible to be socialist if you've ever produced anything of value on a mass scale with the exception of art and media.

File: images.jpg (9KB, 272x185px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 272x185px

Offer him a free helicopter ride. Socialists like free stuff. Jews too.

>>726195289
Brackets. Do you use them?

>>726200322
That's the fundamental problem of socialism - they want everyone to share everything, so they're equally miserable. Crabs in a bucket.
>Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

>>726199938
of course things can go wrong, particularly when there is corruption and mismanagement, both rampant in venezuela, not so much in norway wouldn't you agree?

you say there is deprivement of opportunity for the citizen, but in all honesty, how many citizens own the oil in the US? the citizen has no opportunity to tap into these things, capitalists do, and even if a citizen manages to do so, it is only a handful at best, the rest are left forgotten and without opportunities

>>726200606
That was truly too idiotic to properly respond to, this is all you get: educate yourself

File: download.png (107KB, 780x800px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 780x800px

>>726200756
I'll take that as you giving up. Thanks for playing!

File: 1485123964099.gif (57KB, 464x582px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 464x582px

>>726199794
Still missing the problems of worker alienation and profit. Not too mention the fact that under socialism, there would still be those who organize efforts and deal with logistics.

>>726200606
equal opportunities, not equal pay or whatever, you are trying to strawman

File: screen shot 2015-06-15 at 11.28.56 am.png (330KB, 849x466px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 849x466px

>>726200844
Take it however you like buddy, whatever makes you feel better.

>>726200114
This malnourished African is clearly educated enough to be a software engineer paid at least $113 000 and republicans want him to make our shoes. Nazism and capitalism working hand in hand folks

This thread gave me a terminal illness.

>>726200322
You misunderstand. You're conflating your feelings about the idea of socialism with the results it produces. You feel positive about the idea, therefore you assume a positive result. This is dogma. There is no such correlation in real life.

>>726200343
>HOWEVER, you must agree that predatory capitalism has led to the impoverishment of the working class, particularly in the US,
No I shouldn't. Mainly because such a thing is not actually true. The exploitation of the worker is long over in the united states. The simple fact is that the vast majority of first world workers don't actually produce anything of value, which is why we have a consumerist economy. The working class here is impoverished due to sheer stupidity and failure of the the government to actually achieve any of its stated goals with regards to education, health care, or really anything at all. The standard of living for the average American was actually much better in all times where there was less government regulation and nationalization of industry, which makes the united states exactly the wrong country to use as an example of exploitative capitalism. Had you mentioned the United Kingdom or China then you would have had a point.

>and the redistribution of wealth to absurd levels (8 people own more than half of the world)
Study normal distribution and tell me why the most rich people on earth should not own the largest share of the world's wealth. This type of thinking is one of the main problems with socialism and hearkens back to what I said about coveting other people's wealth. Ironically since such wealthy and powerful people are usually immunized against redistribution all of the socialist's wrath falls on other members of the middle class. Selling people goods and services is not redistribution of wealth in the socialist sense. You sold someone something. And were good at it. You're angry that someone was successful at making money at some point and then passing it on (cont)

>>726199794
yeah, the rich struggle so much, they are "lucky to pocket a few pennies"... again, productivity and corporate profits have never been higher, all the while the middle class has been torn to shreds, the wage gap has increased and the minimum wage has not kept up...

how about making some arguments rather than being a good sheep and copying an image off the internet?

File: imagined.png (79KB, 928x336px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 928x336px

>>726200999
then that's not socialism

>>726201060
>>726201301
perversion of markets through government regulation

>>726200969
humans are terrible organizers of markets. markets coordinate interest with money and time.

>>726201213
to their children. Furthermore this assumes that the supply of wealth in the world is static. Such a view suggest that nothing else can be created or produced. Nothing else of value will ever exist. Why would such a thing be so when so many wealthy billionaires of our time made their money off of technology booms. Even the late 19th and early 20th century's titans were men who got their wealth from investment in oil and steel, which created new wealth and value where there previously was none.

