>Sup Forums will defend this
>"capitalism it just works! xD"
>in b4 "one day I'll pull myself up by my bootstraps enough and be just as rich as they are"
Protip: you won't.
Give me one good reason they shouldn't all be slaughtered and have their wealth redistributed to build roads, hospitals and shit like that.
If you defend this shit you're basically the goodest of goys and a cuck.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
5555 GEttt
off by one
>83625900
Yay Ccheck Dem
So what?
It means nothing really, if leftists did not tell you about you would not even know about it.
U WERE SO CLODE
literally what? I ain't a leftie but that's possibly the most autistic thing I've heard this week.
you're right op, Communism is the way
>switch to Communism
>replace businessmen with party officials
>get the exact same result, with extra starvation
gee whiz okie doke
when i was 14 I had the exact same thoughts as he does now
What this faggot doesnt realise is that the majority of wealth comes from stocks/owning companies.
If (((The Independent))) is saying something is a problem, it's either a non-problem or a distraction.
The Independent is worse than The Guardian and BBC combined.
But if we are all equally miserable everything would be better.
>killing people because they are more successful
why not just kill the top students of every class too, that way nobody tries to be the best and we are all equally mediocre and still just as miserable.
(((62)))
U 2
2
UUUU
U
U
U
> ID JUSD WORGS OGAY U GAPIDALIS PIG
> t.perniezandlers
>explain to me why murdering and robbing people is wrong
You don't sound like you belong here.
Sure maybe people shouldn't be allowed to accumulate this much wealth, that's at least debatable. Murder and theft, however are dindu level retarded for anyone to see as justified.
dubs never lie
>implying this isn't because of socialist thugs holding back the power of real capitalism.
Someone having more money than you has no affect on you. I wish this stupidity would die.
>They should be slaughtered because they're more successful than me
fuck off, retard
>>Sup Forums will defend this
seeing as how the majority of those 62 people are probably globalist jews, I doubt it
When they say wealth they mean assets.
You can't just tear down a rich guys building and use the "wealth" to build a road.
If you take from the rich you're really taking control, not wealth. You're taking control and passing it from one hand to another: the government.
Want a real solution? End the control. Keep capitalism but end globalism. Globalism is how they consolidate control.
>1 post by this ID
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
>NOT A FREE MARKET
NOT A FREE MARKET
You think free market capitalism is how they got that money? A lot of the people on that list are dictators and monarchs who got all of their wealth through taxation and nationalized oil industries. A lot of the rest are people whose fortunes were gained through securing market-manipulating favors from governments.
Please don't try to use the Sultan of Brunei as evidence that the free market doesn't work.
not if they are just sitting on a large portion of that wealth, then it isn't circulating through the economy. Granted most of these (((62))) people's wealth is invested in some asset or holding.
>protecting the property rights of 62 people is more important than the well-being of three billion people
>people hoarding billions of dollars in off shore accounts while millions starve is the same as students outperforming each other on a test
That doesn't seem right. I mean I'm no economist, but just intuitively it kinda seems wrong. I mean consider this you have 20 and everyone else has 20, you can offer someone 5 in exchange for a service and they will probably take it to get an edge over all the other 20s. Now if you have 20 and everyone else has 200 the 5 you can offer is now not so significant to any of the 200's. Not really trying to make a point just trying to flesh out wether what you said is true or not
>Why shouldn't they be slaughtered
Because 99.9999% of their money is tied up in the economy as investments or businesses
Do you want to nationalize those private businesses and let a big bureaucracy run them?
You probably do as you are a retard
Other than the fact that money = power, that is. The power which is used to screw you over if necessary.
>own
they got their name next to a piece of paper.
>have their wealth redistributed to build roads, hospitals and shit like that.
because their wealth IS roads, hospitals and shit like that you fucking moron.
This isnt MONEY we are talking about its THINGS. Often not more than brand names or small percentage shares in companies all over the world.
Wait, who the fuck are they?
>Give me one good reason they shouldn't all be slaughtered and have their wealth redistributed to build roads, hospitals and shit like that.
you would make like 10 hospitals then be out of money.
