Why is socialism being pushed so hard? What's so good about it? Why do so many people want it to happen?
Why is capitalism seen as something bad? At least with capitalism, you can choose where you spend your money. If you're being fucked over by the government, you either hand over a portion of your income or get put in prison.
Lazy faggots
Uncle Ted spoke on this more eloquently then you or I ever could.
>What's so good about it? Why do so many people want it to happen?
Nothing. Because they suck at everything else.
They want free shit.
Why should people under the age of nine not post about politics? Denmark is considered heavily socialist and they have more freedoms than in the US. Same goes for Germany. Perhaps you need to finish grade school and travel outside of Alabama.
This discussion isn't about "freedoms" in particular, just the economic system.
Why do so many people support a system that essentially penalizes someone for becoming wealthy and doing well for themselves? Heavy regulations on the market make it harder for companies to innovate and compete with one another.
Capitalism is racist and oppressive. It holds people back and kills people if they can't get a job. It cares more about profit than human life. It's destructive and needs drastic reform or to be abolished entirely.
Denmark isn't socialist.
>Capitalism is racist
How so?
>and oppressive
How is it oppressive if you have the choice of where you spend your money?
> It holds people back and kills people if they can't get a job.
People aren't held back in a free market. There are far more job opportunities and ways to make your own money.
>It cares more about profit than human life.
Arguable. Everyone cares about different things. There's no one single hivemind among capitalists.
>needs drastic reform
What would you suggest?
Socialism is like a family. Think about benefits that family gives you.
People are idealistic and refuse to accept that even if ideas sound nice on paper they will still have to be implemented by flawed humans.
Capitalism provides the best social good despite its flaws because it inherently exploits human nature in order to compel people to build and create.
Socialism on the other hand makes people feel hopeless and cheated and lazy because they have no carrot only stick as when they do work hard and create other people who are lazy get just as much reward.
Once adaptation of socialism begins it cannot be stopped as can be seen in western states it's a genie, pandora's box. Once you allow it, foreigners will come to your land to get the gibes, their population will grow, they will demand more gibes, and eventually they will have complete control to enslave and take from the productive.
Economic systems are so broadly defined that such questions are almost meaningless unless you go into more detail.
Systemic and institutional racism
You don't really have a choice due to monopolies
Under socialism and communism, everyone is guaranteed a job no matter who they are. In capitalism, many are displaced and unemployed if they don't have a college degree. If they do have a college degree, they're in debt tens of thousands of dollars.
Milton Freidman, proud capitalist once said "the only social responsibility of a company is to deliver profit to the shareholders". What does that imply?
Equal distribution of wealth, equal opportunity to succeed, nationalized industries, social market system
By 'equal distribution of wealth' you do mean distribution of wealth according to need, right?
Family help each other because they love each other. Not because it's the law.
It would be different if my dad said for me to give money to him to distribute to my siblings as he sees fit, otherwise I'm grounded for two weeks.
The only people who win in socialism are those in the government, at the very top.
>Systemic and institutional racism
Explain this to me. I still don't get it. What's racist about wanting to provide goods and services?
>You don't really have a choice due to monopolies
Isn't communism one big monopoly that only benefits the government and leaves everyone else with no choices and the market with no innovation?
>Under socialism and communism, everyone is guaranteed a job no matter who they are.
Do they get to choose their job? What if someone wants to start a business?
>In capitalism, many are displaced and unemployed if they don't have a college degree.
There's a huge shortage of skilled trade workers, at least in the USA. College is a waste of time nowadays unless it's for something specific like the medical field or engineering.
>If they do have a college degree, they're in debt tens of thousands of dollars.
They go into debt because of government subsidized student loans. Colleges and universities can crank up prices and charge ridiculous amounts off subsidized loans.
>Milton Freidman, proud capitalist once said "the only social responsibility of a company is to deliver profit to the shareholders". What does that imply?
Everyone can do what they want in a free market. You think there wouldn't be all sorts of different charity organizations?
>Equal distribution of wealth, equal opportunity to succeed, nationalized industries, social market system
There's nothing equal about it though. The government takes everything and the people are working for nothing.
>Systemic and institutional racism
then don't support the companies who do that and do a public boycott of said company as in capitalism the customer has control of the market.
>You don't really have a choice due to monopolies.
actually you have the choice of starting your own buisness of that type up and having better practices which you can flont as well as better product so you would be wrong as you can easily start that up yourself or find someone starting up and support them.
>Under socialism and communism, everyone is guaranteed a job no matter who they are.
thus devaluing the job they do and since they can't make more then someone else for doing better they have no incentive to make quality merch thus making it irrelevant that he even has the job.
>In capitalism, many are displaced and unemployed if they don't have a college degree.
your acting like maret isn't important when making jobs which is one of the reasons cheyrnobyl happened.
>If they do have a college degree, they're in debt tens of thousands of dollars.
only if they get a lone from a bank or the government which they then have to repay with interest over time, if they pay out of pocket they have no debt, the same with trade school.
no actually bring in some real arguments instead of this low level entry tier of mien kamph.
>Family help each other because they love each other.
we are talking about social and economical relationships.
and why exactly they are loving each other? isn't it because they have such relationships as a basis?
It is the current mindset that we are all "equal" and yet everyone is "special". We all "deserve" everything just for existing and we are entitled to everything whether we work for it or don't. Competitiveness is now a bad thing, because it means there are winners and losers but they want to level the playing field, so the outcome is the same for everyone, even if that means there are no winners.
capitalism is fine but the moment you take away my livelihood, i will defend myself through whatever means necessary
competitiveness in a setting where new technologies are being developed is inefficient and wasteful.
