>>738946473 Some faggot? Okay let's take an example we all know, WoW. Blizzard North created WoW, every piece of it, their work. Blizz had no idea it would take off like it did, but it was a stellar success by anyone's standards.
Move forward 3-4 years and it is literally bringing in billions of dollars a month. Blizzard North team want's to renegotiate contracts and get some of that MASSIVE excess of money they were almost solely responsible for earning. Blizzard North is disbanded.
That kind of shit is the problem in our bullshit economy. The top is supported and ultimately bolstered by the middle and bottom, but only the top has upward mobility. The top should be tethered to the entire enterprise.
Example, I'm an HVAC tech. I find a bad heat exchanger and the customer wants a new system, I collect a check for from $4K to $20K+_. I get $30 commission and will likely have to install it myself.
>>738947558 self interest isn't greed, you twat I am self interested to go to work so I can feed my sons What kind of shitforbrains calls that greed? And you think, under a guaranteed income, I would get up to go to work. Why?
>>738947616 You seem to be, if you think self-interest is only measured in monetary value.
I know plenty of people who volunteer and I have as well, and it's always because they want to help. It makes them feel good. It's what they want. It's not government mandated and regulated. I help people because I want to help them, not because I'm obligated to do so.
>>738946387 Well the capitalist one depends on using the poor people as tools and basically killing them either by not giving them enough money or not giving them health care a house(basic human rights)
>>738947791 And the more people who become dependent on the state, the larger the voting bloc for statists. It's cruel that there is a whole political program based on expanding the power of statists by extending the misery of parasites.
>>738944674 >/r/LateStageCapitalism there you have it argument worthless you are worthless let the screeching begin REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>738944674 Your brainfart of an ideology is the pinnacle of the ramblings of an armchair anthropoligist who lived 200 years ago when kids were working in factories and companies hired thugs and going at each other in what was basically corporate feudalism warfare. You're obsolete.
>>738948053 >people at the top having a lot more power than any other group. that's a tautology people at the top will always have more power, as they mean the same thing where socialists go full retard is in thinking they can have rulers but not a ruling class (or even dumber, a totalitarian state without rulers)
>>738948212 I have a friend who went to business school, got an MBA, got a gig on Wall Street, worked there for 15 years, and socked away several million so he could retire before he turned 40. He worked 60 hour weeks for years. It makes socialists mad that a nigger who slept through high school, smoked weed, and got a GED doesn't have the same financial resources.
>>738944674 Do you think pure socialism is the answer? (america isn't purely capitalist we have quite a few social programs, in your perfect world what rough percentage of socialism would the society be and why?)
>>738948387 I live in the UK, and minimum wage here is enough for anyone to comfortably live on if they can budget correctly.
Basic human interaction with other people is not on the same level of effort as spending years learning a particular field. They should not be paid equally, and the gap should be vast. Capitalism excels in this regard.
>>738948549 >your anecdote doesn't really challenge my statement no doubt there are wealthy people who did nothing to earn their wealth, but those are the exceptions I live in an upper class neighborhood with pilots, lawyers, doctors. They weren't handed their wealth.
>>738948743 Not OP, but would you agree that not all poor people deserve to be poor? In the same way most rich people deserve to be rich i'm sure most poor people deserve to be poor, but do you think it's just for the exceptions to have to suffer for bad circumstance?
>>738944674 Go ahead and point to one, just ONE, socialist country that has a similar GDP to the united states, and doesn't also have excessive wealth inequality. Go ahead, point me to those amazing european megacorporations like mcdonalds, sony, LG, dell, apple..... oh wait
If you can prove socialism actually works to make a society more productive, creates more wealth and promotes innovation, i'll fucking shoot myself right now. But you can't, because every socialist run country, while having less wealth inequality, isn't as innovative as its' capitalist counterpart and does less overall to further the human race. scandinavians basically opt out of doing anything useful for society
>>738948867 I think the deserving poor should be given every break possible by family, employers, churches, charities, etc. The trick is, how to distinguish between the good woman whose husband died in a car accident while she was pregnant with their third child from the negress with 8 nuggets from 8 different baby daddies. The Left won't allow that there are deserving and undeserving poor.
