wong knows what is what. bye bye bank account too if you disagree. Can't associate with the racist subhuman race. Than means eviction too, landlord doesn't take cash crypto or dicksuck. Maybe dicksuck is a good tender soon, idk.
"People say that poverty is bad, but in fact poverty is good. The poorer people are, the more revolutionary they are. It is dreadful to imagine a time when everyone will be rich." - Mao
They certainly have to lie but the contradictions are a result of the stupidity of the ideology rather than intentional. Intentional contradictions imply they can be coherent and make sense at the drop of a dime. (Narrator: They can't).
Yeah, I guess we can pity liberals and commies to the extent they are stupid, or weak, or radicalized by media and socialist politcians, or victims of persuasive propaganda, unable to accept responsibililty for the breathtaking hypocrisy inherent in their chosen ideology.
At the same time if I ask myself, did I deliberately intend to be a conservative/libertarian? the answer is no. It just rings true and right, without the slightest effort, question, or doubt. It's like, of COURSE free enterprise, free markets, USA, and Trump. Of course NOT the screaming hate-left and their seething racist brigades on the news, brimming with menace and open anti-American animus. My choice to be on the right isn't intentional so much as organic, just as I didn't intend to like the music I like. I suspect leftoids are in the same boat (only theirs is sinking :)
It's not perfect, but it's the best economic engine this world has seen yet. And it drives scientific advancement. Which allows for better solutions to world problems.
Nothing is perfect because we have limited resources. Capitalism is the closest thing you can get to perfect because over the long run resourses will flow to those who can be most productive with them. Socialism doesn't have this feature, and is accepted by a bunch a LOW IQ blobs who have no creativity because it was beaten out of them by government employees at public school.
Not a big fan of that quote. It's cynical and assumes the whole goal in all our minds is to screw other over. That the only way to get ahead is to screw someone else. Not the case. Are socialist states not trying to screw people over? I don't understand his thinking.
When people say "Capitalism can't feed the hungry." I first make the point that capitalism HAS fed hungry people and I then ask them to define what a reasonable poverty metric is for any economic ideology to be successful. It always falls apart, like Al Sharpton when Sharpton was asked by a Fox News anchor to define what a good tax rate is for the "rich." Sharpton says "15%", proving he knew nothing about what he was talking about because the rich were paying a higher rate than that at the time. Of course, Sharpton had no inward reflection because Sharpton doesn't argue from a place of good intentions.
Monopolies likely aren't a stable state if they aren't able to gain regulatory capture. Part of monopolies thriving is their ability to hold new entrants into a market at arms length.
They also use their ability to lobby for special perks and push for ways to undermined competition.
Example, pushing for Government Sponsored Free Trade. At the same time increasing costs internally so smaller companies cannot compete. Then using that as a cover to ship out manufacturing jobs and importing white collar workers from the third world.
The cosument argument from "Free Trade proponents" is that its a good thing, that the new jobs would replace the old ones. Except they forget to tell you that these companies will lobby and lie stating that "There are not enough Americans that can do X job so we need foreign workers" "Americans will not do this job" and my favorite "STEM students in the US are far too low, we need to invest in STEM. In the meantime lets import foreign workers". These companies who profit off of free trade often argue to the death that its good.
I agree on all points, I think those are great examples of the dangers of monopolies.
My point was that monopolies are largely a creation of the regulatory capture. Without it the barriers for new competitors would be much lower and the ability for large companies to fuck over employees or customers would be much lower.
I'm just adding to that point, regulation capture is one key. Propaganda to keep the public on your side is the other.
These monopolies move their money around when there's threats. They fund both sides of the isle and fund think tanks that mask as part of the one side.
Democrats like big business because it forces reliance on government. RINOs love big business because they can make a quick buck on the stock market. Capturing Regulation (as you said) and feeding propaganda to keep that regulation capture is key to keep monopolies going in the current age.
You can regulate capitalism to ensure competition - but there is no way to regulate Marxism beyond the family level so that it works.