>>726200677
>the citizen has no opportunity to tap into these things, capitalists do, and even if a citizen manages to do so, it is only a handful at best, the rest are left forgotten and without opportunities
Capitalists are not citizens? Do people cease to be people when they have a successful business venture?

>>726200606
You didn't respond to the question posed, and instead presented your opinions on what socialists want and what socialism leads to. You also presented 0 evidence for any of your claims and you display a complete misunderstanding of basic economic concepts.
Ps. Churchill was also an idiot.

>>726201301
My friend, you should start a business and then come to have this discussion with us again. As someone who's worked for multiple small businesses and now a silicon valley startup you seem like you haven't worked on both sides of the desk yet.

>>726201343
lol what does that even mean? "perversion of markets through government regulation?" elaborate, don't just repeat talking points... there's nuisance, some regulation is necessary, you cant have companies dumping chemicals in the water to cut costs for example

>>726201446
Altruism is a philosophical discussion that I wouldn't want to discuss on a bernie thread on /b/ of all places where threads die in 10 minutes.

Churchill was an idiot, but stopped clocks are right twice a day.

>>726201558
which poster were you?

>>726201558
>"perversion of markets through government regulation?"
Ah, I see. Allow me to inquire what is the function of price in an economy? How does it relate to supply and demand? Furthermore what is money? What does it represent? Why is it required if at all?

>>726201213
Implying that it would be impossible to test socialism to see if it would work in modern-day conditions. Furthermore, where do you get the idea that I "feel good" about socialism? Also it seems as though you are implying that a socialist take-over including seizing the means of production and property, makes it inherently harmful, which, to me, sounds like the real appeal to pathos.

>>726201544
of course there's companies struggling, no one is arguing against that, but i am talking in general terms, not specific examples... corporate profits and productivity at an all time high, wages haven't kept up.... that is all i am arguing, these ideas are a core concept of socialism and why it is necessary at least to some degree

File: K1Xit1A.jpg (378KB, 1920x1400px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1920x1400px

>>726201343
>humans are terrible organizers of markets. markets coordinate interest with money and time.
Right, because thats been working out so well for us. And do you have any evidence that humans are terrible organizers, or do you expect us to assume it to be true as you have?

>>726201606
>Churchill was an idiot, but stopped clocks are right twice a day.
>Therefore he was right about socialism
Your conclusion does not follow from the premise, not to mention the fact that his statement is nothing more than opinionated propaganda. I could say the same of capitalism and it would be equally valid.

>>726201695
in a marxist point of view, its all about the work that gets put into something, the more work it takes to produce the higher the price should be, this could also curve its supply and demand, money was invented as an intermediary of trade (you cant sell a piece of a cow for a shoe, but you can trade the cow for money and then buy the shoes or whatever)... I'm not sure what you are asking

>>726201916
stupid way to represent it

>>726202109
You are describing the labor theory of value, which states that the more human time is placed into a product the more valuable it becomes. To answer your question, it would seem as though>>726201558 is asking you to define basic economic principles, hope you were paying attention in seventh grade social studies.

File: Net_worth_and_financial_wealth.gif (30KB, 524x310px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 524x310px

>>726202269
How's this one suit you then?

>>726201781
>Implying that it would be impossible to test socialism to see if it would work in modern-day conditions.
I didn't imply that at all. I'm simply saying that you must do that elsewhere, since socialism, as stated before, necessarily involves the theft of my, and other people's, private property and if you try to take it we will kill you or die.

>Furthermore, where do you get the idea that I "feel good" about socialism?
Religious adherence to socialist dogma. It is an assumption but the evidence is there.

>Also it seems as though you are implying that a socialist take-over including seizing the means of production and property, makes it inherently harmful, which, to me, sounds like the real appeal to pathos.
Stealing from many people necessarily will cost many lives and a lion's share of productive time. Do you expect everyone to hand everything over to you voluntarily? Or were you planning to have the government do it for you? If that's the case then we've just come full circle to where this started. As I said before; socialism is inherently oppressive. It naturally breeds totalitarianism over time because the only way that you can garner greater control over the wealth of a nation is with progressively more oppressive and violent government. And the more you divorce prices from the physical reality of production the more you will have to control the means of production, given that it is finite at any moment.