>>738946909 This. I feel your pain, I have a side business keeping bees though as well and started from keeping two hives and have 200 now, I make pennies though compared to established companies. Basically in the US if you aren't born into the business you have no chance. Companies with a workforce vs me and a single friend just trying to turn a tiny profit have no chance whatsoever when you account for costs of business.
>>738948989 inheritance taxes are unjust if I work my ass off and make a pile, I should be able to do with it what I like, including burning the money, giving it to my kids, or blowing it on hookers and coke
>>738949246 for the poor, we need less entitlements, as a sense of entitlement is an acid in which industry and the work ethic dissolve I'd prefer a system where the poor are evaluated for whether they are deserving of help, and where the help is seen as charity, not some kind of right, so that the recipients are grateful
>>738947785 True. Those people then gain social capital, which is also worth something, although its harder to assign a monetary value to that.
If you were obligated to help them you might not want to do it anymore. That´s basically why people didnt give a shit about their jobs in the socialist countries. They got their money no matter what, it wasn´t really important to deliver a good product or to produce what people wanted, because everyone earned the same amount of money. Pure socialism takes away incentive to get better and to innovate. And then you build Trabants for 60 years while on the other side they build mercedes.
>>738949162 name a country that has a better GDP and isn't capitalist then, if capitalism is shit at productivity. I'm literally waiting for you to prove it. Don't just shout meaningless shit if you have no actual proof
>>738944674 Entry level jobs don't deserve 15/hour. If that goes up, everyone else will want adjustments for what they make now, businesses will respond by cutting hours, staffing, reducing/restricting benefits, downsizing expansion which would eliminate potential future jobs, raise costs to consumers. You don't like how a business treats their workers? Then boycott them and spread the word. Don't hurt the market just because you want to blanket it with your idealism.
I work for a company that pays more than minimum wage to start, has awesome benefits and decent hours. We've already felt the effects (positive and negative) of these types of policies being enacted. Mostly negative. While they do their best to do as much as they can for us, they still have to look out for their interests.
>>738944674 Socialism only works in a vacuum. Humans have a natural inclination to compete and attain power. That's combined with the fact that a large cross section of humanity is incapable of taking care of themselves. That's why every time it's attempted it results in totalitarian regimes or single party tyranny. Capitalism has its own issues. Namely it ends up selling basic human needs for a profit. However, it's worst is still better than a purely socialist govt bc of the innovation it produces. The best option is a mixed system like the one we used from the 40s until Reagon. Ironically, that was the same period we were self brainwashing ourselves into thinking any socialistic ideas were evil like a bunch of idiots
>>738949327 this is true in NY, the state sets taxes so high no one can survive and then creates empire tax zones and tax credits and economic development panels so that bureaucrats pick the winners and losers these kind of public-private partnerships are what Obama was always saying we needed they are, essentially and technically, fascism
>>738947834 None of those are human rights. You have the right to own a house, but you don't just flat out have the right to a house because you're living, and breathing.
This is the actual problem with Marxism. It's based off of the idea of "I breathe, I exist, therefor I deserve" No. No you do not. Nobody owes you anything, and when you grow up one day the realities of life will come crashing down on you. Prepare yourself for the day that you find out a large portion of the things you have learned in life are wrong.
>>738949503 So you think the outlook of the person should dictate whether or not they should receive money from the government, i suppose that's fair. What about minimum wage do you think that minimum wage is a sufficient living wage?
>>738949490 no on both accounts. They were self made. I also know carpenters who are multi-millionaires because they know style and sell cabinets for thousands of dollars. Be good at what you do and you can make money. Be bitter and don't invest in your profession and stagnate. choice is yours
Personally I believe that capitalism does mostly good things and for the few things that it does badly (infrastructure, armies, starving jobless people, education) you need a state and taxes to take care of them. Basically take away the brutal edges of capitalism where they hurt most.
