Why the poor should be communist by /biz/ Capitalist argue:

File: 1444477226692.jpg (63KB, 500x628px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x628px

bump

Look up Rawls' distributive justice.

Rawls would argue that the inequality in capitalism is justifiable so long as the worst off person is still better off than they would have been without the inequity.

>communism is in the self-interest of the poor
So is stealing shit, but we don't permit that either. There are more important things than material wealth.

>hurr easy for you to say richfag >:|
I'm not defending the system we have NOW. I'm simply saying that full Stalinism isn't the only alternative to neoliberal globalist bullshit.

>>129197507
>Rawls would argue that the inequality in capitalism is justifiable so long as the worst off person is still better off than they would have been without the inequity.

but this flies directly in the face of Human biology and nature. Primates get pissed when there is inequality and even rats will share food.
https://www.primates.com/monkeys/fairness.html

Rawls assumes people would rather have trinkets than autonomy, independence and dignity. This is incredibly erroneous and will lead to social problems.

>>129197953
>Rawls assumes people would rather have trinkets than autonomy, independence and dignity.
Why not have both?

Autonomy, independence, and dignity, are all enhanced by wealth. Inequality does not diminish your autonomy, independence, or dignity, so long as the wealth of the tall poppy is not made at your expense. If inequality leaves us all wealthier then inequality makes us all more autonomous, independent, and able to live lives of dignity.

There is no autonomy, independence, or dignity in absolute poverty.

>but this flies directly in the face of Human biology and nature
Read some Kafka. All our knowledge is ourselves to know.

File: 1496972102431.jpg (31KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 500x333px

>>129197953
>autonomy, independence, and dignity
>implying they would have those under communism
You have to be 18 to post on this board

>>129198695
>Autonomy, independence, and dignity, are all enhanced by wealth
Having an iphone, doesn't make up not having any job security/healthcare/autonomy in the workplace

>There is no autonomy, independence, or dignity in absolute poverty.
no one is arguing this, communism does not mean poverty.

>Read some Kafka. All our knowledge is ourselves to know.
Is Kafka a biologist? No he is not, he was a fiction writer. What point are you trying to make?

>Workers don't vote for their supervisors or their bosses,
You sound underage, maybe you should grow up first.

>>129198719
If you find autonomy, independence and dignity in the mcjobs late stage capitalism creates, then you are in a small deluded minority

>>129199946
Are you claiming they do?

>>129195612
If the poor revolt and destroy the welth, then everyone will be poor. The ONLY OPTIONS for a society is
>Some rich, some poor

or

>ALL POOR

Capitalism just makes the poor have a better standard of living than anywhere else.

>>129199778
>Having an iphone, doesn't make up not having any job security/healthcare/autonomy in the workplace
Having savings and a strong economy means that you can take time out of the workforce to look for a job that suits you instead of working paycheck-to-paycheck.

That's autonomy.

And it also means that business owners can run their business the way that they want.

That's also autonomy.

What's your alternative? More misguided and inefficient bureaucratic interference where workers don't get the outcomes they actually want while business owners can't structure their business competitively because of red tape?

>communism does not mean poverty.
I agree, but neither does it mean autonomy. You said it was in the self-interest of the workers to advocate for communism because it would increase their autonomy. I disagree. Wealth increases autonomy. Having what you need today, and knowing that you will have what you need tomorrow, gives you the freedom to pick and choose which opportunities you will take. This only happens in a strong economy. I would argue that some inequality leads to a stronger economy. SOME inequality. Not the shitshow that the US is today, sure, but the alternative is not full communism.

>Is Kafka a biologist?
Are you?

>>129195612

I guess we're anti-Marxist because we can read a history book guy. There's not a single communist country that EVER became a utopia, and instead became some of the worst, dystopian shitholes on the planet. If you honestly can't see that, you're retarded.

>>129200010
No, but those are not meant to be careers. Poverty is a state of mind, and you can work that shit job your whole life, or you can do something about it.

>>129200403
>If the poor revolt and destroy the welth, then everyone will be poor
objectively wrong, China and the Soviet union increased living standards

>>129200770
>Poverty is a state of mind
wait, what can a sub-80-IQ-tard do?

Go ahead and revolt we will put you down

File: image.gif (2MB, 230x175px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 230x175px

>>129200868
>the Soviet Union
>China
>real communism

>>129201216
Go back to Africa

>>129201344
let me rephrase that, what can a sub-90-IQ-tard do?

>>129200868
They weren't REAL communism

>>129195612
Every argument you just made assumes those of power and wealth to be there by happenstance and luck rather than by superior skill and effort. It assumes that a communist system could provide a similar level of general welfare to the masses as would capitalism. It also assumes that those incompetent rubes that rebel seeking into redistribute wealth would be able to rule properly and maintain a functioning system. It assumes that those willing to fight for communism are actually human.
Each of those are incredibly wrong and you're a retard for not realizing it. Please, kill yourself and do the world a favor.

>>129201504
If they are actually handicapped, then they most likely require state support. If not, then they need to find their ikigai and contribute in a way that's meaningful to them. No one says they have to work a shitty job, but they generally choose to because it's easy.

>>129200443
>Having savings and a strong economy
Strong economy means housing prices go up, which makes it more difficult to save and increases the cost of searching for a job
>to look for a job that suits you
Don't individualize everything. This isn't about finding a job that suits an individual, this is about making a system that provides all humans with a social safety net, so we don't have to be knifing each other over shekels our corporate masters reluctantly pay
>And it also means that business owners can run their business the way that they want.
Why should only business owners have autonomy?
>What's your alternative?
Worker control over the means of production
>Having what you need today, and knowing that you will have what you need tomorrow, gives you the freedom to pick and choose which opportunities you will take.
correct
>This only happens in a strong economy. I would argue that some inequality leads to a stronger economy.
By what mechanism?
> Not the shitshow that the US is today
Capitalism permits private property which will naturally concentrate, by the mechanism of influence-peddling and monopolization. Laws against bribery and corruption will be overturned for the right price, so there is no mechanism against what people like to call "crony capitalism."
Capitalism in all countries will turn into "crony capitalism."
>but the alternative is not full communism.
why not? it worked in Mao's china in the 1970s 1/2

File: China-reform.png (213KB, 684x842px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 684x842px

>>129200443
Mao moved China closer to real communism.
Stalin wasn't bad but he was never the intellectual Mao was.

Mao's experiment in decentralized popular mass communism is excellent evidence that communism works.

People claim that the cultural revolution was a disaster.

They claim China destroyed history.
False, numerous archaeological sites such as Mawangdui were discovered and preserved and peasants were educated on how to identify historical relics if they were to come across them in the field.

They claim science and learning was destroyed.
False, China sent its first space satellite and created high yield hybrid rice. While building schools in rural areas.

They claim the economy was a disaster.
Yet, growth rates were higher then than in the reform era. Rural areas actually had growth rather than decline as they do now.

