When did you realize that socialism is the most selfish philosophy

>>35358473
hehe that's right goy, globalists got their money because they're just good people who deserve it. they didn't rig the economy, everything is fine.

>>35358473
>>35358473

1. Who the fuck is that Lumberjack? Why does he look so smug?

>Free does not actually mean free

No shit. It means publically funded. It means everyone chips in .05 as opposed to an individual having to spend 15,000 that they might have. Distributing the costs out is great for the individual. You benefit it from it.

>You cannot tax a nation into prosperity

Again, no shit nigger. Prosperity requires economic growth. But you can have tax codes that reduce income inequality. You can create tax codes that creates massive inequality or you can do the opposite. That's why we have progressive taxation.

Oh and guess what? A bunch of poor people are not what you want. They do drugs, commit crimes. The rich then uses this as jutsification for scrweing them even harder

The counter is that we live in a nation based on the social contract. We give you a shit ton of goodies. We pave roads, police, law, government, etc. The second something goes wrong, the rich go off to the courts. Courts and laws paid for by tax dollars and wouldn't exist without a government. Their employees are trained by public education. Then, they turn around and say they should spend as little as possible after all these goodies they get, that they should spend as little taxes as possible. Those people are the moochers. Those people are the free loaders. They want a free ride on OUR society and they want US to pay for it, not them.

>The rich are not responsible for your financial situation.... you are

Often they ARE. They're the ones pushing trade deals, cutting social spending

>socialism leads to communism... always

Every nation on earth is a "mixed" economy. The debate is about whether were we should have the balance between government control, spending, and free markets.

>>35358473
yeah because capitalism and other similar shit are so great, and we're in a worthy position to judge

>>35358473

>Mori Goldbrickenstein telling me what a selfish philosophy is from atop his ivory tower built on a mass grave filled with impoverished goyim as he wrings his blood-drenched hands

Oy vey!

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

30KB, 524x310px

>all these alt right /pol/smokers thinking they're manly and smart when they're actually the biggest fucking cucks for wealthy Chad douchebags

even income inequality statistics is enough to demolish your argument. 1% holds nearly half of the worlds wealth? the system is clearly fucking you. you blind moron.

>>35358702

There's nothing wrong with what Trump SOLD himself as. But it was a fucking baseless sales pitch. The guy is a con man.

>>35358702
>the system is clearly fucking you
As opposed to every other system? How do you feel about being forced to dig your own grave and then being executed in public?

>>35358702
I hate liberals, but retards think that the only problem with liberals is that they actually give a fuck about poor people (even then, most liberals love corporations who shill for fag rights or feminism)

>>35358772

>The alternative to Communism is fat cat trickle down economics
>there are no third or fourth, etc options

This framing is made by the rich to fuck you over.

>>35358473
this isn't /pol/ guys pls stahp

>>35358772
>he thinks if he wagecucks hard enough he'll become rich

fucking lmao. the system is designed to steal your money through inflation and cost of living. you're a slave.

but sure bring up the red scare bullshit from the 70s you dumb twat.

File: trickle down.jpg (40KB, 599x466px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 599x466px

Trickle down means you get nothing.

>>35358846
I don't think I'll be rich I just think I'll be living a comfortable life in a country with one of the highest standards of living. So far it seems to be true. Unlike you who is just a lazy piece of shit and looking for a convenient excuse.

>>35358889
>battle cry of a wageslave in cognitive dissonance

damn you really wear the cuck badge proudly

Most developped countries are socialist based, america is a shithole and everybody knows that

File: IMG_0007.jpg (18KB, 183x275px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 183x275px

>>35358702

>this lazy post gets multiple responses because of how easy it is to refute

>>35358646

>this post doesn't get any responses because it's over alt-right man-babbys' heads and they aren't able to refute it

File: 1458126919301.gif (77KB, 172x200px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 172x200px

>>35358889

>L-LAZY GOY, GET BACK TO WORK! I DON'T HAND OUT THIS DAILY BOWL OF GRUEL TO HEAR COMPLAINTS!

File: 404.jpg (27KB, 460x385px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 460x385px

>>35358473
I disagree. I think for the most part, socialists just want to help poorer people, I think they have good intentions. Then you have those cunts who think anyone who is upper class should be taxed to oblivion. I don't mind paying for police/healthcare/fire brigades etc.(not schools though)

There is some fair criticisms to be made of capitalism, but in general, it works in more cases than socialism.

>>35358846
>he thinks if he wagecucks hard enough he'll become rich
As opposed to getting rich in a socialist country ? Nigger, my parents lived in a '''''communist''''' (socialist) country. They had no fucking chance to get rich, they were appointed jobs and had to be wageslaves for the rest of their lives before retiring. There was no fucking chance to become rich then just like it isn't in any other socialist country today.
If you're born poor the only chance you have is to wageslave enough so you can start your own business so at least you might be able to live without working even if you don't become rich. How is that easier to do in a socialist country where taxes are extremely fucking high ?

>>35359499

>More Communist vs. Capitalist false dichotomy

Nigger, there's WAY more options out there. Most nations are mixed anyways, meaning they're not purely capitalist.

>>35358646
I'm socialist but "progressive" taxation is retarded. The tax percentage should stay the same no matter how much you make. (Except for the impoverished). Someone with high income will still pay much more in taxes than someone with average income.