What if I am cool with it?
You are the CEO of Mcdonald and only 1 cent per burger goes right to your pocket.
thats like 0.5% of the total value of the meal.
Whats wrong with that? Of course you make abysmal amount of money out of this, but so what its your company and you got employees to pay, store to own, shelf to use, marketing to do.
Don't crucify a guy that is the empire you built.
Name the Jew or go back to r.e.d.d.i.t.
Yeah because capitalism and wealth distribution were so much better back when the US was isolationist...
>rockefeller
>carnegie
>vanderbilt
Do you even history?
HIROSHIMA
how likely is the 62 all have ((()))
stay mad poorfag
why? if everyone is poor, no one is poor
the really rich will always be rich no matter what. you can't really just stampede in and demand they give most of their assets away
Stop worrying about what other people make. Individualisim. Look it up. Quit being an immature selfish bitch.
>Give me one good reason they shouldn't all be slaughtered and have their wealth redistributed to build roads, hospitals and shit like that.
>their wealth is completely liquid and can be transmuted into anything, just like in a video game
When you turn 18 maybe you'll think differently.
Because their finances are none of your business?
Why the fuck do you care if someone else is rich?
Whining about other people's success is only an indicator of your own weakness and insecurity.
Fag.
Sup Forums hates the rothchilds and globalists.
yet you are so eager to support the candidate they bankroll.
if want justice and fairness in the world. oppose the rothchilds and all their minions.
Nigger globalism IS capitalism. They're joined at the hip. To be anti globalist is to be anti capitalist.
>99% of their money is tied up in volatile speculation that doesn't translate into any actual physical production
Fixed that for you.
Best goy
If you are in debt you have negative wealth
I have a £500 overdraft and am £36k in debt due to student loans, I own nothing except clothes, some books and some electronics. I have negative wealth and yet I am better off than 99% of the world population. In fact a homeless child who finds 5p has more wealth than I do as long as they are not in debt
I hope you get sodomized to death by a baboon you fucking shaved ape go FUCK yourself and take your retard meme statistic with you
They are rich because they provide products or services that millions of people are willing to spend their hard earned money on. Where is the problem? Are you just jealous of your own inadequacy?
oy vey these two goys are correct! Those fine people earned those shekels!
Didn't oil drop from 36 cents to 6 cents
well, there's a difference between "really rich" and "owning half of the world's wealth"
I thought we're supposed to be selfish under capitalism
and the money is useless because it will never get spend.
share the money with the 50% and everything get's more expensive because everybody has more money.
I am one of the 62.
Trying to tell people how much money they can have makes you a freedom hating commie cuck.
They provide services? Do they really now? Or do they just pay people that provide services?
>Some people figured out how to get rich
>We should kill them and take everything they own
It just writes itself!
Are you an olliegark
Well its pretty simple my friend. We have antitrust laws(i.e. 'anti-capitalism', common sense) for monopolies but we need to cap the fortunes of individuals, which encompasses corporations. Otherwise, they might as well be monopolies. The influence they wield on markets should never kneecap the economy when they 'fail'.
And how many of those 62 are Jewish?
Liberals are fucking faggots.
дa
So what. It's not like these people are sitting on a pile of half the worlds goods and not letting anyone have them. They have the means to make a noticable economic pact since in the past they made decisions good enough to increase or at least keep their wealth.
Btw, socialism is shit.
Get a load of this goy.
He's PROUD of having nothing.
Good goyim.
>they got their name next to a piece of paper.
retard alert
>people actually think the world is currently practicing capitalism and not crony corporatism
>muh kill all niggs
Except most wealthy people don't have their wealth in actual fucking cash, it's in assets and it's said assets that's usually the reason why their rich in the first place.
Trump for example only has a few hundred million in actual liquid assets, the bulk of his wealth comes from his property holdings.
Liberals are economically retarded
Or Nazi level, depends who does it really, if it's done by blond blue eyed cuties it's alright, if it's done by the big US nukes it's also aaaight Muricaa, if it's done by ugly brown or black people it's retarded.