FWIW I think the right needs to talk more about Marxism and less about Communism. As Communism is just one method of achieving the Marxist goal. Hitler and China used/use fascism just as much as they do communism. It's all about fucking up the rich - leveling the playing field by breaking everyone's knees.
That's what this lockdown is doing - breaking everyone's knees except for the big companies which are in league with fascists.
but there is no way to regulate Marxism beyond the family level so that it works.
I've always thought this too. And I'm a bit surprised it doesn't come up in discussions more.
According to Price's Law, the square root of a group will do the the majority of the work. For instance, I live in a household of four people. My wife and I do most of the work.
In a small company of a hundred people, ten of the people will do most of the work. I saw this in my last company: there were about ten people who were making the big sales, making a name for the company, the glue that held everyone else together. This is why the loss of one or two great employees can be devastating for a small company, but isn't even a "blip" at a huge company. And it's why the number one talent of someone in a small company is the ability to amplify the productivity of the people around them.
Marxism breaks down because of Price's Law. For instance, in a country of 5.8 million, like Denmark, 2410 people will be doing most of the work. That's 0.04% of their population. Or to put it another way, one out of 2406 people in Denmark will be producing most of Denmark's output. Denmark is probably about the limit where Marxist policies can work.
But in the United States, with 328 million people, 18,116 people will be doing most of the work. That's 0.005% of the population. Or to put it another way, one out of 18,105 people will be producing most of the USA's output. And that's why Marxism is unsustainable in a place the size of the US: 18,116 people can't generate enough money to pay for all the rest. If the US was broken down into Denmark-sized pieces, some socialist policies might be tenable. But it would only be possible if you set up large barriers to entry, so that people couldn't just migrate to whoever had the most optimum policies.
Bernie Sanders certainly understood this: you can combine Marxism and open borders. Marxism fundamentally works only in small sets of people, with high barriers to entry. Sanders probably figured this out when living on a commune.
"Bernie Sanders certainly understood this: you can combine Marxism and open borders. Marxism fundamentally works only in small sets of people, with high barriers to entry. Sanders probably figured this out when living on a commune."
If Bernie Sanders understands this, why is he trying to apply it on a federal level?
It doesn't matter because even with closed borders, socialism is going to fall apart with 330 million people. Socialism only works in units as small as families. At the absolute best, perhaps a neighborhood can be quasi-socialist. Now when you get to the city/town level, you're asking for a lot.
Yes. And I think that China's current situation is a great example of that. China is spending money like a drunken sailor. Which is reasonable if there's a huge demand for what they're spending money on.
But in a lot of cases, it's not.
For instance, China is currently building a bridge in Croatia, to the tune of millions of dollars, which replaces a stretch of road that's perfectly usable. They've also spent billions on empty shopping malls and empty cities.
But there are so many people out there conditioned to believe that they have a right to you giving them a fish every day because feelings. We could solve so many problems by buying Greenland and putting welfare queens, feminists, the far left, BLM, hate crime fakers, etc. on that island and letting them go Lord of the Flies on each other.
Also remember than their reaction to this virus is EXACTLY what they've been trying to do with Climate Alarmism. They've fear mongered the younger population into thinking the world will literally be a giant fireball in 10 years. And now that we've seen how people willingly give up their constitutional rights out of fear it should make a lot of sense why they push climate fear mongering so hard.
Fear gets people to think irrationally and the left takes advantage of it to grow their power. It's no different with school shooting as well. Notice how it all surrounds itself around scaring you into thinking you'll be dead?
Fear makes people behave irrationally and makes them easier to manipulate.
Those who would seek to manipulate therefore despise anything that helps people deal with their fear in a meaningful way.
Thus the hatred of individual achievement in any sense, such as sports, physical fitness... anything where an individual overcomes adversity through effort.
I keep telling everyone that being told where we can go, when we can work, what stores we can shop at is just a small taste of what socialism/communism is all about. Just add in being murdered for Independent thought and you have arrived.
Communists are so vengeful about their failure to outperform capitalism's success that they'll intentionally cause a global economic collapse simply for revenge.