>>726201798
>of course there's companies struggling, no one is arguing against that, but i am talking in general terms, not specific examples... corporate profits and productivity at an all time high, wages haven't kept up.... that is all i am arguing, these ideas are a core concept of socialism and why it is necessary
The reason for that is not capitalism but rather the fact that our government is very powerful, while also not doing things in the best interests of the people intentionally. Corporate power crumbles without government backing-

>>726202524
Socialism will not have the desired effect.

>>726193357
>*blocks your primarys*
thanks rigged DNC

>>726202367
ha! I was but my school was so underfunded i didn't learn it well enough apparently... i think i answered his question, did i not?

>>726194628
Forget about niggers, did you?

>>726202524
yeah, government working with the companies... a corporatocracy AKA fascism AKA (im sorry to admit) america... socialism says redistribute the wealth and remunerate the worker fairly (it can be done, again, look at the arguments i made)

>>726202524
The reason for wages not keeping up is greed pure and simple. It has not been that government corrupted the corporations but the other way around

>>726202671
what about them? sweden has them too, if allowed to integrate, minorities do just fine, look at canada, look at the irish in the us... if marginalized and targeted you get fucking detroit

>>726202967
You mean the city with pretty much all democrats running it the past few decades, with a mostly black everything.

>>726202109
>in a marxist point of view, its all about the work that gets put into something, the more work it takes to produce the higher the price should be,
When you can quantify work done in anything other than Joules then I may give this sentence more attention.

>this could also curve its supply and demand,
This already happens in a market economy.

>money was invented as an intermediary of trade (you cant sell a> piece of a cow for a shoe, but you can trade the cow for money and then buy the shoes or whatever)... I'm not sure what you are asking
Money represents a function energy in a very abstract and primitive state. It isn't just the energy required to produce a good but a function of that energy weighted against supply and demand that determines prices. Nobody will produce anything in a market economy when they can't make a profit unless it just makes them happy regardless. The system of money, and even further than that a market economy in general is a system of allocating finite resources towards production of goods and services based on a summation of the total sentiment of consumers weighted by owned wealth. It is therefore not just a medium of exchange but rather the decider of production in general. It is true that many make mistakes about what to produce in a market economy, but the virtue of that fact is that the burden for that production rests solely on the producer. They must eat the costs of their mistake and attempt to regroup if they are to provide something that meets demand. The economic surplus is the incentive for producing these goods. This is what's commonly referred to as profits. If the demand is high, but a good does not cost very much nonspecific effort to produce, then there is an opportunity for profit, assuming the market is not saturated. In short there is an incentive for the allocation of resources to the fulfillment of that need or want. The consumer surplus is the value that a consumer ascribes to an item.(cont)

>>726202866
you didn't make any arguments.

>>726202928
That's exactly what I said.

>>726202524
>Religious adherence to socialist dogma. It is an assumption but the evidence is there.
So because I posted a definition, and tried explaining basic concepts I have a "religious adherence"? Try again.
>socialism, as stated before, necessarily involves the theft of my, and other people's, private property and if you try to take it we will kill you or die.
Calm yourself edgelord, and this again represents your total understanding of how socialist theory works or what it is, if you want a broad overview I recommend you read a book or maybe watch these videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWF_0lkBhjY
>As I said before; socialism is inherently oppressive
Prove it. You can't just say something to make it true, not to mention you haven't shown a totalitarian government to be inherently worse than a libertarian one.

>>726203100
democrats can be bought-off idiots too

>>726203274
true dat

>>726202967
>sweden has them too,
Nowhere near in the same population numbers.
>implying the Irish weren't marginalized and targeted in America
Are you fucking retarded?