Sources:
Mr. Science and Chairman Mao's Cultural Revolution : science and technology in modern China / edited by Chunjuan Nancy Wei and Darryl E. Brock.

The battle for China's past : Mao and the Cultural Revolution / Mobo Gao.

The Unknown Cultural Revolution
Life and Change in a Chinese Village / Dongping Han

If you go to rural China you will find it is these people who (according to wealthy Chinese urban elite expatriates and Western scholars who have never been to rural China) are supposedly his victims, who are most supportive of Mao and the cultural revolution and hate the reforms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

2/2

>>129200770
>Poverty is a state of mind, and you can work that shit job your whole life, or you can do something about it.
Like what?
Revolution is a great way to escape a mcjob
>>129201670
Have you ever met rich people? They aren't any better than poor people. I urge you go get some life experience, before you start fellating people on the internet

>>129195612
>whataboutism the post

>>129202596
>Like what?
I'd like to assume you're not foolish enough to think I can provide a blanket answer that covers every individual, but you're in favor of communism so that assumption probably isn't safe.

I can tell you that I enlisted when I was dirt poor, did my time, and now have an engineering degree and a six figure salary. Yes, fighting for Israel sucked. Yes, fighting for the deep state sucked. But my life is better for it now, and the sacrifices were worthy. People who stay impoverished never want to sacrifice, only be given what they feel they are owed.

>>129195612
The poor should not rebel and take the money from the rich because i plan to be rich, not poor.

So basically your argument is lireeally "yeah but capitalists do that too". Since both systems are shit which one would you rather live under? Where you know youre poor and live a shit tier life, but know its all you have? Or one that at least gives you the idea that you can be anything you want in life and wealthy too.

>>129202203
>Strong economy means housing prices go up, which makes it more difficult to save and increases the cost of searching for a job
A strong economy means a lot of things. Unless you are specifically claiming that a strong economy is bad for most average people I don't see any point in going down this rabbit hole of endless technical pointscoring.

>this is about making a system that provides all humans with a social safety net
I live in one. Wow, looks like full communism isn't that necessary after all.

>Why should only business owners have autonomy?
Why do you imply that they don't deserve any?

>Worker control over the means of production
I think that's a desirable goal. But it doesn't require full communism.

>By what mechanism?
Price signals and free market competition are most efficient at discerning how much of what goods are demanded and incentivising innovation (generally speaking, leaving aside the obvious talking points of public goods and blue sky research that are the domain of the government). This leads to a strong economy, but also results in inequality.

>Capitalism in all countries will turn into "crony capitalism."
I agree, but the solution is not throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

>>129202345
>muh China
I agree. Without Mao literally building modern China out of whole cloth Deng would never have had the infrastructure needed to carry out his reforms.

But I will never support any system that is not a representative parliamentary democracy regardless of what it promises. Full stop.

Give me liberty or give me death.

>>129203060
If everyone did what you did engineering degrees would get even more undervalued.
My point is that there is no mechanism for mass prosperity. Capitalism is to serve the few with some concessions to the hardworking and fortunate, be glad that your parents didn't have a medical crisis that required you to drop out of school
>>129203497
>Since both systems are shit which one would you rather live under?
communism isn't shit to those who are failed by capitalism.
>one that at least gives you the idea that you can be anything you want in life and wealthy too.
right on! there is nothing more inspiring than declaring bankruptcy due to medical bills

File: IMG_5766.png (62KB, 747x526px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 747x526px

>>129197953
>but this flies directly in the face of Human biology and nature
Except it doesn't. It's perfectly in line with every aspect of natural human accomplishment. Look up pareto distribution.
>Primates get pissed when there is inequality and even rats will share food
And? You genuinely think nobody shares under capitalism?

You're a delusional college student who's a useful idiot for people much smarter and older than you are. The mere fact that you live in the United States makes you part of the global 1%. Every champagne socialist loves to think that their system will bring them more goodies, when in reality you're the kind of person who will lose everyhing and never reach another habitable living standard again in your life, that is if you're not simply shot.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution#Applications

>>129195612
Ohhh just shutup you sissy, no perfect system exist altough some compromises can be done for those who doesnt want to work or can't work, this is called social security and it's logical to fit in a society to enjoy an overal stable society.

It doesn't remove the fact that heavy competition and right to keep earning individualy shall never ever be infringed unless you want to remove 100% motivation to develop and inovate your utopian society.

Communists and socialists enablers shall thus be killed on sight as for 1 good social reform there is usualy 100 social horrids consequences for future generations (who are born more and more enslaved by the state with less and less liberty to venture freely in life as INTENDED)

>>129204073
Where did I imply that everyone should do what I did? Where did I imply that everyone should be an engineer? Why do my parents have anything to do with the degree I paid for with my service?

Thank you for the fine example of deflection, comrade.

>>129204073
communism is shit to those it failed and still fails. The funny thing about all you neo-revolutionaries is you enjoy a greater life living in and hating a capitalist country then you ever would in a communist nation.

"Good" life in a communist paradise was living in a small flatt among hundreda of other people in a complex of mega apartment structures, waiting for word on the trabant you applied for working a shitty job for a meager living wage. All the while living under the suspicion of the secret police and your neighbors who keep and ear out for what you say.

File: this-pleases-stirner-gt-tfw-engels-says-we-are-communists-in-2661085.png (75KB, 500x674px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 500x674px

>>129195612
You should make revolution on a individual level and rob a rich capitalist.

>>129203546
>A strong economy means a lot of things
good! refrain from using such ill-defined nebulous terms to make points
>I live in one. Wow, looks like full communism isn't that necessary after all.
Lucky you, glorious American capitalism is spreading, The U.K is already starting to get rid of the NHS, I hope you are able to resist this. Protip: you won't
>Price signals and free market competition are most efficient at discerning how much of what goods are demanded and incentivising innovation
there is a lot of overproduction and stupid shit being made(fidget spinners.) What is the point of being the most efficient? I would rather there be some inefficiencies and the social safety net and worker dignity be maintained than there be maximum efficiency and those things be lost. If you really want maximum efficiency institute slavery.

>Why do you imply that they don't deserve any?
My point is everyone deserves autonomy. If you are willing to work you deserve housing, healthcare, education, employment

>>129202596
I know many rich people that were formerly poor, namely my grandparents and all of their children. They imbued a set of morals and ethics that guided them to success, some despite having met many failures. I know many that I'm not related to that have done this as well. One developed a product and now lives comfortably off of selling it, one worked his way through local politics and does quite well for himself in national politics, one went to the USA to study medicine after being born to a poor factory worker in malaysia, one strived his entire life to be a high up in the military but after his tour he went into law and does quite well.
These people are brilliant, clever, and motivated while at the same time having a good set of morals. Most people I know that stayed in the town I grew up in and which are doing not so well, were very obviously missing something of that equation.
I won't claim it's a perfect system because no system is perfect, but capitalism despite its flaws and its needing reigns to keep it in check will provide those at the bottom with the greatest level of welfare. Communism drags down the people at the top instead of pulling up those at the bottom.
It's not mine nor anyone elses fault that you think the world has treated you unfairly. Grow the fuck up, you sound like someone in their late teens who is going through their angsty rebellious phase.