The head of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom, is a member of not one, but two Ethiopian communist parties. Do you think all of his bad moves were made in good faith? Do you think he's just an idiot? No friend, he did it all on purpose. The more people who die, the longer the lockdowns last, the happier he will be.
Whatever happened to "for the happiness of all mankind" as a Communist motto? No, now it is "for the dignity of the party, even though it is dead."
If we only had teachers that taught history instead of socialist doctrine our children would know that we already tried socialism once and it was catastrophic. It was called the Mayflower Compact and the entire colony was almost entirely wiped out because of the “union” philosophy. Once capitalism was instituted they suddenly survived quite efficiently. Go figure!
What we are experiencing now is decades of “union” teachers. Remember Khrushchev said he would destroy us without firing a shot. We aren’t learning very much from our history.
People in the US don't die of starvation. People go hungry sure, but without some other serious issue (usually abuse of a vulnerable person or drug use) it doesn't lead to death. Look this one up: it warms the heart.
Military rations are eaten by the general public for fun. They're really not bad. Ya'll know what pemmican is? Hardtack?
Everyone I know owns multiple pairs of shoes. My grandmother was one of the first one in her family that got a pair of shoes before she got a job. (By the way, this is where the whole "barefooted hillbilly" thing comes from.)
... And life is so good we don't even notice these things. Think about the wealth and prosperity around you, and understand from a historical perspective none of this would even have been conceivable by the average person. We spend so much time bitching about flying cars that we forget what the world used to be like as recently as our grandparent's generation.
Maria Bartiromo was just talking about the problem that at this point in time, many people are making more money on unemployment than they did working. Will that be a disincentive to return to work?
My region of PA returns to work on Friday. I think people need to realize that extra unemployment money is only temporary!
The US dollar having it's current value is only temporary too if stimulus spending continues. Hyperinflation is real. This money isn't coming out of thin air. It's not going to be very much fun when the cost of basic goods doubles in a year or two and people see the value of their savings cut in half.
That how socialism works though. Seduce people with short term freebies while the floor falls from under them.
Yep what these ass hats dont understand is that even though the worlds wealth is owned by a small group of billionaires the rest of us still live better and in better conditions than kings ever did 150years ago.
Imagine telling a king that the poorest people 100 years from his time would be able to be living in air conditioned homes that they can order food from any culture and it's brought to them directly, their entertainment is available at their finger tips, and that they can travel the world and be on one side of the planet in a few hours. I mean I can go on and on with the technology advances and thats because of Capitalism and liberty Only. Protestant Christianity and the American Constitution truly allowed mankind to flourish. Without both of these the world becomes dark and boring and less advanced.
An open mind will eventually arrive at the conclusion that Capitalism is the greatest tool of lifting one's self out of poverty. Liberals like Bono arrived at this conclusion a long time ago.
Bono:
“Aid is just a stopgap,” he said. “Commerce [and] entrepreneurial capitalism take more people out of poverty than aid. We need Africa to become an economic powerhouse.”
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as “bad luck.”. --Robert A. Heinlein
Love how Bernie was kissing China's ass by pointing to how many people they have lifted out of poverty. Right, when they relaxes some laws in order to incorporate a little but of capitalism. Hey if you lift me out of poverty and the gas me when I speak my mind, there's nothing positive to see there.
Commie retards cry about how China is not real communism. Morons are too stupid to realize that the only good that has happened in China has been due to the elements of capitalism they have allowed in.
They are further from their utopia than ever before. Everything they're doing is making the public hate them.
You know, for a pro-Trump page there sure are an awful lot of people who seem to think he's hopeless and ineffective.
PEople have to remember that people are good all over, no matter what system. For example., communist people are good peope--they would give to charity too, if they weren't too busy living in rabbit cages in highrises or throwing themselves to their death from the tops of iphone manufacturing buildings.
And nothing has been a bigger contributor to worldwide poverty than globalism.
I think this is something a lot of people miss.
The UN drafted this shit decades ago.