>>738949475 >look at my selective memory capitalism has plunged millions and millions of people into poverty all over the fucking world you provincial shut-in.
your own national wealth didn't come from your superior form of government, it came from the british empire handing over all its combined wealth looted from all over the fucking world for two centuries, over the course of two world wars in exchange for support against the germans.
meanwhile, socialism has produced countrys with the highest quality of life in the world.
All I can say is the current existence in western society, specifically America, is extremely depressing as far as society goes. There is no point to trying to immerse yourself in it unless you care about getting richer and richer.
I naturally have little drive for this. I've been happy surviving comfortably, compared to when I grew up rich and miserable (maybe this had an effect on me, I don't know). I think we're in an age where we don't really need much more past a certain low level of cash, we have more materials provided than ever before. I find it really strange to see so many people so interested an devoting so much of their lives into "climbing the ladder". These drives are not natural. When do you reach a point of satisfaction and just find other things to do? It seems most people don't.
The misery comes from seeing people you know get so sucked into it.
>>738949613 People wonder why leftists are dumb, but then you see that they don't consider any work other than menial labor to be actual work. It's economics for those without the talent or wit to do anything better.
>>738949287 The problem is your view is extremely short sighted. America's system has always worked bc we don't have landed gentry or aristocracy like Europe does. That didn't just happen in Europe. It took generations. If we're not careful with inheritance we'll have one here in a few generations and then it's game over. That's what we ran from to begin with and there's nowhere else to run to if we dick it up
>>738949613 O.K. Stockbrokers to be fair, don't work that hard, but they do run VERY high risk businesses, which definitely equates to something. CEO's on the other hand work their asses off hiring different people, they spend half their lives away from their home negotiating with other company heads, dealing with cocky pricks, crunching numbers, worrying about their company's well being. The CEO's you're probably thinking of have already done this shit and are now reaping the benefits, I agree that the gap should be smaller, but thinking that CEO's don't work as hard as gardeners is just stupid. They work in different ways their work is mostly mental and social, not manual labor.
I'm pro capitalist. However, Currently, the richest 1% hold about 38% of all privately held wealth in the United States. while the bottom 90% held 73% of all debt. According to The New York Times, the "richest 1 percent in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent".
>>738944674 The socialist argument always seems to boil down to the idea that because there is wealth inequality, by extension there must also be some inequity going on, when in reality this is more often than not false. I like to think of capitalism as consensual sex because you have to be productive to be successful; I have to give you something cool for you to give me something cool in return. Socialism is more like rape because socialism forces the rich to bear the burden of the poor's crap decision making and forces big business out of the country because they can't be fucked paying high tax rates.
At the end of the day socialism is an immoral idea because you have to steal peoples labor in order for it to work, it's a shit idea in theory and also a shit idea in practice.
Capitalism has one main function: Getting rid of shit that isn´t needed anymore. If you have a company producing carriages and then the car comes along, your factory is no longer needed. In Capitalism it´s going to go bankrupt and then that´s it. A socialist government might not even know that carriages aren´t what people need anymore, they might not even produce cars and people have to buy the stupid carriages for forever. This is true for everything. Even people. If people can´t feed themselves, they die and are gotten rid off. If they had a use, someone would pay them enough to feed themselves. Now, this aspect needs to be taken care of by the state, because no one really wants starving people (at least most people don´t), so here the state has to take care of them.
>>738949662 >do you think that minimum wage is a sufficient living wage? not even close because a living wage depends on things like if you have kids or not go to the living wage calculator at MIT and search your nearest city for what the living wage would have to be for a single woman with 2 kids in my city, she'd have to make 58k a year to make a living wage that would be around 30 dollars an hour for an entry-level job at McDonald's
>>738949874 the history of wealthy people is largely the history of a patriarch amassing a pile of money and then handing it on to heirs who fritter it away and are bankrupt in a generation or two there are very few rich families these days who have been rich for more than a generation or two
>>738950036 The most important element of socialism is taxing the biggest earners to pay for social programs. Schools, hospitals, firemen, policemen, roads, programs to help the poor. There doesn't have to be production of any one sort of product.