>>129201670
>have rich parents
>get rich
lots of effort there

>>129204908
>you deserve
We don't deserve anything of the sorts you listed. We deserve what we can attain and what the system can afford to provide. Seriously, take it from an econfag, read some political economy other than marx. Until you've read at least Bastiat, gtfo.

>>129204908
>good! refrain from using such ill-defined nebulous terms to make points
Like I said: unless you are claiming that strong economies are a bad thing, I'm not interested in discussing this. It's meaningless technical pointscoring in an attempt to disguise the fact that you have no substantive argument.

>Lucky you, glorious American capitalism is spreading
Have you ever, in your entire life, even once travelled to my country? What the fuck do you know about anything about my country other than memes and shitposting?

>there is a lot of overproduction and stupid shit being made(fidget spinners.)
Your solution to this is to send around the jackbooted secret police to burn down the factories in the night, in the name of increasing people's autonomy and independence? Why? It's just "stop liking what I don't like" dressed up to make it look like something other than autistic envy.

>I would rather there be some inefficiencies and the social safety net and worker dignity be maintained
I'm going to let you in on a secret: you will need to manufacture products to maintain the social safety net. The more efficient your manufacturing process, the more products you can make to give to people. Efficiency is ALWAYS important because you cannot do something with nothing. The prerequisite of distributing things fairly to people is having enough to go around in the first place. An economic system that is inefficient will underperform and then implode because everybody will just import things from more efficient economies. Then you will say "we'll just close the trade lines" and pretend that banning imports and emigration while deliberately pursuing poverty increases people's autonomy.

>My point is everyone deserves autonomy
So why are you actively curtailing it with backwards economics?

The best form of welfare is a job.

File: efw.png (239KB, 1911x768px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1911x768px

>>129204173
look at this piece of shit map, countries that have no social safety, barely existent governments/taxes/regulation are ranked as less economically free than countries with massive social safety nets, regulations and tax codes
the methodology is garbage

>>129205086
M8, my grandmother worked in the fields her entire childhood and my grandfathers family worked as subsistence farmers and as small time local officials.
Their children had a low-mid middle class lifestyle off of my grandfathers church salary, but even that was far far above what my grandparents had. They continued with teaching morals and all of things I've mentioned and they all then did well.
While I was young, my dad had lost millions after a company merger and he didn't start doing well (more than 30k-40k a year) again until my 20s and now he has millions. By that time I had a full ride scholarship and now I'm overseas (I'm a burger).

>argues about theory
>no actual evidence to back this up

commies

>>129205026
>I know many rich people that were formerly poor
you should meet those born into wealth, it will destroy the myth that wealth correlates to virtue

You should also go out and meet some hardworking poor people who can't make ends meet, I don't know how many of those there are in Germany but there are many in the U.S and around the world
>>129205446
>We deserve what we can attain and what the system can afford to provide
this argument made to a poor person encourages communist revolution, this same argument made to a wealthy person encourages exploitation. Which was what the OP was about

>>129200403
>destroying wealth
Are you blind or just stupid? Working class participation in politics doesn't mean destroying wealth?
Even the fucking Soviet Union had much better living standards in the 1950s than in the 1910s.

>>129205821
>Your solution to this is to send around the jackbooted secret police to burn down the factories in the night, in the name of increasing people's autonomy and independence? Why? It's just "stop liking what I don't like" dressed up to make it look like something other than autistic envy.
Won't be necessary the workers will decide what to produce
>An economic system that is inefficient will underperform and then implode
by what mechanism?

>>129206500
Everytime a communist preaches their unique form of communism that, if tested, would finally he a success. But what every single one of you forget to come to terms with is your delusion about the standards of living in a communist country.

>>129200770
Oh yeah I'm sure those billions of poor people on Earth could be millionaires if they just worked a little bit harder.
>>129201233
Don't be surprised when the revolutionaries strike back even harder then.

>>129206902
Of course it did, but living in the soviet union in the late 50s was no dream.

>>129206500
Dude, I have friends that were born very wealthy and I have friends that were born into trailer parks, one of whom had methhead parents growing up. Some of the wealthy kids were assholes and some were straight arrows that didnt care about the wealth they just wanted to succeed for themselves, this as well applies to the people I know on the poor end of things.
That one with methhead parents? He's qualified to be a translator at this point but he seriously sits around doing nothing and going to the river while he and his wife (who works to provide for them) live in his fathers (he's clean now) expanded trailer (rooms constructed off of the original trailer portion). I love the guy, but he's wasting his talents and skills.

>>129201999
>it's easy to work a shitty job
Found the rich condescending faggot.

>>129205977
Capitalism works for you congratulations!
The OP specifically said you wouldn't give a fuck about communism and you would oppose it.

>>129207067
Not what was said. I'm not a millionaire, but I do live a great life because I worked hard and made sacrifices.

>>129195612
nice bait
i like

>>129207172
Bro, I did my time flipping fries, washing cars, and fighting for Israel. You want a good job, you have to earn it.

>>129206979
read this
>>129202345

>>129204173
"Economic Freedom" is a meme-tier definition of capitalism.
>le useful idiots meme
Just like poor people who support capitalism are useful idiots for the elite?
>when in reality you're the kind of person who will lose everything and never reach another habitable living standard again in your life, that is if you're not simply shot.
Did you take this straight from le subversion man?

>>129207356
>Bro, I did my time flipping fries, washing cars, and fighting for Israel.
not everyone wants to take the cuck path.

furthermore if everyone did as you did your skills would be valueless, capitalism cannot provide dignity to everyone who jumps through the hoops

>>129206939
>Won't be necessary the workers will decide what to produce
They already have.

The workers want fidget spinners.

Do you think that the economy's consumers are somehow separate from the economy's workers? The workers will produce whatever the market demands, because that is what they can trade for food and water and houses and cars. If the market demands fidget spinners that is what they will make.

The only way to circumvent this is to
a) ban fidget spinners
In which case, congratulations on dramatically reducing autonomy, independence, and dignity like the tyrannical despot that you are.
b) teach people not to want stupid shit
In which case you are falling for Marx's ludicrous notion of the New Soviet Man, which I am happy to talk about but it's basically a whole separate topic to economics.