>>35359499
Haven't you heard tho? That wasn't REAL socialism? Real socialism is where I never have to work ever(not that I worked a day in my life mind you), and there's no social stigma attached to it. It's literal paradise.

>>35358473
>you are not entitled to someone else's hard-earned money... ever
But the rich are perfectly entitled to your labour, eh.
>the rich are not responsible for your financial situation... you are

>>35358646

>It means everyone chips in .05 as opposed to an individual having to spend 15,000 that they might have.

That sounds good, but you have to understand what happens. Firstly because it is easier people to pay companies who are affected by any kind of security net will raise there prices. This results to an increase in taxes. Secondly on something such as a social healthcare, people lose the incentive to work to take care of them selves since it is not going to be a burden on them as much. Rather it goes to the tax payer. 0.05$ directly towards that $15,000 purchase is nice. But after the changes in pricelevels and demand. it change to 0.10$ for $30,000.
(Insurance companies do the same thing)


>But you can have tax codes that reduce income inequality.
>That's why we have progressive taxation.

Problem is with that, people lose the incentive to work harder, progress, and earn more. (What is the point of working more, if the government ends up taking more).

> They do drugs, commit crimes.
Fallacy. Just look at hollywood and washington DC

> We give you a shit ton of goodies
This creates its own unique problem. Typically most countries reach a point and they can no longer raise taxes with out serious decreases in quality of life. But giving free people entiltements will very likely get people to vote for you. So if you can't raise taxes, but need to give out entitlements, the most common and often times only solution is to deficet spend.

Grecce is a good example of this.

>Often they [The rich] ARE.

I know I like to blame the jew; honestly everyone should have some sort of financhal responsibility. The Federal Reserve anounced that they will be raising intrest rates (3%), regardless of a persons income the wiset thing they could do would be to save there money and collect the little bit of money they can. If the rich can play there rigged system why can't you.

File: 1471787625353.jpg (81KB, 1200x758px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1200x758px

>>35358473
>Free does not actually mean free
Yes it does

>You are not entitiled to someone else's hard-earned money... ever
Strawman, but Yes I am, wagie

>You cannot tax a nation into prosperity
Another strawman

>The rich are not responsible ofr your financial situation... you are
Nope, that's my parents fault

>socialism leads to communism... always
and that's a bad thing?

I wanna smack the smug off of this wagies face

>>35359735
The day Trump cuts you and all the rest of the niggers off welfare will be the greatest day in American history. It's coming leech.

>>35358646
silly communist

File: GetImage.jpg (469KB, 2608x1952px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 2608x1952px

>>35358646
>Then, they turn around and say they should spend as little as possible after all these goodies they get, that they should spend as little taxes as possible. Those people are the moochers. Those people are the free loaders. They want a free ride on OUR society and they want US to pay for it, not them.
Never thought about it like that, but you're right.
The problem is that a country's government pretty much has to cave in. Let's take Germany. A huge part of its economy is in the automobile industry. If Germany said they tax the big shot CEO's of VW, BMW, and Daimler with 40% on their entire income (as they should be according to the law, i think, but rich people typically find ways to circumvent that), they'd take their businesses elsewhere and crash the whole economy.

>>35359610
reminder that conservatives are to money as feminists are to sex

>hurr you are not entitled to money!
>hurr you are not entitled to sex!

They also expect poor and ugly men to accept this unconditionally

>>35359241
Why not schools?

File: 1486580558029.jpg (151KB, 1000x640px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1000x640px

>>35359755
>Trump
Papa Trudeau looks after me

File: memes irl.jpg (137KB, 740x746px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 740x746px

>>35359787
Because if a curriculum is government approved, then the government can control what the next generation will think, for the most part. You can't really do that with other amenities.

>>35358473
There is no purely capitalist or socialist country on earth retard. If you live in a country that has taxes it's socialist to some extent.

Stop buying into strawmans made up by rich people to delude you.

>>35359558

>Someone with high income will still pay much more in taxes than someone with average income.

A 15% tax hits someone earning $30,000 a lot harder than it hits someone earning $30,000,000 though. That's why flat taxes are retarded and blatantly geared in favor of the wealthy elite.

>>35358473
>you cannot tax a nation into prosperity
That depends how you view tax. If you're a whiny little baby who thinks tax = theft, then you'll agree with that statement.
If you're someone with sense then you'll realise the important thing about tax is how the money is spent. Tax money allows a nation to upgrade its infrastructure. It allows a nation to invest more heavily into education, security and all sorts of things that leads to the nation becoming prosperous.

Tax is about chipping in to improve your country.

Keep in mind that all of what I said is thrown out the window in corrupt countries where tax money is wasted. Like every single country on earth.
The problem with that is capitalism.

>>35358473
Good goy, make sure to keep lining Mr. Steinberg'a pockets. After all, you're not selfish, are you?

>>35359808
Why is this pussy-lookin' bitch boi in charge of a country?

File: images.duckduckgo.com(7).jpg (122KB, 574x574px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 574x574px

>>35359950
But the wealthy and poor person get the same services from the government regardless of how much they pay. Why should a rich person, like myself pay more of my income for public utility than a poorfag?

>>35360060
Because if you don't armed men will come to your house and kidnap you and lock you in a big building with a bunch of other criminals like yourself.

>>35359991
>the problem with that is capitalism
loooooool
also you totally miss the point of that statement

>>35358633
>rig the economy and trick everyone so that they are the richest
>don't deserve their riches
Pick one.