>>738950172 That was my point You can't pay idiots enough to cover their bad decisions in life. Someone who drops out, has a litter of bastards, sits around getting fat and doing drugs, will never EARN enough to get out of squalor, and doesn't deserve to have others bail her out. In the past, we understood that her misery was valuable in that it showed others not to follow her lead. But people like Nancy Pelosi want us all to see that dropping out to make art and get high is as valid as working, and the state ought to underwrite our adventures.
>>738949734 capitalism has literally done the opposite. We have the least income inequality in all of history under capitalist principles and western dogma. We also have exponentially more wealth so there's a difference between the very top and everyone else. Take those few billionair conglomerate producers out of the equation and equality is at an all time high.
you have no idea what you're fucking talking about
For all you left leaning fucks who think your side supports you - they don't. They are just like the right wingers in the fact that the leftist billionaires use their money to keep you useful tools but not improve your life one iota - after all, the left's biggest bankrollers could single handedly create charities and organizations that would benefit you all and could be set up to run in perpetuity through market accounts and interests, but don't. They keep making the real money for themselves and throwing cash at the things they want, and for real charity, they toss bones to. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/jun/23/do-many-billionaires-support-democratic-party/
One reason leftists talk so much about income equality is that the so-called poor live in places with broadband internet and cable television, have smart phones, and unlike every other "poor" people in history, suffer from obesity. I once asked a leftist friend if he would rather earn 100,000 and work for a guy who earned 100,000,000 or earn 50,000 and work for a guy who earns 75,000. He chose the latter. Class envy was so intense that he would rather give up 50% of his own income to take away 99.9% of his boss's income.
>>738950588 You have a right to a doctor's labor and to the products of those who work in pharm and healthcare without having to pay for it? How can someone have a right to have someone else work for him without pay? Isn't that slavery? Do you think housing is built by builders or merely distributed by states?
You guys are all so dumb. Really believe that less regulation equals better results for the small or middle sized enterpreneurs. I come from a country that sees what less regulations mean. Less regulation means the big eats the small. Your country gets bought by foreigners who will profit out of your country's work, and then they will tell you that the reason your population is poor is because you are dumb and should take their culture.
>>738950234 True. Many children commence losing their acquired wealth but every generation a percentage slips through. That why it takes multiple generations to come to fruition but human history shows it always happens eventually. In my opinion is the biggest threat to our capitalistic society. Capitalism only works if there's not a segment of society occupying the top permanently. They retard our agility to innovate or to profit from or innovations bc the market becomes less than free at that point
>>738950734 >I once asked a leftist friend if he would rather earn 100,000 and work for a guy who earned 100,000,000 or earn 50,000 and work for a guy who earns 75,000. He chose the latter. Class envy was so intense that he would rather give up 50% of his own income to take away 99.9% of his boss's income.
That's crazy. And mental. Leftism is a mental disease.
>>738950998 You're more an imbecile than you know. In America, the big USE regulations and tax laws and corporate welfare to put the little out of business. Example: Every box Amazon mails is underwritten by $1.60 in taxpayer subsidies A small bookstore can't compete with that
>>738951061 Wow just like when those dudes quit just because the CEO raised the wages of the workers below them to be equal (at no cost to the higher workers). It's not just leftists who are petty and retarded.
>>738944674 >socialism >not riding the capitalist wave under Trump My retirement plan and stocks have almost doubled since Trump has been in office. I'm a mechanic that works at a service station for a dealership so I wouldn't exaclty consider myself upper class either.
>>738950998 How do you think a big corporation can keep competition down? By making a superior product at an affordable price? Or by lobbying legislation in their favor while hurting their competition? Using loopholes and government assistance to their fullest?
People always say that coal wasn't killed by regulation, but by better sources like natural gas. So why are people against removing those regulations, because clearly they did nothing? If the removal of the regulations won't save coal, then it'll die once again without them. If it doesn't... What does that show?