>by what mechanism?
I told you the mechanism.
>i want a car
>the cars my economy produce are either shittier than foreign cars at the same price, or more expensive than foreign cars of the same quality (or both!) because my economy is inefficient
>i will buy a foreign car
>my money travels offshore, enriching foreigners and foreign companies and not my own economy
This happens all the time today. Nations have something called comparative advantage. Germany makes better cars, Australia makes better hearing aids, and so we trade for them. If you have a wildly inefficient economy, however, you will do almost nothing better than the foreigners and your terms of trade will be wildly imbalanced. Money will flow out of your country, the value of your currency will go down, and your currency will be worth less and less internationally, until imports become more and more expensive.

Suddenly, you can no longer afford to import goods, and you cannot make them domestically. Congratulations, you are an African nation.

>>129204607
Tell that to the third worlders who live much, much, much worse than people in the USSR did.

>>129207234
Yes, being competent and driven usually does work well in a meritocratic society. Who'd have guessed? It isn't my fault a lot of people are bumbling fools.
What commies can't seem to grasp is when one guy makes a bunch of money, chances are his having done that has provided a far greater increase in welfare to society as a whole than should he have not created anything and that same amount he made just be distributed to those 'who need it' with no development being added.
You have this delusional notion that it is money in and of itself which determines success when it is something acquired by things you and other communists lack. You see this wealth as mana from heaven and that you, you oh so great you, must be as deserving as any other. You're not. You're not until you've gone out and made it. Even then, life is a crapshoot and you may be the most skilled out there and get fucked. That's a part of life. When you try to force equal results for unequal input because of those who get left out, you doom the system to collapse. The skilled see no purpose in work because they will get as much as the crackwhore down the street, the poor see no purpose in work because they're already living comfy for doing nothing.
Seriously, you have some false delusion as to how people think and act that needs to be fixed.

>>129207067
Go and fucking do it then, have you fucking seen yourselves, every self proclaimed "communist" is a selfish entitled fuck, some of the most toxic people ive ever encountered. The reality of the situation is, youre still going to eat big brand foods and wear big brand clothing and use your big brand computer and post on an unregulated internet. And you fucking hate it somehow. As if all your troubles in the world can be solved by a powerful and corrupt communist oligarchy that keeps the great majority of people at a fixed living standard living in shit conditions, eating crappy food and having second rate medical care, all while earning nothing and having no aspirations or dreams of proving your worth or climbing the ladder. Capitalism gives you the steps you need to take if you want to succeed, its about research, hard work and a steady mind. You have to be determined to work as hard as it takes to get to the next level, advance your education, and start working, all while loving what youre doing. Essentially all these things you believe come along with your perfect view of communism, but the past has showed that these nations habitually fail after having disenfranchised its own people out of a better life.

>>129195612
Communism does not make the poor rich, it drags the rich down to the poor's level, or gives them government protection and employment.

Capitalism is the only system that allows for vertical class movement without government patronage.

File: 1496801945491.png (723KB, 1006x672px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 1006x672px

>>129195612
>by /biz/
/biz/ is a capitalists board, fuck off..

>>129207928
See the problem with the third world is the cold war robbed them of the post war economic boom. Its was nice of the USSR to fund revolutionary groups and rebellions all across africa. These countries were locked in civil war for years and years. Groids are stupid and servile, so maybe communism is the best system for them

>>129207735
Show me where I said my path is for everyone.

Nice name calling, BTW. Shows how strong your "arguments" are.

>>129208183
>communism is bad
>therefore capitalism is perfect
pls stop

>>129207816
>The workers want fidget spinners
A market is not a democratic way of controlling production. A democratic way fo controlling production is the workers controlling the means of production.

In a market one's power is decided by their purse(not democratic), furthermore markets exist to distribute goods, not to decide and plan for production.

a better way to plan production would be to have people plan production instead of relying on a product distribution system and hoping for the best.

Communism aims to give people the power to plan their production through empowering them in their workplace, relying on a collection of merchants hawking their wares for production will not produce the same results as empowering people in their workplace.
>my money
I don't think foreigners will accept Soviet Australia labour credits are valid outside of Soviet Australia

>>129200770

>Poverty is a state of mind

Id rather die than be a pinko, but this some bullshit. It's immensely difficult getting out of poverty. McJobs lead to mcJobs and lack of capital from inheritance leaves you trying to hold on to a pot to piss in.

>>129209268
Never said that, if you read my precious posts, of course capitalism creates the same powerful rich oligarchy, but i argue that there is more of an oppirtunity to make it in a capitalist system than in a communist one.

>>129207234
Capitalism works for anyone willing to put forth the effort to climb the class ladder.

It's an overtime job. You will spend 80-120 hours a week working for yourself to gain wealth and connections. You don't get evenings and weekends off every week.

I was raised in East Oakland by parents who never went to college, divorced when I was 4, and stopped parenting me in any way when I was 12. All I got from them after that was a roach-filled bedroom and fast food twice a week.

I filed for emancipation at 16, went to adult school and graduated my final 2 years of credits in 6 months, got TWO jobs, went to community college part time for 4 years.

At night and on weekends when I wasn't working, I studied electrical engineering and computer science.

By the end of my 4 years, I had good enough grades and enough money saved from living in a shitty rental room and west oakland that I was able to afford my first year's tuition and was granted some assistance and a small scholarship 6 months after I got in to university.

For the past 10 years, I've been working my way up the engineering ladder, and I've finally broken $75K a pay. I'm fully vested in my retirement, and I'm planning to retire at $125K by the time I'm 50.

Stop being lazy.
Yes, it's not fair that you were born to shitty parents who never gave you anything, but whining will never change that, and trying to get the government to force others to care for you will never let you rise above poverty.

communism doesn't make the poor rich it makes everyone poor

>>129195612
>If you are poor in capitalism then capitalism has failed you
except that's not how capitalism works

you failed yourself

Name one poor person who got rich under communism that wasn't a dictator.

>>129195612
>If that is the case why should the poor not rebel? If poverty is okay why is the expropriation of the bourgeoisie not okay?

Because life is indeed unfair and that dosent make ok to people go around stealing others property, poverty is better dealt with market economy not socialism and state intervation. Capitalism didnt creat child labor or slaves, those things existed longe before capitalism come to be and those thing dosent longer exist on major country with market economys because of capitalism advance, it was not unions or magic pen-blows of politicians that improved the quality of workers it was science, free enterprise and automation that did it.

>These are all concepts with no real proof.

Yes there are proof, your natural instincts tell you to survive no matter what, as they tell you that you are an territorial animal. The negative rights property, life and freedom of action while nothing violeting other same rights are the only that exist, rights to steal others people money in the many of the proletariat, to waste on welfare, or public schools and so on, those things are services and the private charity is more efficiant than the state.

>if humans are naturally greedy, why should the poor not play their role and revolt and be greedy? There is also the fact that laborers are not being greedy by not revolting, which means people are okay with sharing their labor.