>>35360060

Because it's your civic fucking duty you putz.

Amerilards are stupid, what else?

>>35359946
>muh middle ground
>what is workers' control of the means of production

I'm tired of these comments. Socialism not some attribute that exists on a sliding scale in relation to the tax rate.

>capitalist health care
>10 months waiting list
>meds cost $5000/year

>socialist health care
>2 months waiting list
>meds free

That's the only way I was impacted by either. Otherwise I don't care either way. Life is shit under either system, if you're a robot.

>>35360111
Nobody gets rich through hard work and ability. Those things may be involved but they're secondary. People get rich by being lucky. Like so many things in life it ultimately just comes down to luck.

Nobody deserves to be rich, rather the rich deserve to have their money taken and redistributed. Of course it's another question entirely as to whether they actually get what they deserve.

File: 17103513_1859711854285110_8892405902445930592_n.jpg (65KB, 755x682px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 755x682px

OPs meme is the best "I have no idea what socialism is" poster ever. Marx literally describes socialism as the stepping stone to communism.
This is what American regards who've never played attention to politics never understand.
It is truly the stupidest nation on earth.

File: Peron_gathering_vital_energy_from_the_masses.jpg (192KB, 640x458px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 640x458px

Peron 3rd position idea was kinda neat. True social justice (not bullshit identity politics), wellfare state and fair workers rights.
Too bad he was a populist demagogue and, in practice, his doctrine (applied by his corrupt followers) ruined his country.

>>35360060

>But the wealthy and poor person get the same services from the government regardless of how much they pay. Why should a rich person, like myself pay more of my income for public utility than a poorfag?

Because it's cheaper.

Private services are always more expensive. Under a public system everyone pays the same and everyone pays less.

Under a private system, half the people get nothing. Half get a shitty service that costs twice as much.

>>35360181
>nobody deserves to be rich
>everyone deserves to have money

You're so oblivious and closed minded it's not even funny.

>>35360110
Did I? So what was the point of the statement?

Corporations won't take responsibility for the infrastructure of a nation. The rich love to weedle their way out of paying tax.

>>35360187
Hey man show some sympathy, we're 10 decades into the most massive and most effective psychological warfare, mass manipulation, brainwashing a nation, mental controls in history. Literally everything around us is carefully designed to deceive and manipulate and we're subjected to it from birth. It's so effective most people don't even realize it, most people fervently defend their own brainwashing, their own status as tools. It can't be helped.

>>35358473
politicall discusion could be held at... I don't know >>>/pol/ maybe?

>>35360221
Nice ad hominem, great namecalling, very convincing.

Really gets the noggin joggin.

File: Flags_map_2012.png (351KB, 1280x635px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1280x635px

Can we have an anti-capitalist thread? i really love these.

>>35360230

>Except for me, I'm too smart to be manipulated. You're all puppets but I can see the strings

What does your own cum taste like, anyway?

>>35358633
Globalists and socialists are almost always the same thing, retard.

>>35360269
Never said I wasn't also subject to it you dumb fucking faggot frogposter.

>>35358646
>>The rich are not responsible for your financial situation.... you are
>Often they ARE. They're the ones pushing trade deals, cutting social spending

When is the right of inheritance going to get repealed?

>>35360263
There are way way way too many trolls on /r9k/ to ever have a reasonable conversation.

People will defend capitalism just to make you mad.

File: free-helicopter-the-only-free-policy-we-should-have-is-2623252.png (112KB, 500x542px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 500x542px

>>35360263
Might I interest you in a free ride, sir?

>>35360263
Kazakhstan is way bigger than I thought it was.

>>35358473
>Capitalism leads to slavery, poverty, low wages with little or no support from the government


>"HURRR SOCIALISM IS SELFISH"

Just fucking LOL, at all these NEET retards thinking they understand economics and that communism will totally work the 367842016th time that it has been tried and won't end up killing tens of millions of peoplelike all the other times it has been tried, but y'all too lazy and stupid to get a full time job working at McDonalds.

>>35360121
Socialism in the modern world doesn't entail the abolition of private property retard, the word has evolved since the 19th century. Contemporary usage refers the government taking responsiblity for social welfare.

>muh middle ground
There are more political systems than ancap and communist dictatorships, the majority of the world is currently living in them. Sorry your braindead black and white philosophy can't see them.

>>35360329
I thought kids were supposed to learn about shit like Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, and the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire in school so they're cautious of this kind of stuff, but apparently not.

Maybe it's just because I went to a nice all-white school.

File: index-1.png (114KB, 412x270px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 412x270px

>>35360380
>Capitalism NEVER failed unlike those filthy communists!

>>35360060
>But the wealthy and poor person get the same services from the government

This is incorrect

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBQ4MLodVKU

>>35360019
Liberalism is a mental illness. Any corrupt, communist, war mongering retard that doesn't understand economics can ride to the top of the political party.

The further left a political party is, the shitter it gets. The Democrat party will never fix itself, if they were smart enough to do that, they'd become conservative.

>>35360380

>People dying from capitalism is more quiet and not talked about in capitalist society for obvious reasons so I'm going to bring up the price in human life of communism and win the argument! It's just that simple! People DIE!

Every time.

>>35360508
He didn't say that, shitforbrains. Did you get your high school diploma, or flunk out?