Replace the bourgeoisie with "The West," and everything falls into place. Race has also been added as a component.
Exactamundo.
You're not wong. :) You're right!
wong knows what is what. bye bye bank account too if you disagree. Can't associate with the racist subhuman race. Than means eviction too, landlord doesn't take cash crypto or dicksuck. Maybe dicksuck is a good tender soon, idk.
The sheer fucking hubris.
Identity more than race. It's easy to convince a group that shares obvious things in common that they can't win. Then you blame racism.
I can adopt that. It has morphed, you're right.
Globalism is just Communism enforced by a special sort of people
That's by design.
"People say that poverty is bad, but in fact poverty is good. The poorer people are, the more revolutionary they are. It is dreadful to imagine a time when everyone will be rich." - Mao
Yep, it's a feedback loop that they use to seize more power based on the problems their policies created.
Sounds a bit like Bernie.
Again communists, like liberals, must lie. It's inherent in the ideology. They must self-contradict and be hypocritical.
Mao himself certainly wasn't starving, the fat fuck.
They certainly have to lie but the contradictions are a result of the stupidity of the ideology rather than intentional. Intentional contradictions imply they can be coherent and make sense at the drop of a dime. (Narrator: They can't).
Yeah, I guess we can pity liberals and commies to the extent they are stupid, or weak, or radicalized by media and socialist politcians, or victims of persuasive propaganda, unable to accept responsibililty for the breathtaking hypocrisy inherent in their chosen ideology.
At the same time if I ask myself, did I deliberately intend to be a conservative/libertarian? the answer is no. It just rings true and right, without the slightest effort, question, or doubt. It's like, of COURSE free enterprise, free markets, USA, and Trump. Of course NOT the screaming hate-left and their seething racist brigades on the news, brimming with menace and open anti-American animus. My choice to be on the right isn't intentional so much as organic, just as I didn't intend to like the music I like. I suspect leftoids are in the same boat (only theirs is sinking :)
Best depiction there is showing the correlation between wealth and health -- with capitalism of course being the engine of wealth:
https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-avg-securebrowser&hsimp=yhs-securebrowser&hspart=avg&p=200+years+hans+rosling#id=1&vid=fed878e324a0717403f9c01b349ef5e2&action=click
I believe in Capitalism, we should try it here one day.
True capitalism breaks down at the monopoly, which undermines innovation and technological advancement.
Socialism breaks down in its infancy, as it overlooks human nature. It destroys incentive for technological advancement.
I can't stand it when people equate crony capitalism/monopolies with just capitalism. Those EVIL mom and pop stores just trying to get by!
When I hear "Capitalism can't feed the hungry!" I don't even know where to begin stating all the problems with that fallacy.
It's not perfect, but it's the best economic engine this world has seen yet. And it drives scientific advancement. Which allows for better solutions to world problems.
Nothing is perfect because we have limited resources. Capitalism is the closest thing you can get to perfect because over the long run resourses will flow to those who can be most productive with them. Socialism doesn't have this feature, and is accepted by a bunch a LOW IQ blobs who have no creativity because it was beaten out of them by government employees at public school.
"It's amazing that a system of a million weasels trying to screw eachother works so well." - Scott Adams (paraphrased)
Not a big fan of that quote. It's cynical and assumes the whole goal in all our minds is to screw other over. That the only way to get ahead is to screw someone else. Not the case. Are socialist states not trying to screw people over? I don't understand his thinking.
When people say "Capitalism can't feed the hungry." I first make the point that capitalism HAS fed hungry people and I then ask them to define what a reasonable poverty metric is for any economic ideology to be successful. It always falls apart, like Al Sharpton when Sharpton was asked by a Fox News anchor to define what a good tax rate is for the "rich." Sharpton says "15%", proving he knew nothing about what he was talking about because the rich were paying a higher rate than that at the time. Of course, Sharpton had no inward reflection because Sharpton doesn't argue from a place of good intentions.
Monopolies likely aren't a stable state if they aren't able to gain regulatory capture. Part of monopolies thriving is their ability to hold new entrants into a market at arms length.