If you want to share your labor with others you are free but making people do it with a gun point at their heads is an agression and imoral. The poor are better of now than ever before because the market economy (average income in a hundred years got from 3 to 30 dollars world wide, in rich countries its now 100 dollars), thats why socialist revolution dosent take place and post-modernism is all about identity politics.

>>129195612
The solution to these problems is syndicalism

>>129209426
Then how come some of us can rise above it? Choices we make now impact our future chances. I was on trajectory to work at a car wash until I enlisted. Six years of sacrifice afforded me a chance to earn a degree, get a great job, and buy a home. Yet people still choose to work mcjob instead of taking a chance and making sacrifices for their future. The fact that you can't correlate cause and effect is very troubling and going to make discussion difficult.

>>129209269
Unless you intend every factory to produce every good needed by every worker, trade will occur. So long as trade occurs there will be a need to produce goods that the market demands. Whether production is set by the Executive Vice President of Product Design or the Chairperson of the Product Design Committee, the demands of the market are not going to change. The market doesn't care about how the sausage is made. It just wants to buy some god damn sausage. You think that if workers control production they will produce only useful things, and that's not wrong. What you don't understand is that a product is useful to the person who makes it if it can be sold for money that allows the maker to buy what he wants. Fidget spinners ARE useful to me, because I can SELL them. A democratically controlled factory will produce exactly the same things as one run on the basis of managerial prerogative.

I will make fidget spinners because I can make 10 fidget spinners, sell them, and buy 10 loaves of bread, in the same amount of time it would take me to bake one loaf of bread.

>I don't think foreigners will accept Soviet Australia labour credits are valid outside of Soviet Australia
Then Soviet Australia will be even poorer because autarkic nations do not benefit from comparative advantage.

>>129209604
What's the point of "making it" when your nation is a diseased shitpile? Don't pretend America is somehow better than the USSR just because you can afford enough opiates to forget the cliff you're hurtling towards.

There is nothing that can save America that doesn't come with a fuse.

>>129209426
>>Poverty is a state of mind
>Id rather die than be a pinko, but this some bullshit. It's immensely difficult getting out of poverty.

Nothing in life is easy.
Your comfort is provided by the hard work of those who came before you. If not for them, you'd be chasing rats through the fields for your meals, and weighing the benefits of drinking from a stream and getting dysentery, or fermenting the stream water and going thirsty for a day or two because you'd be too ignorant to know you could just boil it.

Success is built by sacrifice.
When you have nothing except yourself, guess what ends up being sacrificed?

>>129210094
Have millions starved in America?
Are there millions in Gulags?

Then it's better than the USSR.

>>129208700
>Show me where I said my path is for everyone.
so you are admitting capitalism will have a large underclass that will not be served by capitalism and it is in their best interest to overthrow the capitalist system?
>>129208174
>Yes, being competent and driven usually does work well in a meritocratic society
shame we don't live in one.

what capitalist don't understand is that capitalism relies on screwing over people. You could have a society of hard working geniuses, and what you would end up with is hardworking geniuses who can't get a job because employers have already filled the job with another hard working genius or another hardworking genius already had the business idea

communists should be murdered

File: cool dragon sunnies.jpg (113KB, 684x690px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 684x690px

>>129210221
There are more important things in life than living.

File: ceo-worker-pay-ratio1.jpg (35KB, 543x470px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 543x470px

>>129209714
capitalism is a scam

>>129210250
Show me where I implied that.

>>129209908
>How is that different from capitalism? Workers don't vote for their supervisors or their bosses, the power over someone's economic activity is no small deal. Workers today live under a system where they have to submit to others in order to have an income. At least in communism they auto-manage.

Capitalism is an economy system, states with market economy can range from democracys to totalarian regimes. Voters dosent vote for their supervisors or bosses because they are getting paid to do a job, its an voluntary transaction and they have no saying in the company that is an private entity. Like i said people are not been opressed by agreeing to do a job, its voluntary if they dont want it they can open their own bussines and so on, in socialism is not an choice give the fruits of your work for other people its mandatory and fail to do it and you will die.

>If you are poor in capitalism then capitalism has failed you and a communist revolution at least brings the hope of a better system decided by the poor revolting class.

Capitalism has not failed because there is poor people, capitalism is all about a free enterprise and people doing voluntary exchanges,socialist fails if there is poor people because the whole thing is to 'improve" their citizens lives. Hopes and revolutions based on lies dosent make the world better and only lead people to suffer and death.

>>129209268
Nobody said it´s perfect, but it´s better than all the other alternaties at the moment.
Why don´t you research a bit more, about how well communist nations fared in the past?
USSR? Dead, millions killed, the great majority peassants or poor people (The ones they tried to lift, the ones they promised better living standars)
Cuba? A joke, they live from american tourism
Communist China? Dead, millions starved
Venezuela? If you follow the news you'll see that they have left wing dath squads backed up indirectly by the government, and their economy is in shambles.
The point is: If it's so much better than capitalism, how is it that every communist regime is dead or dying?

File: 1493672672142.png (139KB, 500x668px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 500x668px

>>129209714
>I filed for emancipation at 16, went to adult school and graduated my final 2 years of credits in 6 months, got TWO jobs, went to community college part time for 4 years.
did you collect any form of government help?
>At night and on weekends when I wasn't working, I studied electrical engineering and computer science.
If everyone did this being an electrical engineer would earn you mcjob wages and getting a job would be unlikely
>For the past 10 years, I've been working my way up the engineering ladder, and I've finally broken $75K
took you that long to break 75K with an EE degree? I don't know whether to doubt or laugh
>>129209905
not rich, but better living conditions, pic related and literally millions more

>>129208649
The USSR funded rebels in the third world but nowhere near to the extent that the USA and Britain did.
>see: the Congo, Uganda, Indonesia, Pakistan, Chad, South Africa, basically every country in Latin America

>>129210575
replace "CEO" with "Party Leader".
There's communism.

>>129210885
How many of these were in response to Russians?

>>129210575
wait lmao you actually think if this ratio was 1 and 1 the working class would have higher living standards and be able to buy more shit
AHAHAHAHAHHAHA

holy fuck are you eurocucks actually this dumb?

>>129210575
this image is even MORE retarded because switzerland is one of the top 3 FREE MARKET countries on earth

that's right, usa is more socialist than switzerland

fuck off you fucking communist faggot
die

>>129210554
Like what? Dying in a gutter, riddled by bullets, your friends and family worse than before or dead as well? Starving to death, sent to prison for being a dissenter, the removal of free speech?

>>129210982
A fair number were out of mere suspicion that there would be a communist revolution in those countries.

>>129209908
Why do you commies still exist?

WHY?

>>129195612
>If that is the case why should the poor not rebel?
Godless communists go to hell, that's why.

>>129210826
>saved the world from fascism

then why did the working class live BETTER under fascism than stalin's shithole?