>>35360694
He pointed out on the failures on Communist countries. It was only right to point of Capitalist failures as well, which does fail a lot of times

both socialism and capitalism can fail. the only problem is that the liberal left and the kikes have corrupted socialism and marxism into their own little selfish System

File: 1441850642248.jpg (207KB, 508x580px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 508x580px

>>35360631
Fuck off to europe if you like socialism so much. I hear they're doing great. The US is dropping military support of several NATO countries, since they have much more important socialist things to spend taxes on than national defense, and they wouldn't appreciate our help anyway.

>>35358473
When I was 7 years old. Having the best grades in school and getting grounded because others act like tards and "you're all getting punished to teach you to be a team" redpills you at an early age.

>>35360808
If capitalism was so good and so strong, then why do countries keep trying to be socialist?

Checkmate.

File: 1475288818070.jpg (80KB, 825x631px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 825x631px

Bernie Sanders, a fine example of socialists.

File: tears.jpg (63KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 633x758px

>>35360835
When I was 7 years old, momma told me to go make some friends or I'll be lonely.
>tfw she was right

that's not socialism, that's welfare capitalism. actual socialism is collectivist which means you have to care about everyone not just yourself.
>ohh le not REAL socialism XDDD
not a fugging argument.

Look you autists,

You can be for a progressive tax, anti-free trade, and pro labor unions and still be for a capitalist free-enterprise system.

Enough of this Libertarian "Free Market" will fix everything autism

File: socialism.gif (1MB, 800x667px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x667px

>>35360932
Liberalism may be a mental illness, but it's part of human nature. Every country in the world is plagued by it. Witnessing a poor person unable to afford cancer treatment, seeing someone get shot by a gun, etc. creates a new liberal.

Thankfully real life counters this. As people get older, and experience the failures of socialism, they become conservative. Ever wonder why old people always vote more conservative than young people? It's been that way with every generation.

>>35361146
That's just boomers. They vote conservative because they want to keep everything for themselves. When they were young, they wanted everything so they voted socialist so they could get a bit of everything for free. Now that they're old and have everything, they vote conservative so they can keep it.

>>35359499
Ever heard of that little country named Germany?

File: Canada Supreme Court.jpg (182KB, 686x604px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 686x604px

>>35361146
Getting mugged or shot at gunpoint/knifepoint. Getting angry it's illegal to carry weapons for self defense, yet criminals still do and are emboldened by the unarmed victims. Getting arrested for hate speech for saying unpopular facts. Witnessing someone die waiting for an xray through national healthcare. Traveling to a country without free healthcare for better care. Gibsmedats growing and bankrupting the nation, and being abused by millions. The government restricting freedoms and making your life a living hell. These things redpill you, create new conservatives. Old people are majority conservative.

>>35358473
>You are not entitled to someone else's hard earned money... EVER
Can someone please tell this to all the people who extract value through ownership please?

>>35361280
Republicans want to end, or change and cut back social security and medicare. Boomers get money from it, but will still vote conservative. Gibsmedats aren't the only reason they vote republican. They also care about keeping their freedoms, guns, oil industry.

>>35361356
wut? are you comparing gibsmedats to owning a business? One is doing something and getting money in return, the other does nothing and gets money.

Ownership of some things are easy and almost require nothing to make money. Like owning a big business, or renting out a house. Though they'll lose it if they delegate the work to someone else and let them run it into the ground.

>>35358473
JUST A REMINDER:

TODAY'S POVERTY IS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE STATE REGULATION OF THE MARKET. IF THE MARKET WAS FREE, POVERTY WOULD BE ALMOST NON-EXISTENT.

MONOPOLIES ONLY EXIST BECAUSE THEY RECEIVE ALL SORTS OF STATE AID.

COMPANIES CAN ONLY EXPLOIT THE MARKET IF THEY ARE ULTIMATELLY AIDED BY THE STATE'S MILLITARY POWER.

>>35358473
Commies annoy me if they're college kids with "who gives a shit about money" majors like Sociology, which they generally are.

>>35358473
Libertarians are the reason the 2008 recession happened. Can't wait for the 2019 recession so we can once again rekt these niggers

File: 1462816665145.jpg (13KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 250x250px

>all the pinkos in this thread
>not being a Eco-Authoritarian Moralist with Peronist or National Syndicalist economic ideology

It's like you want to have a bad opinion.

>>35360508
Thats not a failure, just a really bad economic down turn. if anything the depression was extended by FDR's socialist policies.

>>35361665
>IF THE MARKET WAS FREE, POVERTY WOULD BE ALMOST NON-EXISTENT.
Do you have one single sensible thought to back this idea up?

A truly free market would only lead to greater extremes, a greater divide between rich and poor.
There would be slaves, definitely. A true free market would have slavery. So there would be a substantial amount of people who are deemed even too worthless to be slaves. Those people would be forced underground.

>>35361782
>A truly free market would only lead to greater extremes, a greater divide between rich and poor.
NO. THE ECONOMY IS NOT A ZERO-SUM GAME. WEALTH CAN BE CREATED.

>>35361782
A regulated market =/= socialism.

Wealth Re-distribution = Socialism.

File: GettyImages-3246323-E.jpg (161KB, 686x385px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 686x385px

>>35361665
Son of a bitch American capitalist.

I will BUST your TRUST!