Ma Bell seemed to make it work.
Which part of telecom didn't involve regulatory capture?
The breakup of the Bell system was government solving a problem it helped create.
Yes, cronyism of monopolies allow them to exist.
It's easy to regulate monopolies. If they harm consumers, split up. If they don't let them be. Pretty simple.
They also use their ability to lobby for special perks and push for ways to undermined competition.
Example, pushing for Government Sponsored Free Trade. At the same time increasing costs internally so smaller companies cannot compete. Then using that as a cover to ship out manufacturing jobs and importing white collar workers from the third world.
The cosument argument from "Free Trade proponents" is that its a good thing, that the new jobs would replace the old ones. Except they forget to tell you that these companies will lobby and lie stating that "There are not enough Americans that can do X job so we need foreign workers" "Americans will not do this job" and my favorite "STEM students in the US are far too low, we need to invest in STEM. In the meantime lets import foreign workers". These companies who profit off of free trade often argue to the death that its good.
I agree on all points, I think those are great examples of the dangers of monopolies.
My point was that monopolies are largely a creation of the regulatory capture. Without it the barriers for new competitors would be much lower and the ability for large companies to fuck over employees or customers would be much lower.
I'm just adding to that point, regulation capture is one key. Propaganda to keep the public on your side is the other.
These monopolies move their money around when there's threats. They fund both sides of the isle and fund think tanks that mask as part of the one side.
Democrats like big business because it forces reliance on government. RINOs love big business because they can make a quick buck on the stock market. Capturing Regulation (as you said) and feeding propaganda to keep that regulation capture is key to keep monopolies going in the current age.
You can regulate capitalism to ensure competition - but there is no way to regulate Marxism beyond the family level so that it works.
FWIW I think the right needs to talk more about Marxism and less about Communism. As Communism is just one method of achieving the Marxist goal. Hitler and China used/use fascism just as much as they do communism. It's all about fucking up the rich - leveling the playing field by breaking everyone's knees.
That's what this lockdown is doing - breaking everyone's knees except for the big companies which are in league with fascists.
I've always thought this too. And I'm a bit surprised it doesn't come up in discussions more.
According to Price's Law, the square root of a group will do the the majority of the work. For instance, I live in a household of four people. My wife and I do most of the work.
In a small company of a hundred people, ten of the people will do most of the work. I saw this in my last company: there were about ten people who were making the big sales, making a name for the company, the glue that held everyone else together. This is why the loss of one or two great employees can be devastating for a small company, but isn't even a "blip" at a huge company. And it's why the number one talent of someone in a small company is the ability to amplify the productivity of the people around them.
Marxism breaks down because of Price's Law. For instance, in a country of 5.8 million, like Denmark, 2410 people will be doing most of the work. That's 0.04% of their population. Or to put it another way, one out of 2406 people in Denmark will be producing most of Denmark's output. Denmark is probably about the limit where Marxist policies can work.
But in the United States, with 328 million people, 18,116 people will be doing most of the work. That's 0.005% of the population. Or to put it another way, one out of 18,105 people will be producing most of the USA's output. And that's why Marxism is unsustainable in a place the size of the US: 18,116 people can't generate enough money to pay for all the rest. If the US was broken down into Denmark-sized pieces, some socialist policies might be tenable. But it would only be possible if you set up large barriers to entry, so that people couldn't just migrate to whoever had the most optimum policies.
Bernie Sanders certainly understood this: you can combine Marxism and open borders. Marxism fundamentally works only in small sets of people, with high barriers to entry. Sanders probably figured this out when living on a commune.
"Bernie Sanders certainly understood this: you can combine Marxism and open borders. Marxism fundamentally works only in small sets of people, with high barriers to entry. Sanders probably figured this out when living on a commune."
If Bernie Sanders understands this, why is he trying to apply it on a federal level?
Sanders was opposed to open borders.
I think socialism is stupid, but I'll give Sanders credit for understanding that you can't have open borders and ALSO give people free shit.