LMAO you people are fucking bootlickers

>>129195612
Guys I think communism is nice in theory, but I'm afraid I end up like in Venezuela. What do? I mean USSR wasn't hopeless developing country but one of the most advanced countries in the world, so maybe it's a white-nonwhite issue?

>>129210094
If you choose to view everything through that lense, be my guest but you are mistaken. Besides the major cities and of course groid areas. America is as beautiful as ever, with strong national pride and enthusiasm about working and enjoying life. The difference was, outside of the major cities, there is no life for you in a communist country. So you live in your tiny shanty village working the fields endlessly for nothing, you dont own or sell your crop, you dont own your equipment, you dont have a car,m. These are the lowest of the low. There is no life for you outside of a city in communism. In a city, youre very "lucky" because you have a nice factory job, you work long hours and earn almost nothing, you cant apply to university because you didnt score well enough. But thats okay because you can redeem your food vouchers for groceries then return to your shitty flat where all the other factory peons are living stacked on top of each other. Sure, America has had a fall from grace. But you can still make the system work for you, you gotta be determined to do put in hours and work before you decide the system has failed you. Sure ive had my fair share of let downs and shortcomings, but oppurtunity always presents itself in capitalism, there are hundreds of paths to take

>>129210221
This

>>129211284
They are delussional, and don't know their history

>>129210826
It's hilarious when I see these images while at the same time understanding the history of soviet healthcare and medicine

these tankies are brainwashed as fuck, holy shit

just kill them all

>>129210732
>>129211100
>implying i'm going to respond seriously to a nigger

>>129195612
This reminds me of Bernie

>>129211099
>said the poorfag while choking on globalist semen

>>129211384
>Sure, America has had a fall from grace
I don't know how to break this to you, anon.

America's fall hasn't even begun.

>>129200868
>China and the Soviet union increased living standards
Compared to what? Is this a joke? Millions of people starved to death

>>129195612
>If you are poor in capitalism
the current world isn't as simple as capitalism vs communism

it's much more complex

there are degrees of economic freedom

man I swear to fuck you leftists are brain dead
just kill yourselves

>nd a communist revolution at least brings the hope of a better system
While killing and enslaving the working class?

>>129211306
Its partially a racial issue. But it is very much ideological. Communism, strips you of identity and treats you as a collective. Capitalism encourages individualism and self made men, ideas to strive for. Its the real test of how someons determination, with grit, everyone can make it.

>>129211569
And when that happens ill be ready :3

>>129211559
>POORFAG
What does this have to do with anything?
Even if I was poor, what's wrong with promoting economic freedom, so I can escape poverty?

Also define globalism, you literally can't.

>>129210826
Read the Gulag Archipelago. Stalin imprisoned anyone for anything. You would get 10 years in Gulag for having been a Russian POW because Stalin was scared that prisoners returning from Europe would tell Soviets how superior Europe was. Stalin was an evil resentful man, all he wanted to do was to plunge humanity into hell

If Stalin had lived longer he would have started WWIII and killed everyone.

>>129210094
>Unless you intend every factory to produce every good needed by every worker
this is why you need to organize workers across factories, and have them debate and argue production priorities
>The market doesn't care about how the sausage is made. It just wants to buy some god damn sausage.
this is the weakness of deciding production by market
>Fidget spinners ARE useful to me, because I can SELL them
the only reason you can sell fidget spinners is because there are a ton of poor people with kids and they are not empowered enough to have the means of production make other stuff.
there is a qualitative difference in having 3 dollars in your pocket and having a voice in the workplace in a country that guarantees employment

Soviet Australia would not be autarkic, trade decision will be done as colelctives not as individuals as it is now
>>129210221
there are millions in prison and millions of exploited illegal mexicans

>>129210575
The ceo manage an large company, have to make risk decisions who affect thousands and so on while the worker does not, it all comes to: value is subjective (ceo earns more because if the perform a job more required by the market because there is an limited supply of capable persons on such positions while the comum worker does an job with unlimited supply of bad-avarage-good people that decrease its values).

File: 1496501526016.jpg (13KB, 276x413px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 276x413px

>>129202345
>Mao's experiment in decentralized popular mass communism is excellent evidence that communism works.
Millions of people starved to death? While during this time standards of living in the US increased at a rate orders of magnitude higher

And since Mao died and China has become more capitalist, their economy has grown at a far greater rate compared to when it was more communist

It's like the perfect case study of how capitalism is better than communism

Other examples include:
South Korea vs North Korea
United States vs Soviet Union

>>129211448
Nice ad homminem you got there, man!
(you) sure showed me!

File: millenials.png (443KB, 600x498px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 600x498px

>Capitalists: Communists don't understand basic economics!

Meanwhile...

>>129211284
I think the LIBERATORS got the better part of the deal
>>129211306
>Last year the private sector accounted for 70 percent of gross domestic product, including 11 percent in taxes paid on products, according to Central Bank estimates. The public sector was 30 percent, a slightly smaller share than when Chavez was elected in 2008.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/07/18/socialism-private-sector-dominates-venezuelan-economy-despite-chavez-crusade.html

File: 1495226574689.png (460KB, 750x1020px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 750x1020px

>>129197953
>autonomy
>central planning

Pick one you unimaginably dense retard.

Also consider this: communism is a designed system which requires humans to behave a certain way while capitalism is nothing more than a collection of observations of what free men will do when left to their own devices. Proof? First text about capitalism is 'wealth of nations' which is literally a book of observations while first text on socialism is 'communist manifesto' by a literal societal leech which is a book describing an ideal world.

>>129211927
>this is why you need to organize workers across factories, and have them debate and argue production priorities
Are they, perhaps, going to trade their production amongst themselves? Sort of like a "you produce that for me, and I'll produce this for you" system? Literally the exact same kind of system that we currently have?

>the only reason you can sell fidget spinners is because
there are people with money who will pay for them.

Correct.

In your Soviet system they would be workers with labour vouchers. Nothing changes.

>Soviet Australia would not be autarkic, trade decision will be done as colelctives not as individuals as it is now
So? Its still-inefficient economy would be bleeding with every trade it made. Collective trade decisions do nothing to offset the damage of such a trade deficit. Trade deficits aren't always bad - but trade deficits caused by a hideously inefficient economy ARE. You are essentially selling long term assets to fund current consumption.

You've either got autarky or trade deficits. Pick your poison.

Efficient economies are not optional nice things. You NEED to have an efficient economy or else you will be poor as fuck because nobody will buy your shitty expensive products and you won't be able to afford anyone else's stuff. Why is Africa so poor? Because they cannot make anything I want at a competitive price, so I never give them any money. Now explain how your inefficient economy is not going to turn out like Africa.

>>129212185
shut up nigger

>>129212184
>their economy has grown at a far greater rate compared to when it was more communist
Wrong! read this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_GDP_of_China

>>129212687
What happened? You sound like an upset woman. A dingo ate your baby?