Boss Tweed GO TO HELL!!!

File: jfc.png (45KB, 792x386px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 792x386px

>>35360383
>Socialism in the modern world doesn't entail the abolition of private property

The ideology is strong with this one.

>>35361803
>WEALTH CAN BE CREATED.
Correct. Economies expand all the time as more people are born, more resources are used, and more land is created or better allocated.

>>35358473
You know what's ironic? This guy is supposed to be a lumberjack or some other manual laborer. Lumberjacks have some of the highest suicide rates in the world with construction and factory workers following closely behind. They are literally The wage cuck meme brought to life

>>35358473
after i took the capitalist bluepill and received severe brain damage

>>35361833
IN A FREE MARKET LAND AND RESOURCES CAN ONLY BE HELD BY PRODUCTIVE HANDS. UNPRODUCTIVE LANDS AND RESOURCES ARE RENTED OR SOLD.BECAUSE IN THE LONG RUN THEY'RE TOO EXPENSIVE TO BE MAINTAINED. THE MARKET MAKES LAND MORE HOMOGENEOUSLY DISTRIBUTED.

Here's some simple logic.

IF there was an objectively better system, you fuckers wouldn't be here arguing all the time.

There are millions of people living under all kinds of governments systems.

If one system was objectively better, everyone would want that one particular system.

>>35361665
>reality conflicts with the model, are we wrong?
>no, it is because we're not pure enough

if there's a finite amount of a resource, how is another company supposed to compete when the company holding a monopoly controls it all.

>>35361920
BECAUSE THERE ARE NO MONOPOLIES IN A FREE MARKET IF THEY DON'T PROVIDE THE BEST COST-BENEFIT FOR THE CONSUMERS. THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM BUT A GREAT THING.

>>35361917
There are systems which are objectively better for everyone.

However, our current system is better for the rich people who control it.

Do you understand the difference?

Disregarding the wellness of the people as a whole in favor of personal wealth.

>>35360276
They're also capitalists, tool. It's called playing both sides.

>>35361917
European social democracy. That is, in comparison to what the people who'd post something like this would prefer.

>>35361944
>However, our current system is better for the rich people who control it.

ONLY BECAUSE THESE RICH PEOPLE ARE AIDED BY THE STATE THAT RIGS THE MARKET.

>>35361944

You said nothing that was false.

My point is, different people want different economic systems because they would benefit differently from them.

So even if everyone was 100% well informed about how each economic system treats them, there would still be a disagreement over which system should be implemented.

>>35361937
you're assuming consumers have perfect knowledge of the market an all options. this is obviously not true. shitty companies and products succeed all the time.

>>35361937
>what are cartels
>what is predatory pricing
>what is patent abuse

You come across as a 14-year old who just discovered Ayn Rand. Please kill yourself you waste of oxygen.

>>35361955

The difference between the US and the EU is the proportion of the middle class.

If you Americans had a larger middle class your government would start working like ours.

That's the only difference.

If we have lots of billionaires and lots of poor people, our welfare states would be eliminated immediately.

>>35362040
THE CONSUMERS ARE FREE TO MAKE THEIR CHOICES AND OBVIOUSLY CHEAPER AND BETTER PRODUCTS ARE ALWAYS GOING TO SUCCEED NO MATTER HOW MUCH PYSOPS ARE YOU IMPLING.
>>35362058
>what are cartels
>what is predatory pricing
>what is patent abuse
ALL THOSE ARE BYPRODUCT OF STATE REGULATION OF THE MARKET AND ARE COUNTERED BY FREE COMPETITION.

>>35361937
Well actually no, they can form in a free market. It is true today most monopolies are created by government contracts or patents. But look at Standard Oil back in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Standard Oil bought out most of it's competition, and once Rockefeller bought out everybody who was willing, he simply lowered his prices so that way nobody could compete with him, and they went out of business. Rockefeller made Standard Oil a monopoly trough legitimate means.

>>35362102
>>35361959
>>35361937
>>35361890
Either fix you CAPSLOCK button or go back to [S4S] your wasting space.

>>35362112
>he simply lowered his prices so that way nobody could compete with him, and they went out of business. Rockefeller made Standard Oil a monopoly trough legitimate means.
AND WHAT'S BAD ABOUT THAT?
>>35362131
NO.

>>35362064
It's tough because immigration is so huge in the US. I'm talking 1-2 million people each year. A significant portion of people are immigrants, it's like 10-15% of the total population. That kind of immigration makes it really difficult and expensive to implement social welfare.

>>35362163
Second generation immigrants have low birth rates and add to our economy. Even in the age of basic income we can have immigration. In fact there will provably be basic income in every country

>>35362162
AND WHAT'S BAD ABOUT THAT?

Well, for one higher pricess for consumer. Not even Rockefeller or Bill Gates in the 90s couldn't charge ridiculous prices because the market still has control over you.

Secondly, if only one firm is in control of a part of the market. There is no reason to have superior goods. So there is a bit of regression or stagnation in the quality of goods.

Now I am anti-socialist, but I do belive in minimal regulations. One of which would be to break up monopolies and oligopolies once they control too much of the market so that way this doesn't happen.

>>35361833
>more resources are used
Resources are finite. As more resources are extracted and used, extraction becomes more expensive and time-consuming. How are you going to create wealth forever like that?

>>35362102
>implying that government intervention can't prevent monopolies from forming

Posting it in all caps doesn't make it any more true.