>>738944674 I'm all about capital socialism. Capitalism is the most efficient resource allocation system we have and its efficacy has been proven over thousands of years. However with the impending obsolescence of human laborers, the welfare state will be needed to prevent widespread poverty
>>738950848 One has a right that the state, i.e. society pays for those things. At least in this blessed country. Of course in some third-world states society just can´t afford public healthcare. Poor Americans.
>>738951824 You think bc they've chanced last names or moved they don't exist. Who the hell do you think good to bilderberg. Don't you think it's strange that if you follow the lineage of so many of Europe's leaders it traces back to some sort of royalty. Possibly they've figured out that they staying out of public sight is safer than controlling things I the open but that Durant man they aren't there. Convincing you otherwise is a huge win
>>738952156 So who exactly? Where I come from, the daughter of a protestant priest is leader of the government, some dude from a swabian small city is her finance minister. Europe is more democratic than the US you faggot. If there is someone with royalty background in the government, its because they got elected not because they´re royalty.
>>738944674 Op how does raising the Min Wage help? Its still Min Wage. The working class took a pay but the burger flippers got a little more money. So the educated get fucked. Now the people in charge raise cost for the burger, fries, drinks. Our housing cost goes up, light bills, water bill, gas, everything goes up. So $15 an hour is still worth $7.25 and the working man who did everything he could to have a better life now makes $7 an hour less. So how do you fix this? We can't tell the rich to stop being mean jerks and share.
I've worked my ass off for the $43 an hour I make. I worked for $5.25 many times in my life. Work 60 hours a my 5.25 and come back and let's talk of the great check you can get. No one got me here but me. You can do it also Its called work your ass off. Also go to school get a real degree.
>>738952438 Lol. It costs money to run a campaign. The role your aristocracy plays is king maker. They throw fundraisers make large donations and supply infrastructure to candidates. In exchange they get tax breaks, loop holes, blind eyes and influence. If it all goes South they don't have to worry about a thing bc idiots, such as yourself, think the politicians are the only ones in charge and you'll punish them. Meanwhile your true overlords are polishing up the next suit to tell you what you want to hear and you'll never notice that the trajectory of things hasn't really changed bc you'll be too busy patting yourself on the back bc your guy won
>>738952736 That's fine for a couple generations on a smaller scale but it has to end eventually though or you get stagnation in the economy. Capitalism needs constant growth and rotation to work long term. Once things get too consolidated in a few hands the system breaks down
>>738952750 except that right now minimum wage DOESN'T pay for all the bills and housing costs. 30 years ago it did, but not today because it hasn't kept up with inflation or GDP growth. Right now $15 IS 7.25, but we're getting 7.25 which is more like 5.25.
>>738952040 You are misusing the term "right" Because you pay taxes, you have a small say in how those taxes are being used.. but instead of focusing on this aspect of it (if we all want charity why dont we vote to make it happen/make it happen ourselves) socialists/progressives/etc think that the population at large needs less power over these decisions.. How about socialists try to explain their ideas without lying to try to sway people emotionally?
Everyone is liberal when they first come here. Then, as they lurk this place, they become addicted to the luls not realizing that with those luls come small does of Red Pills that undermine the socialist indoctrination of western public education.
As you continue to lurk this place you will come face to face with facts about liberalism that you can't deny and can't refute and eventually, we will cure you of your socialist indoctrination with the truth.
>>738955029 Uh.. I've been on this crazy train since Ron Paul dude. You can keep your redpills to yourself. I agree, socialism doesnt work Problem is political ideaology in general is becoming a cancer that is paralyzing the populace while the political elite on both sides keep changing the political system to favor them.. all with impunity.
>>738952332 >>738952332 You know it's illegal to misrepresent yourself as a CPA in all 50 states, believe it or not. We had a competitor (I work in a tax firm) that had been attempting to steal clients of ours by claiming they were a CPA, had better service, and was undercutting our prices. Had a new client come in and tell me about them, and how they claimed they were a CPA but couldn't answer some basic CPA questions and didn't even know how to use quickbooks properly. Told the new client to report them to the BBB for our state, and then I started checking into some things. I found out because I was looking through the CPA guidelines for my state and used the law to get a competitor fined for deceptive practices, since they weren't a licensed CPA but were claiming otherwise. Also found out all 50 states have similar laws regarding this type of deception.