File: GDP_per_capita_of_China_and_India.svg.png (50KB, 750x560px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 750x560px

>>129212783
Pic related from that page

Mao died in the mid 70's

Nixon went to China and opened up trade relations in 1971

Look how the economy grew since then

>>129213041
B-but muh Great Leap Forward.

File: 440px-Two_koreas_gdp_1950_1977.jpg (17KB, 440x324px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 440x324px

>>129212184
I'd be careful anon.

North Korea grew on par with South Korea until the leadership started diverting resources for retarded vanity projects.

You're right, but you're only half right.

File: GDP_per_capita_of_China_and_India.svg.png (60KB, 750x560px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 750x560px

>>129212783

>>129212783
Large government spending and massive debt can make a country have "growth", China did that an it result in mass starvation, our military regime in the 60-70s did the same and result in the 80s beign a lost decade with hyperinflation of more than 1 thousand a year

>>129212644
>autonomy
>central planning
what is the contradiction? you participate in the planning.
>>129212648
>Literally the exact same kind of system that we currently have?
if the same exact system we have today held the means of production in common and used labour vouchers, tied strongly to hours of labour
>>129212648
>Its still-inefficient economy would be bleeding with every trade it made
how so? Australia has some resources and manufacturing capabilities that other countries don't, these countries in turn have things Australia doesn't have.

>You NEED to have an efficient economy or else you will be poor as fuck
economies do not solely rely on trade

>>129213041
>>129213580
GDP is not growth
>>129213600
China didn't have mass starvation in the cultural revolution AKA peak communism

File: tmp_12811-1494521908327-1245820433.jpg (122KB, 827x571px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 827x571px

Actually OP I completely agree. It's why I advocate for ancap or something close. In a truly free and just society, I would be free to live by buying and selling goods and services with like minded people, and if a group wanted to form a communist enclave there is no government saying they can't or taxing them so harshly that they cant.

But their system remains a moral choice in this case because they aren't forcing it on others.

And ultimately they would still be a factor of the free market, because they are simply negotiating the value of labor. Less workers would mean industry and businesses would have to increase their offering of pay, or add automation. And that's fine. I would personally still rather work for pay than live in the commute since I prefer independence and making my own decisions vs. Being tethered to the commute of people I probably don't even like at all. This is tied to having private property and being able to save and invest capital vs. Basically having all of my excess taken for the group.

Lastly, being poor does not mean capitalism has failed you, it means you fail at capitalism. I was poor but am steadily making progress toward where I want to be. You just can't be a lazy fuck.

>>129213933
>GDP is not growth
lol what metric shall we use then? You're the one who directed me to the historical GDP of China wiki page in the first place!

Your own evidence disproves your point

>>129213933
Up to 60 million people dying of starvation is probably what we could call mass starvation.

>>129214703
Can you say more about what happened here in Brazil: >>129213600

I am worried that we in the UK are going the same way with excessive borrowing (especially if Corbyn gets into govt. in the near future) to fund short term spending today that will lead to hyperinflation in a decade or so

File: smuganimeface.jpg (3KB, 125x83px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x83px

>>129197953
So what you're saying is we should base or society more on being rat and monkey-like?

>>129213722
I'm sick of you, you stupid fuck.

I have tried, and tried, to get home basic economic principles to you. I am also a leftist who believes in mandatory collectivisation. Unlike you, however, I am not an idiot.

You are describing a system of free market trade between workers. Workers who own factories trade their production to other workers. That's free market trade. The fact that wages are pegged to hours worked changes nothing about the principles of market operation. So your assertion that less useless shit will be produced is just fucking wrong. So long as people can choose to buy what they want they will buy stupid shit because people want stupid shit because consumer desires are not rational. You either have to learn to shut the fuck up and accept this or give up on pretending you're actually advocating for independence and autonomy and just go full Stalinist.

Then you have fundamentally failed to apply any understanding of comparative advantage. People will only trade with Australia if they can import Australian products cheaper than producing them at home. If Australia's economy is a basket case because of inefficiencies then that will not be the case and Australia will run a trade deficit, in effect selling off long term assets by sending money that could be used to fund domestic growth offshore to finance current consumption. Unsustainable! Not only that - you will lose jobs too in the short term.

You are a fucking moron.

>economies do not solely rely on trade
Wrong. Fucking WRONG.

If the US became a closed economy it would fucking collapse, permanently and irrevocably. Your living standards rely ENTIRELY on trade. Without trade it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to enjoy your quality of life.

I am done being polite and I am done being patient. I have studied for YEARS. You simply are not qualified to have an opinion. Unless you can comprehensively explain how the current system works in its own terms you cannot even begin to explain why it doesn't.

>>129213722
Central planning is a government telling you what to do, autonomy is you telling yourself what to do. Say government tells you that you make 10 widgets per day, but you're a smart dude and found a way to make 12. Too bad, you either make 10 or end up in a gulag. Your autonomy is 100% non-existant in a central-planned economy. It stifles innovation and removes free will. All because communists want gibs, but don't consider the wants of anybody else. Literally the most selfish and immoral imposition conceived in human history.

>>129214703
60 million people didn't die of starvation in the Cultural Revolution

The Capitalism/Communism debate is resultant of urbanization. It isn't natural to pack so many people together where natural freedom isn't possible. A poor man could at one point, providing he were intelligent enough (which is a factor of naturality and environmental upbringing) plant a farm, sell the crops after a season, buy two pigs, create more pigs, sell said pigs for a wagon, haul and sell more crops and pigs with his wagon, create a market stall to sell even more of his crops and livestock, hire farmhands to produce even more, open a shop to sell to even more people, open multiple shops and diversify his business portfolio, buy out an entire block, then a district, then a city, then a county, and so on. Feudalism was inherently interesting because of man's freedom here. Note how Serfs acted in comparison to those who rose in the ranks and who survived until this day.

>>129215053
better than being sheep-like

File: 1465945037072.jpg (52KB, 462x500px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 462x500px

>>129215332
you are an irl foxnews bot, you are hopelessly ignorant. the wonderful thing is you are either very old and about to die, pic related or bourgeois

>>129195612
If you can suggest a system better than capitalism that actually works then be my guest. But we have all the evidence we need that every time communism happens on a national scale, things start to happen:

First, peoples guises of life are considered equal, despite the fact they are not. This causes a void in motivation other than the pride of the state, and that goes when people realise everyone is miserable. People then can't be bothered so authorities get in the mix and tell people to work, empowering themselves. This creates a more powerful authority which then exploits people because by this time the economy is desperately running dry. They keep trying to maintain control and eventually end up in fachism. Communism has killed over 100,000,000 people, don't be a fool. Capitalism is not perfect but that doesn't mean communism is a better alternative, or any other system we've currently got. We just have to stick with it.
People often have gripes with capitalism for the wrong reasons anyway. It's often corporatism which is the actual cause of what people tend to complain about with their snapchat stories on their iphones.