Government isn't necessary for any of those things. If you beg to differ, prove me wrong.

>>35362255
Better allocation of resources. Weather harvested, recycled, or used more efficiency. There is an upper limit, but I think we are at least a few centuries away from that upper limit.

File: anarchy.jpg (36KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 1920x1080px

>left side promotes equality and unity between people but inhibits development due to corruption
>right side promotes development but creates elitism where money = power
Why isn't anyone edgy enough to want complete chaos? Y'all want to secure your lifespan even if it means to cage yourself with a job doing the same shit over and over.
Why not do something fun? Something that may risk your life? Fight for your survival, make gangs, or shoot those assholes who deserve it.

Instead everybody wants to stay in the loop of working, acquiring money, for the sole purpose of feeling good with that paycheck. People would rather inhibit their full freedom just so they can live longer because "muh instincts".
A short happy life is better than a long and depressing one.

>inb4 that destroys development of humanity
Is that a bad thing or what? The world is shit as it is. At least make it funner.

>>35358473

>you are not entitled to someone else's hard-earned money

Why do I get it then?

>>35358473
I'm a libertarian and the fifth point isnt completely correct. Scandinavian socialism is far different than Venezuelan.

>>35358473
>5 THING CAPITALISTS WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND

1: Wage slavery is the freedom to choose your master. Nothing more.

2: Collecting the fruits of another man's labor, paying him a pittance, and living like a king may occasionally involve effort, but it doesn't indicate that you've "earned" or "produced" anything.

3: You cannot at once pay your employees too little to reproduce, complain about the very taxation that allows your employees to reproduce their class with those wages, and complain that employing people to produce things in your country costs too much.

4: Capitalism's eternal drive to maximize the takings of the capitalist class, while minimizing "costs" (read: wages) is DIRECTLY responsible for the financial situations of working class people. It's also directly responsible for abysmal educational quality, which capitalists eternally lament, since it forces them to offer the few people who succeed in spite of it rather "generous" compensatory packages like a living wage.

5: Unchecked capitalism ALWAYS reduces the living standards of working people in the long term, until their lives become absolutely unbearable. This results in revolutionary organization of the working class, unionization, and if unionization fails to produce an amenable class collaboration in the nation state, communist revolution.

>>35362250
>Well, for one higher pricess for consumer. Not even Rockefeller or Bill Gates in the 90s couldn't charge ridiculous prices because the market still has control over you.
YOU SAID LOWER PRICES IN YOUR PREVIOUS POST AND THAT'S GOOD FOR THE CONSUMER.
>Secondly, if only one firm is in control of a part of the market. There is no reason to have superior goods. So there is a bit of regression or stagnation in the quality of goods.
THIS ONLY HAPPENS IF THEY ARE ADIED BY THE STATE OF IF ITS A FREE MARKET AND THEY ARE THE BEST POSSIBLE OPTION FOR THE CONSUMER AND THAT'S ONLY GOOD.
>Now I am anti-socialist, but I do belive in minimal regulations. One of which would be to break up monopolies and oligopolies once they control too much of the market so that way this doesn't happen.
I AM FOR NO MARKET REGULATIONS BECAUSE I BELIEVE BAD MONOPOLIES ONLY EXIST BECAUSE OF STATE AIDING.

STANDARD OIL'S DUMPING DIDN'T WORK AND IT HAD TO BE AIDED BY THE STATE IN THE END.

>>35362266
>implying that government intervention can't prevent monopolies from forming
ARE YOU AGREEING WITH ME? I SAID THAT IT'S THE GOVERNMENT THAT ENABLES TODAY'S MONOPOLIES WITH REGULATIONS.

>>35362391
Exact opposite, bruv. Regulation can stem the advent of monopolies.

>>35362445
MONOPOLIES THAT ARE NOT FORMED WITH THE STATE'S AID ARE GOOD BECAUSE THEY ARE PROVIDING CONSUMERS WITH THE BEST COST-BENEFIT AND THEY CAN ONLY EXIST FOR LONG BECAUSE OF THAT.

File: CAPSLOCK.jpg (109KB, 546x540px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 546x540px

>>35362360
God that is fucking hard to read.

Lower prices are good for consumers, but bad for firms. Monoploies almost allways provide high prices for consumers.

Less consumer spending = Lower GDP

The state needs no place to be able to say who dictates that market, that happens on its own, but it can be aided by the state. As with the case of ISP providers, Electircal and Water Companies, Monsanto, and Pharmaceuticals.

Well i am sure not all monopolies are bad, but I think they hurt the free market. They lower opportunities and have less variety.

>>35362482
I guess, but if someone wants to enter the market, they got to be able to compete with existing monopoly.

>>35362515
>Monoploies almost allways provide high prices for consumers.
ONLY IF THEY ARE AIDED BY THE STATE. IF THEY HAVE HIGHER PRICES AND ANOTHER FIRM COMES WITH LOWER PRICES THEY ARE NOT A MONOPOLY ANYMORE AND ARE ONLY LOSING PLACE.
>I guess, but if someone wants to enter the market, they got to be able to compete with existing monopoly.
YES. THAT'S COMPETITION. IF THEY CAN'TY DO BETTER THEY LOSE. IF THEY'RE BETTER THEY HOLD PLACE. NOT ALL COMPANIES WILL WIN BUT THE ONES WHO WIN IN A FREE MARKET ARE PROVIDING PEOPLE WITH THE CHEAPEST GOODS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE STATE TO AID THEN IF THEY WANT TO PUT THEIR PRICES HIGHER. NOTHING BAD ABOUT THAT.