Socialism = government and taxes. Everywhere except dictatorships live under this. Meant to insure that growth is sustainable as any profit is paid back into the system, whilst not preventing personal wealth (that's why taxes are a percentage, not the whole thing)
Communism = no personal growth in favor of only state growth. Only possible with nationalism or totalitarianism. Stifles individual creativity.
Capitalism = expected unsustainable growth that inevitably ends with solipsism and hedonism.
Libertarianism = individual growth at the expense of community. Unsustainable as groups are always more potent than individuals. Inevitably devolves to solipsism and hedonism.
Objection: Raising the minimum wage will hurt business and reduce employment.
“No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country.” (1933, Statement on National Industrial Recovery Act)
Objection: $10.10 an hour is too much, maybe $9.
“By living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level — I mean the wages of a decent living.” (1933, Statement on National Industrial Recovery Act)
Objection: Once you add in public assistance and tax credits, $9 an hour is plenty, and business could survive that.
“Do not let any calamity-howling executive with an income of $1,000 a day, who has been turning his employees over to the Government relief rolls in order to preserve his company’s undistributed reserves, tell you – using his stockholders’ money to pay the postage for his personal opinions — tell you that a wage of $11.00 a week is going to have a disastrous effect on all American industry.” (1938, Fireside Chat, the night before signing the Fair Labor Standards Act that instituted the federal minimum wage)
Objection: The minimum wage is a government mandate that interferes with the free market.
“All but the hopelessly reactionary will agree that to conserve our primary resources of man power, government must have some control over maximum hours, minimum wages, the evil of child labor and the exploitation of unorganized labor.” (1937, Message to Congress upon introduction of the Fair Labor Standards Act)
>>738954319 >right now minimum wage DOESN'T pay for all the bills and housing costs. 30 years ago it did you have to be retarded 30 years ago min wage was like 3.15 an hour, and you would have to work minimally 100 hours to get the shittiest of apartments
>>738947619 Fast food workers still provide a vital service in the economy. It's not a pleasant or easy job, and they deserve a livable wage if thy work full time.
The same is true of other "low-class, mouth breather" jobs, like janitors, garbage collectors, sanitation workers, construction men, caretakers for the elderly, waitresses, etc. Just because a job is relatively unskilled does not mean it's unimportant. We need all kinds of jobs to support our current society and they should all be regarded as important enough to earn at least a livable wage.
>>738955634 >Socialism = government and taxes lol, no "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" the ancient world had taxes and government
>>738955653 In Los Angeles, a single mother of 3 (the typical sheboon) would have to be paid $40 an hour at an entry level no skill job, for an annual salary of over 80k, to make a living wage. Source: http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/06037 You support that? LOL
This is why everyone thinks socialist/commie kids are idiots because they don't have a clue about economics in the first place. They only know how to regurgitate the bullshit their community college professors try to feed them.
>>738956128 >No matter how skilled. Guys who do labor jobs that advertise "no experience required" are not being shorted for their work, it's that their work has little value because it can be done by anybody. It's like those idiots who whine about a Mexican immigrant taking their job, glossing over the question of why they're satisfied with a job that an illiterate immigrant can do. It's why nobody takes their problems seriously, as long as the work gets done then things are fine.
>>738956205 It's not a "liberal myth." Republicans are far more likely to contribute to charities and social programs than Democrats. Plain and simple. The left talks the big "feelz" speeches but doesn't put their money where their mouth is just like every Hollywood faggot who talks about socialism/communism then runs away to their 20 million dollar mansion with private security.
>>738956128 You're not just paying someone for labor. You're paying them for experience and their unique skill set. If what you say is true then a fry cook should be able to do the same work as a senior software developer. Which they can't, because their labor would not be equal.
