You people are fukking morons, none of the gpd damn bullshyt you fukking spew has any fukking basis on anything. No one tries your shyt cause its shyt. Meanwhile socialism has like 20 countries right now at the top.
You people are fukking morons, none of the gpd damn bullshyt you fukking spew has any fukking basis on anything. No one tries your shyt cause its shyt. Meanwhile socialism has like 20 countries right now at the top.
I think capitalism is a fantastic concept and it's not going anywhere.I'd argue that these things are overcome quicker in a free market or competitive(libertarian) market, but we have no real socialist model to compare it too.
I'd also argue that the wealth generated by capitalism puts us in a position to do more good, but there again, compared to what?
I disagree, at least philosophically, I only think any form of socialism or left anarchism is only possible in a post scarcity society. Which we are nearing if we aren't already there,

To be fair its been corporatism/fascism/crony capitalism, that has managed these things and run them like shyt. "free market capitalism" just gets the blame.I think capitalism is a fantastic concept and it's not going anywhere.
I just believe that for sustainable capitalism to exist, there must be rules in place to keep a level playing field. A monopoly builds just as much complacency as socialism because the same "what's it matter if I give my all to this?" mindset exists when there's no chance to break into the industry.
I also think capitalism is a really shytty way to manage essentials like health care and things that cannot operate with bias, like justice. Libertarianism automatically slants in the favor of the people with the most resources, and that can't happen when it comes to things like public roads, the internet, and environmental policies that effect all of us.
and another discussion altogether... You people are fukking morons, none of the gpd damn bullshyt you fukking spew has any fukking basis on anything. No one tries your shyt cause its shyt. Meanwhile socialism has like 20 countries right now at the top.
), but where are these places where the working class owns and operates the means of production (i.e., socialism)? 
I agree with your characterization of their views (), but where are these places where the working class owns and operates the means of production (i.e., socialism)?
![]()


You fakkits know what I mean
lol @ thinking we just gonna live in a commune where everyone shares everything 50/50.
Wasnt the USA pretty much libertarian in the 1800s. They were the biggest piece of shyt country too![]()
QFTI disagree, at least philosophically, I only think any form of socialism or left anarchism is only possible in a post scarcity society. Which we are nearing if we aren't already there,
Most people are not even surprised any more when they hear about someone who came here from Korea or Vietnam with very little money, and very little knowledge of English, who nevertheless persevered and rose in American society. Nor are we surprised when their children excel in school and go on to professional careers.
Yet the 'economic mobility is dead' argument remains alive and well... go figure.
Cost: being exploitedThe problem is that these people play by such a hilariously different subset of rules that it is much easier for them to become "economically mobile"
The easiest way to get your foot in any professional or educational door is to allow yourself to be exploited...and nobody allows themselves to be exploited more than foreigners...
Cost: being exploited
Benefit: being successful
![]()