>>35358473

Explain to me why I shouldn't vote for and use the government to take money forcibly from the rich and distribute it to everyone else. Why shouldn't i do that? Because it hurts their wittle baby fee fees and we should just let them have vastly more than everyone else?
Because it's "moral" to let them earn money off of everyone else and live extravagant lives while people starve and struggle?

There is no logical argument why I can't vote to enrich myself using the government. That's democracies flaw, deal with it. When the poor outnumber the rich, we will eat you. If you dare argue against me, I will threaten you and beat you up for being a far-right nazi fascist.

>>35361345
>experiences shitty parts of the present make you want to protect the status quo

File: Black and Yellow Pill.png (339KB, 691x1070px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 691x1070px

>>35362587
YOUR JUST PURE SHITPOSTING AT THIS POINT. SO JUST HAVE AN OC ANCAP-MEME.

>>35362600
because there's people who value freedom and won't let a leftist government dictate how they live their lives.

>>35362687
DON'T YOU HAVE ANY ARGUMENTS?
BYE BYE.

>>35358473
Yep...you see it in black and white like that... you do that!!

>>35362690

Then they should move. If we allow them that is.

>>35362716
BYE BYE, you don't even have arguments. Your just saying X is because of State. Even if the example you used doesn't work. Go back to /pol/ or /s4s/.

>>35362778
GO BACK TO /LEFTYPOL/. POOR RAID.

>>35362687
you got btfo. my sides.

>>35361827
>"owned OR REGULATED by the community"
>MUH DICTIONARY
Google feminism why don't you. Most of western european governments self identify as at least somewhat socialist, all have private industry.

Playing a definitions games is pointless anyway. If people in the modern day who identify as socialist don't want Karl Marx's extreme pre-communist state but rather the government taking larger role in societal welfare, then that's what socialism in a modern context will mean. If you go around claiming people believe in things that they don't the only ideological one is you. That's just strawmanning, plain and simple.

>>35362788
Dude I am a far right miniarchist. Fuck socialism and anything more left than 1 unit right of the Y axis.

>you are not entitled to someone else's money ever
wait what?

did the creator of this image not live in a country that has any form of taxation?

>>35362587
>monopoly owns every single aspect of the production of a product and owns all the materials on the planet to make said product effectively making it impossible for a competitor to exist and even if one comes about, they'll just buy them out to stomp it out
>b-b-b-b-but the free market and prices will be corrected by c-c-c-c-competition

Libertarians are philosophical infants that spew diaherea from their food chute. Literally a little baby political idea that is self-contradictory. Only retarded fat virgins spout it. Which is why the majority of 4chan and reddit are libertarian. Because their dumb and don't work or understand the world.

And libertarians are usually the most insufferable people, like their little toddler ideology explains everything and they have to go on top of their box to preach it every second. Meanwhile in the real world and in a real debate, libertarians always lose and are made to be the fools that they are. Keep eating shit faggot

>>35362934
>monopoly owns every single aspect of the production of a product and owns all the materials on the planet to make said product
when has this ever happened?

>>35359728
>That sounds good, but you have to understand what happens. Firstly because it is easier people to pay companies who are affected by any kind of security net will raise there prices. This results to an increase in taxes.
Dubious, because the government has MUCH more market power than individual consumers. They can negotiate bulk discounts.

>Secondly on something such as a social healthcare, people lose the incentive to work to take care of them selves since it is not going to be a burden on them as much.
A theoretical problem, but is there any actual evidence of it occurring?

>Problem is with that, people lose the incentive to work harder, progress, and earn more. (What is the point of working more, if the government ends up taking more).
Whether or not the government ends up taking more, working more still makes you richer. Anyway, there's too much of an emphasis on incentive; opportunity is far more likely to be the limiting factor.

>Fallacy. Just look at hollywood and washington DC
Hold your horses! Before you start labelling it a fallacy, look at the difference between Hollywood and DC:: both have plenty of drugs, but people in Hollywood are far more likely to commit crimes to fund the drugs.

>This creates its own unique problem. Typically most countries reach a point and they can no longer raise taxes with out serious decreases in quality of life. But giving free people entiltements will very likely get people to vote for you.
Then why don't we see much more of these policies.

>So if you can't raise taxes, but need to give out entitlements, the most common and often times only solution is to deficet spend.
Few if any countries couldn't raise taxes. Deficit spending is a different issue - currently the amount of deficit spending in most countries is irresponsibly low; in this stage of the economic cycle it should be much higher in order to support economic growth (though at other stages of the economic cycle surpluses are preferable.

>>35362977

When has a free market existed?

>>35358646
This is the right response

Just kys op

>>35359728 (continued)
>Grecce is a good example of this.
Greece was a good example of that, but more recently it's been a good example of a country that's suffering economically because it surrendered its financial sovereignty.

>I know I like to blame the jew; honestly everyone should have some sort of financhal responsibility. The Federal Reserve anounced that they will be raising intrest rates (3%), regardless of a persons income the wiset thing they could do would be to save there money and collect the little bit of money they can. If the rich can play there rigged system why can't you.
The rich play the rigged system by borrowing more - after all, 3% isn't very much.

