DAILY REMINDER that if you oppose the free movement of peoples

What do you think capitalism means

>>136553485
"Free movement of peoples" is just a faggy kike way of saying invasion. It's always hostile and never good for any system.

File: 1495778049314.jpg (56KB, 350x519px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 350x519px

>>136553485
The founding fathers were capitalists and white nationalists. Literally the first law passed by the first Congress was the Naturalization Act of 1790. Look it up and then tell me you have to support open borders to be a capitalist. Now fuck off cunt.

pic related

>>136553485
One of the functions of government is to protect us from monopolies and foreign invasions. Both of which weren't happening before. sage

>>136553485
Reminder that if you baitpost on /pol/ then you ARE a faggot.

>>136553651
Private ownership of capital at its most fundamental level.

>>136553716
No its a way of expressing the movement of labour to where it is required unencumbered by bureaucracy

>>136553730
They weren't capitalists then

>>136554028
Does a belief in the private ownership of capital contradict an opposition to open border policy?

>>136554154
No but neither do tariffs, taxes and regulations.

But I wouldn't call someone who imposed the aforementioned three in plenty a capitalist either. At that point its pretty clear you don't trust markets.

File: 1495704242633.png (29KB, 741x568px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 741x568px

>>136554500
Let's recap what happened in this thread

>X and Y are contradictory
>What is X?
>[X definition]
>Does X contradict Y?
>No

File: morpheUS.jpg (38KB, 500x303px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x303px

>label self
>let OP redefine label
>oops, guess I'm not what I thought

"Free movement of people" aka invasion of a nation.

>>136553485
>free movement of peoples
That's within the country itself. It doesn't mean that a clusterfuck of random niggers and terrorists have the right to just enter your country whenever they please. That shit supports the socialist welfare system if anything.

>>136554716
You'd call me a capitalist if I supported a 99% tax on income?

Markets are the effect of private capital, if you oppose their function you effectively oppose capitalism

>>136555224
Its both. Its just as harmful to not let someone from another state in to fill a position as it is to not let someone from another country in.

>>136555371
>that retarded statement
How about a more logical approach...
Is it more harmful TO LET someone from another state in to fill a position, or TO LET someone from another country in to fill a position?
What say you now?

Who elected you mayor of the dictionary?
Fuck off with your super-special personal definitions that you expect other people to observe.
s-a-g-e-d

File: 1413706823463.jpg (207KB, 800x1041px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 800x1041px

>>136553485
>DAILY REMINDER that if you oppose the free movement of peoples then you ARE NOT a capitalist

LOL

Yes, every person is the same. Some, more same than others.

File: and race mixing.jpg (28KB, 376x960px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 376x960px

>>136553485
>you ARE NOT a capitalist
I am not.


Also sage.

>>136555675
It'll tend to be more harmful to let someone from your country fill the position. The labour pool outside any country is far greater than that inside. You'll almost always have a candidate who is more skilled and cheaper.

>>136556328
Ok, you're fucking retarded. What you say may actually be true in your country full of abos and morons like yourself, but it's not true for North America (Mexico excluded).

>>136556506
Its just simple probabilities. What is the chance that out of the few dozen million living in your country that the absolute best candidate for a position out of the earths 7 billion is living in that country? Its often very slim. Its only competitive due to the costs imposed on individuals by immigration, unwillingness to immigrate or immigration restrictions.

Its certainly less so the case in NA since you have a larger population but its still true.

>>136553485

>free movement of peoples

I'm not against that. I'm only against the free movement of SUBHUMANS.

>>136556743
If you need a position filled you take a person from your own country and train them. That way you are bettering your own population. You don't accept some rando with a fake 3rd world degree handwritten on papyrus along with his 30 family members, half of which will end up on the welfare system and spawn another 100 leeches who will do the same. It's just common sense. Anyway you're fucking stupid and I'm just not going to reply to your retarded troll thread anymore. kys retard.

>>136556823
>>free movement of peoples
Intrinsic to the country itself, and ONLY citizens of the country, not the whole butt fucking world.

>>136557183
>You don't accept some rando with a fake 3rd world degree handwritten on papyrus along with his 30 family members, half of which will end up on the welfare system and spawn another 100 leeches who will do the same
Indeed, nobody would. Like I said in the post you were replying to, the candidate would have to be more qualified and cheaper than the local candidate if they were ever to be hired.

>Anyway you're fucking stupid and I'm just not going to reply to your retarded troll thread anymore. kys retard.
Yeah sure, thats why

>>136553485
daily reminder if you wanna pay for these peoples welfare and foodstamps, then YOU do it!

>>136553485
but i strongly oppose capitalism and the abuse of my fellow patriots.
Ofc i do not oppose the private property or initiative as it is the only way to bring progress and innovation.
But I'm not a supporter of free kikery.
1 people, 1 nation,1 Reich