>>738956326 Because unlike Democrats, and contrary to their horseshit mythologies, we don't want black babies to be killed. There was a reason Dem hero Margaret Sanger advocated putting Planned Parenthood in ghettoes to purify the American race. >inb4 black genocide is a good thing; if you actually believe that, you should be a Democrat
>>738956436 Liberals would rather see more of their tax money go to these causes, instead of it being wasted to a guy with a GED can stay employed shooting brown people and getting PTSD, only to be forgotten about when he gets home (deservedly so).
>>738955970 Low pay is fine, but you should still be able to live on it and not work five jobs.
We have a system right now where it's easier to get on welfare than to earn a decent living if you're poor. We need to make working more rewarding for everyone in order to solve that problem, which, to me, means raising wages.
>>738956533 Your response makes no sense whatsoever in relation to charity and giving as the Armed Forces are not a charity but a part of the government that is funded by tax money. How stupid are you precisely or do you just have a stick up your ass because you couldn't make it at boot camp kid?
>>738956684 >Armed Forces are not a charity Well you say that and yet I see a lot of people getting money from the government for very little work and, contrary to popular belief, no sacrifice on their part.
>>738956222 Alright, so what if we adopted fiscally conservative policy based around reducing barriers for entry into some markets, removed subsidies from petrol, coal and natural gas gradually, and then reduced income tax across the board (certainly for the middle class?).. i believe in fair tax even though most people think it would be harsh to the middle and lower class.. i think the opposite Privatize welfare, funraise, voulenteer etc, and enjoy 30% more income (with slightly higher sales tax)
>>738956929 At least these people are honest about wanting a handout. People in the military lie to you and tell you that they're fighting for American freedom, as if they stumbled across a time machine in Afghanistan.
>>738944674 1.The economy is not a zero sum game. 2.If you dislike minimum wage, obtain marketable skills. 3. more successful people/companies have no obligation to subsidize your life failure and/or bad luck. 4. From the entirety of human history until the 19th century you would have starved to death sparing mankind your failure genes. Your survival weakens us all.
>>738944674 Before we begin - I'm not capitalist (not entirely at least) and I'm also not here to debate you. Just a piece of advice:
Capitalism is bad - agreed. But socialism is equally bad. Better in some aspects, yet worse in others.
You're smart enough to notice how atrocious capitalism is, why then pick the "lowest hanging fruit" of anti-capitalists - the socialism?
Well you're a socialist. Good. But that's just the first step. Very few people make more than this step and they end up being leftists for the sake of being leftist. Don't do that. It's a trap. Narrows horizons. Keep an open mind and find flaws in socialism. Explore, think.
Once you do that, thoroughly and wholeheartedly, you have my permission to go back to socialism. But before you do that, you shouldn't proclaim that you're a "proud socialist". Unless for entertainment purposes or to iron-out your views (part of the aforementioned exploration).
Good luck to you, I can only hope you won't stay a socialist forever.
The left's end goal couldn't be more clear: pure communism.
Inflate the welfare state until a majority of people are dependent on the government which inevitably leads to socialism. Socialism may thrive for a bit until it collapses into communism. If you read the literature of the actual theorists you would understand this. Don't be fooled. Liberal kids are either too stupid and unread to realize this or they want communism.
The US has never been and never will be communist. My suggestion would be to move to a communist country if that's what you want because you're more likely to get your teeth knocked out or shot in the US before you change the system.
People seem to forget there are still people alive who fought against actual communists and will shed bled when needed to stop that from happening to our country. At the moment you're just whining kids in the street kicking trash cans but you can cross a line that you won't come back if the US military (sworn to protect the non-communist Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic) catch wind of your little wannabe-"revolution."
>>738957021 I don't know anyone in the military who talks like that. What I hear is that they sign up for often dangerous and otherwise bullshit duties so as to build up resources to better their lives later. Nothing stops the welfare trash from doing a tour in the middle east to get money for college. And honestly, most parasites could go to college for free with all the aid packages available, but they don't.
>>738956761 The Armed Forces is literally part of the Executive Branch of GOVERNMENT. It's not Planned Parenthood you incredibly dense motherfucker. You really sound like some butthurt Basic Training reject honestly.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.