> You have been jewed mate.
Can we get a list of the 62 people as well as their "religion"
did u even read my post top fucking kek
I don't have no wealth, I have negative wealth
Your statistic is fucking worthless you left wing retard, next time don't rely on Oxfam for your political talking points because it turns out charities tend to shill in order to get more donations
If animals over-populate the environment to the point they're starving, we cull their numbers. For some reason if shitskins do the same we feed them so they can have more kids.
yes sure, but theres always the other half they dont own, there will always be enough money in circulation for them to earn more.
they are not trying to send the other 7 billion people into african poverty, they want people to still be able to spend money so they can earn money
I don't care if some one is richer than me. I just want to have the ability to accumulate wealth on my own which capitalism is the most conducive to.
Quit acting like a baby
Yeah that's why they are sending all the jobs to Southeast Asia or automating them.
Because they want a robust US economy full of consumers...
Oh wait that has the opposite effect.
There's nothing wrong with making money.
Capitalism is shit. It just so happens that every mainstream "criticism" of it winds up being a thinly-veiled attempt to slip marxism in through the back door, which is even worse.
This article is very anti-semitic you guys sound like Hitler
Theres nothing wrong with killing people owning money either.
Yea, that's already been done before, it was called the French revolution dumbass. Just go play another game of dota, this game is out of your scope.
What?
Redistribution is a fake concept made up by the very people you are complaining about. Materialists mislead you with the third world model of extreme wwalth versus extreme poverty. I demand to be thoroughly middle class, which just happens to work fine and solve all the problems.
> Russia
Exactly what i said. There is no "wrongs". The "right" order only exists wether becasue of control or consensus.
So its "wrong" for your survival to be rich if you cant guarantee your safety by either killing potential threat or negotiating consensus where both parties are satisfied - even if its an illusion of fair trade like the current society.
>implying that Africa, Saudi Arabia, etc, are capitalist societies and that it is the fault of capitalism that various countries on earth are still literal slaves states
It was a reply to your statement, a reply with which I agree btw.
>expecting a livable wage as mcdonalds chef, pizza delivery or factory worker
those are shit-tier jobs that might as well be automated
I agree that that's an issue.
I disagree that voting for a bunch of liberal clowns that are funded by those very same 62 people is somehow going to fix the problem. You would have to be the biggest most guillible retard in existence to believe that.
There is literally no word for how retarded you would be, if you believe Hillary Clinton, who is funded by all those very same people, is going to do anything that would alter the status quo in that regard.
But that's an impossible amount of retardation. So clearly not you.
Right user?
Oh shit. Guess what everyone? We might have just found the worlds most naive retard.
So? The bottom 50 is now better off than it was a century ago.
What's so good about economic equality if everyone is worse off.
Guess where ecomic Inequality is the lowest? Africa countries. Let that sink in.
Capitalism does work.
The world isn't fair or equal.
Libs, maybe you can help me understand your mindset. Why exactly do you think it's unfair that some people have more money than you? Surely you don't think they found billions of dollars under a rock and refused to share it because they're big meanies. Can you tell me exactly what actions they took that were unfair?
Pretty much this. All the wealth that the richest people in the world own was created. If those people never existed, you wouldn't have every person in world retroactively be $400 richer, you would just have that much less money in the world.
Well at the superficial level, the corporations promote globalism as a humanitarian effort. Superficially, the whole point of globalism is to brings about equal opportunity for all people living with meager wages, poor working conditions, no child labor laws, basically no protection for workers. Obama said it himself. Most people who believe in capitalism in the US dont want the terrible trade deals or globalism. That doesnt make them anti-capitalists.
This.
You cannot be pro capitalist but anti globalist.
National socialism is the answer to our current situation.
Where is shillary Clinton mentioned in the op?
Seems accurate
What if there are other alternatives than communism?
youtube.com
neither capitalism or communism have answers to those questions, because they're inherent to the monetary system itself.
It makes them protectionist and anti-free trade though.