Oh god this thread is hilarious. It's true what they say, all the "facts" that Trump supporters use against Bernie are memes they picked up from the internet.

>>726203274
I'm just reminding people that democrats hate the blacks.

>>726203321

You're a Bernie supporter? How many college-level economics courses have you taken?

>>726203310
of course they were, but eventually they were allowed to integrate, if anything you made my case stronger because the irish were also despised and targeted

>>726203100
Yeah, that's the one, what's your point? Are you somehow implying that democrats aren't corrupt, corporate sell-outs, just like the republicans.

>>726203160
what part of your post says that?

>>726203434
Of course they are, i'm just saying that republicans do it for greed, and democrats do it for dogma.

>>726203513
hahahah no im pretty sure they both do it for greed, democrats dont stand for anything anymore (republicans are usually worst and just brazen about it though)

>>726203513
End result is the pretty much the same. They throw the working class under bus for the sake of the party. Somewhere along the Clinton administration, the Democrats sold out

>>726203106
There is high consumer surplus if the consumer wants a good or service and its price is far below what they value it at. When both parties feel as if they've been fairly compensated this is called mutual gain. In the absence of a monopoly, almost every transaction requires mutual gain as a prerequisite to execution. The exceptions are for things that require more "work" to produce than a person is willing to pay for them, but never the less requires for some reason or another. In many of these cases there is a sharp contrast between the "work" required to produce a product and the perceived market value of a product. If you were to sell the item for a lower cost then you would need to decrease profits. If you don't decrease profits then you'd have to decrease wages. If you don't decrease wages then you have to create the product for less "work", if you cannot do that then you simply have to decrease everything that goes into the product. In order to decrease the price of a good below what the market will naturally allow, the deficit of "energy" must be unloaded onto someone. The ultimate form of this goes all the way back to the global pool of goods simply being out of equilibrium with demands. This means that there will be less material or energy for someone else's venture, which leads to the classic bread lines and empty shelves that are so common in fully socialist countries. When a good or service is divorced from the method of production the difference must be unloaded somewhere. The only way around this is to have unlimited energy and materials with which you could produce or to be some sort of omniscient planner that knows every nook and cranny of the economy. The fatal conceit is to watch men go about their business and say "I know better what's good for him."

I recommend that you read some Hayek but also his most serious antitheses John Menard Kaynes, then make up your mind about what you think is a good way to run the economy.

>>726203500
Our government is not looking out for us. Corporate power crumbles without government backing. This implies that the government is in bed with corporations to insulate them from market forces, like in 2008.

>>726203833
thank you for writing that, I could not have written it better or even had the energy to do so.

>>726203247
If you like being controlled then that's fine, but you can't control me without the use of force. What I've described is not even libertarianism but rather plain and simple liberalism. You still haven't cleared the hurdle of how you reappropriate my, and other's, property without force. You simply won't have a discussion about my points. You instead hold fast to the idea that socialism is the answer without giving it an honest discussion, which is where I get religious adherence from. I simply don't understand how socialism works, but you won't explain it to me. What do I not understand, starting with the simple question posed above?

>>726203926
I will agree that in many ways, the government has failed us but I really don't see in what way the corporations have our interests in mind. They don't. You shouldn't let the best be the enemy of the good. Without government corporations would be our lords and take us to a system of neo-feudalism

>>726204195
in socialism (and true communism, none of which have ever actually existed) there is a democracy first of all, then, the means of production are shared by everyone in the sense that no one person can own it. Furthermore, production is targeted for consumption, not profit, so there is little or no over production, and thus no consumerism. This does not mean you cannot own private property. There are also social securities like healthcare, education, etc, all to ensure equal opportunities.

>>726204478
I didn't say that we shouldn't have government. Simply that government shouldn't be powerful enough to prop up corporations. There is no us vs them here. A corporation is a collection of people with a stated goal, usually filling some market demand. They do not need to have everyone's best interests in mind. They just need to be subject to the law like everyone else and fill that need in exchange for profits as dictated by the market. Furthermore what makes you so sure that a government would have your best interests in mind. Is it not a collection of human beings like the corporation. The only differences is that you've given it a license to kill. Obviously the answer is not simple. If we already knew the answer this would not even be a discussion. The proportion of freedom to government power is a very important topic, but socialism is just as absurd as anarcho capitalism, ironically for the exact same reasons as well. I'm sorry but that's just what history has shown us so far.