Imagine you've got 50 different companies trying to develop a new, cutting edge computer processor. All they're doing is spending limited resources and the time of trained professionals trying to create a good processor for the market. Only 2, maybe 3 companies will develop a processor that succeeds in the market, everyone elses capital and time goes down the loo.
Now imagine you've got many worker councils co-operating to create this technology. Instead of wasting money trying to market it, conduct market research etc they can use all of their resources to develop this technology.
>Why is socialism being pushed so hard?
Could be the level of perceived wealth inequality.
They would not all do that, because it wouldn't be profitable for them.
It's pretty simple. Socialism/communism appeals to the very worst in people. Consider the 7 classical virtues vs. the 7 deadly sins. The virtues lead to civilization improving and the sins lead to destruction. One set requires one to make themselves better and encourage others to do the same. The other set requires one to use their worst impulses to justify destroying the virtuous.
It's good vs. evil, and evil is appealing to people.
Chastity...Lust
Temperance...Gluttony
Charity...Greed
Diligence...Sloth
Patience...Wrath
Kindness...Envy
Humility...Pride
>percieved wealth inequality
>percieved
There's wealth inequality alright. Just because there's a 'growing middle class' doesn't mean that there're not very wealthy (((elites))) pulling all of the strings in the world, and very poor people going without needlessly.
>Now imagine you've got many worker councils co-operating to create this technology. Instead of wasting money trying to market it, conduct market research etc they can use all of their resources to develop this technology.
And after they developed it they do nothing more, cause they have no competitor that would develop something better than them. So we have stagnation in technology.
In the end we waste time using obsolete technology because noone is going to develop anything new before this one gets old. Which is far worse than wasting money on marketing and development.
(((Governments))) using those who fail in a capitalist society as useful idiots. Basically those on the left are either intelligent but genetic losers or smart enough to realize a Government will pay them more than they could make on the free market.
There is an intelligent reason why people would support socialism:
Socialism is better than capitalism when it comes to assigning work to people. Look around at the modern world: it feels like there is a lot of work to do, but little job openings. The streets are dirty, the roads are in bad shape, parks are often a mess, there are abandoned buildings that need to be cleaned up....And yet we live in a market where most people can't even find jobs. It's not really profitable for companies to care about cleaning up the streets so why would they?
Public working projects are a lot better at finding people jobs. To be honest, millions of people in the current market have jobs that are more or less worthless. Just look at all of the people (especially women) in worthless HR jobs. Pretty much the only reason they are there is because so many people have useless jobs, so they need useless jobs to handle the disputes between them. We're just creating problems.
There is a lot of work to do. But hardly any jobs. This is one sign that capitalism has failed.
>Systemic and institutional racism
This can't happen under capitalism.
The greedy company want to hire the guy/women/degenerate who will get shit done and be cheap. It don't matter if it is an illegal who don't speak the language.
>monopolies
Impossible under capitalism. You need state control to enforce monopolies, otherwise, new players come from everywhere.
>In capitalism, many are displaced and unemployed if they don't have a college degree
Cleaning shit don't require degree. Cooking don't require degrees. Most jobs can be teached in two weeks.
Because the "winners" of Capitalism have already all been decided (in their minds) and they want to put a seal on their reign by pushing communism on the rest of humanity and keep you as cattle, dependent and stupid so as to never challenge them with capital of your own.
Precisely, read: China
This is why established oligarchs fear the anarchist, because without a state to prop up capital the whole set would come crashing down.
>monopolies
>Impossible under capitalism.
>Monopolies impossible under capitalism
Google can afford to buy out any tech company that has an idea to revolutionize the technology industry, and thus further reinforce their monopoly on search engine technology.
It's not even restricted to search engine technology either, I mean come on, google has its finger in everything these days.
I use qwant and there is also startpage/duckduckgo.
There is no monopoly on search engine.
Give me one exemple of monopoly not enforced by a state.
Not going to ever happen in the USofA.
But I'll help you with some tips.
>you and 5 other working comrades rent a one bedroom house
>live together (it may be illicit)
>share all the expenses with each other
>it should be about $240 each
>each of you guys try to be frugal as possible
>pool in to "the people's fund"
>do this for 3 years
>assuming each of you guys are earning at least $30k a year, you guys should've accumulated about $360k
>you guys vote in "the people's household council", on how to use this large fund
I literally did something similar with my two brothers and two cousins, for 5 years.
If you can't/won't do as mentioned ↑above↑, how do you think you'll implement your ideology on a macro level, if you can't do it on a micro level?
Remember, us modern kulaks are way more armed than the earlier, Soviet era kulaks (we have more than 400 million+ guns, spread across VAST lands).
>Capitalism is racist
Commie
I'm an anarcho syndicalist and, how is capitalism racist? if anything it's in a companies economic interest to adopt a PC slant, aids the ol' profit margins.
>Asking a communist to work towards the common good.
In Soviet Russia, the common good work for you.
Socialism will never work, because people will soon not want to work.
Why is this so hard to understand?
>that pic
>me, in circa 2005
Ewwww. Pure cringe.
Imagine one person in the family had power over all the money and all the work performed by family members. Now imagine that head person was grossly inept and impossible to depose.
This is why communism fails within a century every time it is tried. It has no checks and balances for mismanagement and the only people who think it will work are those too ignorant to see its massive systemic flaws and do nothing to prevent them.
True. Here in faggotland we do have monopolies, but they're all state enforced. As soon as the phone service providers could be something else than the state, big and small companies started appearing, giving room for growth in quality.
Rockefeller.
He was the reason the government stepped in and started regulating monopolies.
Monopolies do exist in Capitalism. It was a big problem back in the days of early capitalism in America.
Socialism is the ideology for the lazy and unskilled who are jealous of others’ material possessions. It’s that simple.