>>35363030

Exactly exactly precisely this. Communism is the only logical choice. Literally kill yourself OP, there is no argument you can make to counter the iron clad arguments of the iron curtain.

Deal with it.

>tfw too intelligent to be a little right wing piss baby

Far left all the way.

>>35362997
>A theoretical problem, but is there any actual evidence of it occurring?
One example could be the higher smoking rates through europe. Plus look at all of the body positive people supporting universal health care. Its a weak support, but it just an observation.

>look at the difference between Hollywood and DC:: both have plenty of drugs, but people in Hollywood are far more likely to commit crimes to fund the drugs.

I was actually trying to allude to pizza gate, scandals, and corruption.

>Then why don't we see much more of these policies.
We do. Most Bernie supporters would fall into this trap. Greece is an example of an end-product.

>currently the amount of deficit spending in most countries is irresponsibly low
Well not the USA it is not, and the majority of our spending is coming from social spending and Medicaid.

>>35363002
How does that answer my question?
this is an original comment

>>35363065
The rich play the rigged system by borrowing more - after all, 3% isn't very much.

Its not, but lets say between now and 2019 when the rates will change. If I am working minimum wage and I store some percentage in the bank. Over time I should be able to get around the equivalent of a paycheck or two.
(Assuming you have enough capital to save)

>>35363163
>hey, don't prove my illogical political beliefs wrong because it's never happened before, why not try it?
>a global interconnected economy where the rich are richer than entire nations won't be able to monopolize all markets and all production
>it won't happen because it hasn't happened yet

Literally the logic of a 3 year old girl. Choke yourself

>>35362855
Relying on an indexical term like ''larger'' makes it even more vague. If that's the road you want to go down then why can't ''regulated'' refer to any regulation? Suddenly all historic governments have been socialist. Remember, the welfare state was invented by the bourgeois.

Words changing their meaning is a process that takes time. That's why otherkin can't be described as the animals they identify as, why agnostics are still either atheist/theist, and why modern social democracy is distinct from (democratic) socialism.

Ideological purity is a chimera. This doesn't preclude the formulation of a practical definition that resists being obscured by plebs like you.

>>35360263


that's an awfully big red sea

>>35363243
Who are you quoting?

originalo

File: 7f6fe47c-2f40-497f-9307-0ab996799afd.jpg (219KB, 1280x736px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1280x736px

never had an epiphany, basically always knew it was garbage, first because of growing up next to entitled commie neighbors and then figuring out socialism is the same "lets make things equal by taking from you to make up for my own inadequacy and lazyness" bullshit but just on a larger scale.

The real shocking redpill was realizing that the concept of statism is entirely illegitimate as well.

File: 5fa.png (320KB, 680x365px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 680x365px

>>35360113
Good goy

You get a gold star

>>35360099
>not paying more taxes than I should
>criminal

I bet you think rape is justified too

>>35359241
You dont mind paying for cops and firefighters, but I do. Buy your own cops and firefighters and hospitals and all the other "essential services", but dont send IRS goons to extort money from me to pay for stuff you want and think everyone should have. I wont complain if my house burns down because I havent paid for fire protection services, but i will complain if you force me to pay for YOUR safety.

>>35360207
Under a public service everyone gets shitty service that costs twice as much.
>le free Canada Healthcare meme

>>35359808
>hes proud to be led by a fucking cuck
>hes proud to be a fucking *leaf*
cant wait till we nuke and subsequently annex canada

>>35361665
You can't have a free market, because free doesn't actually mean free.

taxes are retarded

I'd rather have privately owned roads and police

File: 1601266 - Anna Elsa Frozen Shadman.jpg (645KB, 900x1273px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 900x1273px

>>35361356
>I save $50,000
>buy equipment and materials
>pay other people to use materials and equipment to produce goods
>pay them what was agreed upon
>pay other people to sell these goods to other people
>I'm the bad guy because I took the risk to start a company

>>35363135
>One example could be the higher smoking rates through europe.
But not all of Europe - Denmark has a lower smoking rate than the USA. More importantly, so do Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

>Plus look at all of the body positive people supporting universal health care. Its a weak support, but it just an observation.
I don't understand what you mean there.

>I was actually trying to allude to pizza gate, scandals, and corruption.
Why would you want to allude to that fake news? Surely even on 4chan, most people know that "pizza" really does mean food in most contexts, including the one involving Hillary Clinton.

>We do. Most Bernie supporters would fall into this trap.
More likely you're miscategorizing the opinions of the people you disagree with.

>Greece is an example of an end-product.
Pre GFC Greece was arguably an end product, though in financially sovereign countries the effects would be very different, with devaluing (but NOT collapsing) currencies. But the conditions in present day Greece are very different, and are the result of being stuck in the Euro and being denied the investment capital needed.

>Well not the USA it is not,
Without full employment it probably is, unless you can argue that the country's prioritizing dealing with inflation (which is not credible in this case as America's inflation rate's been very low for nearly a decade). Meanwhile your infrastructure's being neglected.

>and the majority of our spending is coming from social spending and Medicaid.
When your idiots in congress force your country to neglect infrastructure spending, something has to make up the majority. And if you'd run a bigger deficit sooner, you'd've got the private sector to recover sooner, meaning you wouldn't've needed as much social spending.