He changed his tune on that in 2020.
It doesn't matter because even with closed borders, socialism is going to fall apart with 330 million people. Socialism only works in units as small as families. At the absolute best, perhaps a neighborhood can be quasi-socialist. Now when you get to the city/town level, you're asking for a lot.
Yes. And I think that China's current situation is a great example of that. China is spending money like a drunken sailor. Which is reasonable if there's a huge demand for what they're spending money on.
But in a lot of cases, it's not.
For instance, China is currently building a bridge in Croatia, to the tune of millions of dollars, which replaces a stretch of road that's perfectly usable. They've also spent billions on empty shopping malls and empty cities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q1fSNzYNhg
The entire concept has been debunked
Tom Woods = HERO!
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for life.
Don’t give me a handout of government cheese. Give me liberty + an opportunity to work.
But there are so many people out there conditioned to believe that they have a right to you giving them a fish every day because feelings. We could solve so many problems by buying Greenland and putting welfare queens, feminists, the far left, BLM, hate crime fakers, etc. on that island and letting them go Lord of the Flies on each other.
Lol! That is SUCH a good idea... thank you for bringing a smile to my face fren! 😄
Don’t forget to livestream the entire island. It will be glorious.
Can we have mail-in upvotes so I can upvote this post multiple times?
KEK
That and, you know, actually going to work
yeah how's that working out for us
This isn't capitalism, though.
Also remember than their reaction to this virus is EXACTLY what they've been trying to do with Climate Alarmism. They've fear mongered the younger population into thinking the world will literally be a giant fireball in 10 years. And now that we've seen how people willingly give up their constitutional rights out of fear it should make a lot of sense why they push climate fear mongering so hard.
Fear gets people to think irrationally and the left takes advantage of it to grow their power. It's no different with school shooting as well. Notice how it all surrounds itself around scaring you into thinking you'll be dead?
Follow that thought.
Fear makes people behave irrationally and makes them easier to manipulate.
Those who would seek to manipulate therefore despise anything that helps people deal with their fear in a meaningful way.
Thus the hatred of individual achievement in any sense, such as sports, physical fitness... anything where an individual overcomes adversity through effort.
Yeah, we're about due for another school shooting any day now. Been awhile.
I keep telling everyone that being told where we can go, when we can work, what stores we can shop at is just a small taste of what socialism/communism is all about. Just add in being murdered for Independent thought and you have arrived.
You just explained the basis behind pyramid schemes. Communism is a pyramid scheme
Depends on many things including the situation. You can't have my rations, sorry! The management said no.
Only capitalism can provide what socialism promises.
Communists are so vengeful about their failure to outperform capitalism's success that they'll intentionally cause a global economic collapse simply for revenge.
The head of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom, is a member of not one, but two Ethiopian communist parties. Do you think all of his bad moves were made in good faith? Do you think he's just an idiot? No friend, he did it all on purpose. The more people who die, the longer the lockdowns last, the happier he will be.
Whatever happened to "for the happiness of all mankind" as a Communist motto? No, now it is "for the dignity of the party, even though it is dead."
FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM FUCK COMMUNISM
There I feel a tiny bit better. House arrest sucks
Deal
If we only had teachers that taught history instead of socialist doctrine our children would know that we already tried socialism once and it was catastrophic. It was called the Mayflower Compact and the entire colony was almost entirely wiped out because of the “union” philosophy. Once capitalism was instituted they suddenly survived quite efficiently. Go figure! What we are experiencing now is decades of “union” teachers. Remember Khrushchev said he would destroy us without firing a shot. We aren’t learning very much from our history.
Don't forget Pruitt-Igoe!
People in the US don't die of starvation. People go hungry sure, but without some other serious issue (usually abuse of a vulnerable person or drug use) it doesn't lead to death. Look this one up: it warms the heart.
Military rations are eaten by the general public for fun. They're really not bad. Ya'll know what pemmican is? Hardtack?