>>726204594
refer to >>726203106 and reflect on the role of demand in the delegation of resources, then ponder why there has never been true communism not socialism. Ponder why the democracy of socialism is infallible in contrast to other forms. Ponder how the means of production is shared with competing ideas of what should be produced with finite resources. Ponder how you target consumption if demand can not be communicated through prices. Ponder what the alternative to over production is. Ponder how you can provide so many with so much without a great and terrible god directing production or the desires of the people within a finite world.

>>726194994
It's funny how the governor who allowed the Flint shit to happen is a republican then isn't it?

>>726204870
I am all for balancing the government with personal freedom but I think that we also need to balance our personal freedom with the control corporations have on our lives because like it or not they do have lots of pull in the world. As for the government being just as bad as corporations, I say that at least we have a say in what the government does. As small as this voice may be

>>726204195
>If you like being controlled then that's fine, but you can't control me without the use of force.
The society you live in certainly does, or are you just blind to that?
> What I've described is not even libertarianism but rather plain and simple liberalism.
No it isn't and even if it was, I was using a totalitarian/libertarian dichotomy that I would expect any high school graduate to recognize and understand.
>You still haven't cleared the hurdle of how you reappropriate my, and other's, property without force
Why would I have to do that? Again if you want to hear a socialists opinion on that, read a book. I don't have to defend the mechanisms of socialistic takeover to you.
>You instead hold fast to the idea that socialism is the answer without giving it an honest discussion,
No I haven't, I am simply correcting your faulty beliefs as to what socialism is.
>I simply don't understand how socialism works, but you won't explain it to me.
Forgive me for not having the time to explain an entire world view to you, though I did at least make the effort of pointing you towards a pretty good starting point, maybe you should watch that series... and maybe that channel in general. I imagine your understanding of other basic philosophies is equally unimpressive.

>>726205304
Why would that be funny. You assume partisanism on my part and also that flint is related to Michigan. Party is not an accurate indicator of future performance on the job.

As an aside not you are incorrect about the party of the mayor in question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayne_Walling

>>726205616
Except I said governor. And besides, you just implied partisanism by blaming the downfall of Detroit on Democrats

>>726205563
Why are you attacking me personally? If you don't think the discussion is worth your time and i've mistaken you for another poster simply say so. But letting an argument devolve into something of this nature is not productive.

>>726205774
That was my mistake. I misread. I apologize. I wasn't however implying that democrats are worse than republicans but rather that they tend to make promises that lean towards more socialistic sides of the spectrum.

>>726205776
he/she isnt attacking you, he/she just suggested you read up on the subject... ignorance is not bad, its the default, failure to correct it on the other hand...

>>726205926
Fair enough. I get what you're driving at now

>>726193357
>*blocks your path*
To a nice pizza pie in the back of the oven.

>>726205926
they dont, not since clinton at least

>>726205776
>>726205926
be nice you two, mommy's going to bed now.

File: 1489832470353.png (95KB, 261x238px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 261x238px

>>726198532
Your grammar is *too wrong it hurts.

>>726206029
They say that I have a poor understanding of socialism and likely political philosophy in general despite the fact that the definition that they proposed was not at all out of line with one that I implied earlier in the thread. There's actually no indication that I have very little understanding of socialism quite the contrary I've been discussing it the entire time, simply being told that I either don't understand it or it does not need to be defended or justified here. So in reality the comment was an unfounded personal attack on my intelligence or at the very least the relevant knowledge. Having read Marx and Trotsky I do believe that I understand socialism to at least a degree suitable to discuss it. I simply don't agree with it, which brings us back to the point of religious adherence...

Shoot the nigger