What is the best economic ideology, Sup Forums? You may say that governments and regulations fuck things up...

What is the best economic ideology, Sup Forums? You may say that governments and regulations fuck things up, but what can you do about the fact that some people are doomed to poverty even in rather successful economies? Like, if your parents are uneducated workers, you're fucked without any help from the government.

Economical ideologies all are just that - tools of the powerful to dupe the poor into their demise. Communism, capitalism, whateverism was used, being used and will be used by the powerful to maintain and increase their own affluence at the cost of others, at any costs.

Economic liberalism is what built the West and is the most compatible system with European culture. Marxism is an alien jewish ideology.

What about the Nordic countries? Didn't they adopt some Marxist notions to develop the welfare state?

Keynesian. There's absolutely no other answer to that question

Kek'd and check'd

Poverty is relative and there will always be poor people, take it upon yourself to educate yourself, take personal responsibility, have ambition and ultimately work hard. People change their "class" all the time, in America over half the population will be in the top ten percent at some point in their lives, the fact of the matter is that you don't earn the same amount of money at 17 as you do when you're 50, and if you do you deserve to be poor

>Economical ideologies all are just that - tools of the powerful to dupe the poor into their demise.

THIIIISSSS

It's all about a religious Monarchy.

Or barring that, Fascism.

Yeah, poverty is relative, but in some countries there are more people living below the poverty line than in others though. The problem might be not that poverty exists, but that there's inequality.

Those countries tend to be socialist

>but what can you do about the fact that some people are doomed to poverty even in rather successful economies
This problem has never been solved by socialist countries either, so what's the argument?

can there be another, better economic system than just capitalist, socialist or mixed?

What about Latin American and African countries that have never been ruled by socialists?

Better in what way? Scandinavian countries are probably where the poorest people have the highest standard of living in the world. This has come at an extremely high price though.

Yes, Scandinavian countries are always first when it comes to social equality. But how did you get there? At first you were pretty liberal in economic terms, and adopted social democracy only later, didn't you?

the fucking /thread

Make the poor into slaves. Boom, problem solved.

In order to expand production, you need to expand consumption and this is where the road to hell begins...

The rich are getting richer, because selling more the poor are getting poorer because are being told that spending is virtue and YOLO.

>Make the poor into slaves. Boom, problem solved.

Is how the original democracy was invented. Our society cannot exist without slaves.

Mutualism or Syndicalism

Palace economy.
It has worked for thousands of years while everything else is crumbling after only hundreds.

That's a pretty orthodox Marxist route though.

In the Marxist view, a society must pass through many stages before reaching socialism, and then communism. Capitalism "digs its own grave"

>Adam smith neoliberal yadadaada

fuck no, Adam Smith wanted Law and Order and a state who ensures security, morals and law, always in the context of mercantilism

the fucking "adam smith is a neoliberal" is a meme

Yes. Economic liberalism, industrialization, and a deep sense of national pride is what made it possible. The welfare net was possible to establish due to the national homogeneity, wherein living off welfare without needing to was highly stigmatized. This isn't the case anymore, but an ever increasing tax burden and theft from certain groups to finance the welfare system has kept it afloat so far. If you look closely you can see the cracks under the paint though; the welfare system is more and more strict, the elderly care failing, the hospitals seriously lacking funds, the railroads not receiving any maintenance etc. It's still the best place for the poorest 10% as well as refugees and immigrants, but it comes at the expense of the other 90% paying extremely high taxes and getting almost nothing in return.

>Economical ideologies all are just that - tools of the powerful to dupe the poor into their demise

You sir, are 100% correct.

We're getting fucked up the bum by immigrants.
It would work if everyone were willing to work at their highest capacity.
That is the problem with marxism though, if people dont have to work hard, they wont.

Both of those places have been ruled by socialists.

Mercantilism is not capitalism

Mises.org

>educate
>rinse
>repeat

Knowledge is power.

>mercantilism
Are you sure that's what you mean? Mercantilism is a trade policy which is based on completely inaccurate assumptions on how international trade works. Adam Smith and David Ricardo were responsible for mercantilism being phased out of western international trade policy. Adam Smith also frequently spoke about the failures of mercantilism. Adam Smith wasn't an anarchist, but he certainly wasn't in favor of mercantilism.

They are socialist in terms of government spending and various aspects of social policy.

Economically they were fairly by-the-book capitalist with the socialist spending being there purely to provide a safety net to lessen disincentives for people to engage in private enterprise. They were all about free market capitalism in the post-war era and took full advantage of the rebuilding efforts in war ravaged Europe to foster manufacturing. Historically you could class Sweden in particular as exemplifying a Jeffersonian ideal with agricultural workers enjoying a huge deal of independence and enough economic clout to basically democratize the country (check out the abandoned Swedish invasion of Norway to see what I'm talking about). Before you talk about cooperative farming enterprises, these are more in line with distributism than socialism.

The problem Sweden has now is that it's been flooded by people who are not culturally disinclined to live on the safety net and who see no reason to risk short term comfort for long term prosperity. It's why I think shitskins fail in every country they infect while whites/pooinloos/asians flourish almost everywhere they go.