>>129212376
So I'm proof of the downfall of capitalism because I'm not some debt slave who spends money on shit that I don't need? BTW I'm in college and I live entirely off scholarship money. Suck it Bernie shits, you should have spent more time studying and less time bitching.

>>129195612
Sure the rich are richer than ever before but the poor are also richer than ever before. If we had socialism everyone would just be equally poor instead of having the chance to be rich.

>>129215601
In a sheep society everyone is equal and they get free handouts from the shepherd (socialist government)

>>129200868
Lol millions starved to death under those regimes, and China didn't experience an increase in living standards until Deng opened the economy and allowed captialist elements.

File: 1494047258784.jpg (113KB, 750x992px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 750x992px

>>129202345
>If you go to rural China you will find it is these people who (according to wealthy Chinese urban elite expatriates and Western scholars who have never been to rural China) are supposedly his victims, who are most supportive of Mao and the cultural revolution and hate the reforms.

Because the education they received in the rural parts were based on Mao's little red book. Of coarse they're going to parrot talking points from the Cultural rev.

And now a western retards are parroting the same talking points. lol

File: 865F32B8-3F23-4A82-B26F-917AB4D30444-5720-0000085BD820F9BC.jpg (178KB, 774x1024px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 774x1024px

>>129195612
Because in a capitalist society if you don't provide something of value to the society you don't eat and that makes sense. Appropriation is theft and is theft of the masses is wrong why isn't it also the case with theft of the few? PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS NIGGER JEW

>>sage this fucking nigger

File: Screen shot 2017-06-09 at 12.39.13 PM.png (57KB, 816x383px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 816x383px

>>129209269
>Communism aims to give people the power to plan their production through empowering them in their workplace, relying on a collection of merchants hawking their wares for production will not produce the same results as empowering people in their workplace.
lol
>being this brainwashed
It's not about empowering people, it's about empowering the state.

File: 1461832119456.jpg (108KB, 602x915px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 602x915px

>>129195612
>if humans are naturally greedy, why should the poor not play their role and revolt and be greedy?

Because that's the unproductive, short-term satisfaction, nigger kind of greed that destroys civilizations.

>There is also the fact that laborers are not being greedy by not revolting, which means people are okay with sharing their labor.

An employment contract is beneficial for both sides. The employer gets the potential profit, while the worker is compensated, regardless of whether the business turns a profit.

>>129215013
After the great depresion of 29' Brazil 30's was conturbed. He had a coup, a democracy and a facist regime by 37' all of those thing lead by Vargas (our mussolini) he creat the type of corporativist economy with high government intervation (with dozen of workers laws, taxes and so son) that brazil have until this day. After WW2 he has desposed but return in 1950 e continued with his gibs and keynesian polices until he killed himself because he could not step from power (greedy mother fucker where leader of the country for more than 15 years) but the damage was already done, one of his "disciples" took over in sequence and continued with his polices until we enter the 60's with a shit economy, recession an inflation. With comunist, cold war, economy crises and so on in 64' theres a military coup. In the beginning the objective was to remain in power until the end of the economical-political crisis and hold new elections, the first military president Castelo-Branco had very liberal policies for the time that guaranteed an quickly recovered in the economy, but the hard lines of the army took over, and now its now became interesting because the hard lines were fans of Vargas and many were part of his fascist regime in the 1930s.

>>129219577
They belive in government intervation on the economy trough massive debt and big government spending to stimulate the economy and so on, those things lead to the beginning of the 70s what is called "milagre economico" (Economic miracle) where brazil was the fastest growing economy in the planet with more than 20% growth a year (he had few things going on to help it, urbanization, industrialization, booming in the population). The oil crisis of 73 was the begining of the crack in the system, by the mid 70s things were sky clear that the system would not work, we the entered the 80s with one of our biggest recessions, massive unemployment, wildspreed poverty (the process of "favelization" took over here), hyperinflation the debt was so massive that we had to default it by 84, in the later 80's when the democracy was restored we had more than 4 currencys in 3 years. It would continued until the mid 90s.

>>129216246
>taking handouts
>hates the poor
American college student, everybody
>>129216803
Wrong!
>>129217978
>people did not enjoy socialism, they were brainwashed, except for this small group of rabidly butthurt people with a chip on their shoulder
>>129219023
>Because that's the unproductive, short-term satisfaction, nigger kind of greed that destroys civilizations.
sounds like capitalism, enjoy your destroyed society and Earth

>>129210575
Holy shit look at Japan!
That is the most capitalistic country i can think of and it is only 67X for the CEO...

It is a cultural thing not a "capitalism" vs "communism" thing.

There is no thing as communism btw, it is a mcguffin.

>>129195612
Why the fuck are all these filthy commies invading 4chan and reddit? You fucking rats are not entitled to the things I earn. Your entire ideology is entirely based on stealing and killing to get free things, and you faggots are too retarded to understand the value of property, despite being rich kids with all the commodities in the world.

File: Hoppian Snake.png (37KB, 1342x528px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1342x528px

>>129195612
> I support and want to force you to obey the most murderous religion in history
>You should consider my points valid and assume I'm arguing in good faith

No, slaver. You deserve the helicopter.

>>129197953
You will NEVER have autonomy, independence or dignity when at any time there's an all-powerful government or angry violent mob threatening to destroy your life for having more than the bare minimum.

Your retarded system is based on your fantasies of oppression because you don't understand what the economy and business is like, you only believe that the people with money stole it.

>>129220891
>sounds like capitalism

There's nothing more terrifying for a hoodlum and a leech than a voluntary society that wouldn't stand for his shit.

It's the welfare state that subsidizes and encourages nigger behavior, at the expense of responsible people.

>>129222222

File: IMG_20170529_012410.jpg (51KB, 730x859px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 730x859px

>>129212687
>get btfo
>act autistic about race

>>129219577
>>129219709
Interesting. How did the Keynesian/gibs policies of Brazil compare to the U.S., say, with QE 1, 2, & 3? What was the proportion of debt to GDP (I know in the US it is currently more than 100% and we're not far off that here in the UK)

File: 1494363003275.jpg (139KB, 881x496px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 881x496px

>>129220891

>>129220924
>monopolism is bad
monopolism is consequence of a free-market
>>129221999
sounds like your afraid of an angry majority that is tired of exploitation, if that is the case don't even bother shilling for capitalism. The wealthy of the third world are always the biggest thieves

File: 1430855360847.jpg (127KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 600x800px

BUMP

>>129225065
>implying you'll ever see a workers of the world united paradise
Kek.. no.. but I won't have my futuristic fascist starship trooper like gubbmit neither.
>tfw the world population will get culled to 500 million via idiopathic pandemic viruses, weaponized nanotech, subtle sterilization and perhaps some other way I can't imagine that has been developed in black budget R&D projects
I guarantee this lad.
Sad. Many such cases!