Everyone I know owns multiple pairs of shoes. My grandmother was one of the first one in her family that got a pair of shoes before she got a job. (By the way, this is where the whole "barefooted hillbilly" thing comes from.)
... And life is so good we don't even notice these things. Think about the wealth and prosperity around you, and understand from a historical perspective none of this would even have been conceivable by the average person. We spend so much time bitching about flying cars that we forget what the world used to be like as recently as our grandparent's generation.
Maria Bartiromo was just talking about the problem that at this point in time, many people are making more money on unemployment than they did working. Will that be a disincentive to return to work?
My region of PA returns to work on Friday. I think people need to realize that extra unemployment money is only temporary!
The US dollar having it's current value is only temporary too if stimulus spending continues. Hyperinflation is real. This money isn't coming out of thin air. It's not going to be very much fun when the cost of basic goods doubles in a year or two and people see the value of their savings cut in half.
That how socialism works though. Seduce people with short term freebies while the floor falls from under them.
Yep what these ass hats dont understand is that even though the worlds wealth is owned by a small group of billionaires the rest of us still live better and in better conditions than kings ever did 150years ago.
Imagine telling a king that the poorest people 100 years from his time would be able to be living in air conditioned homes that they can order food from any culture and it's brought to them directly, their entertainment is available at their finger tips, and that they can travel the world and be on one side of the planet in a few hours. I mean I can go on and on with the technology advances and thats because of Capitalism and liberty Only. Protestant Christianity and the American Constitution truly allowed mankind to flourish. Without both of these the world becomes dark and boring and less advanced.
An open mind will eventually arrive at the conclusion that Capitalism is the greatest tool of lifting one's self out of poverty. Liberals like Bono arrived at this conclusion a long time ago.
Bono:
“Aid is just a stopgap,” he said. “Commerce [and] entrepreneurial capitalism take more people out of poverty than aid. We need Africa to become an economic powerhouse.”
Milton Friedman's "Free to Choose" series (you can find in on YouTube) completely changed the way I saw economics.
As an added bonus, Thomas Sowell features large.
I'd rather live under inequality rather than abject poverty
But Mama's boy losers on Reddit told me Capitalism was bad!! Unionize every company in America, we have to fight big government with more government.
This is why they oppose capitalism
Communism is about fucking over people - it has nothing to do with eradicating poverty. It's built on envy and theft - not compassion.
When Stalin was starving people - that was not compassion.
Milton ❤️
It wasnt ReAl communism. The "fake" communism has killed over 100 million people and still counting.
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”. --Robert A. Heinlein
Love how Bernie was kissing China's ass by pointing to how many people they have lifted out of poverty. Right, when they relaxes some laws in order to incorporate a little but of capitalism. Hey if you lift me out of poverty and the gas me when I speak my mind, there's nothing positive to see there.
And guns, don’t forget guns.
The world needs more Milton Meme's!!!!
Commie retards cry about how China is not real communism. Morons are too stupid to realize that the only good that has happened in China has been due to the elements of capitalism they have allowed in.
BUT MUH INEQUALITY
They are further from their utopia than ever before. Everything they're doing is making the public hate them. You know, for a pro-Trump page there sure are an awful lot of people who seem to think he's hopeless and ineffective.
I will laying in the ditch across from my house trading aimed fire with the "authorities" before I submit to communism 😎
Communists don’t care about poverty. Everyone is poor and dependent on sugar daddy gov.
I miss those good ol USSR utopia days.
PEople have to remember that people are good all over, no matter what system. For example., communist people are good peope--they would give to charity too, if they weren't too busy living in rabbit cages in highrises or throwing themselves to their death from the tops of iphone manufacturing buildings.
Kill a communist country and achieve prosperity today! Over 100 years of proof this solution works!
—Bono of U2, artist, billionaire, activist and not exactly a conservative curmudgeon
I'm growing suspicious of the name "capitalism" - the proper name is Freedom.
There is nothing more effective at getting people out of poverty than giving them Freedom over their body and what their body can produce.
The freedom to make things and sell them on the market is the very fundamental freedom that the Communists are trying to take away.