"China's economy is great right now" Ask the workers that. In fact, what gives you the right to tell someone else what they want? Would you let someone tell you what you want? No, because only you know what you want.
Man, you are so confused and uneducated on the subject - it blows my mind.
Do yourself and your viewers a favor and learn something before you try to educate someone else.
Here's a one good source on youtube: gz6-d50WWHM - start with this video and then subscribe to the LearnLiberty channel and watch all of their short videos to learn about capitalism, economy, freedom etc.
China's economy is doing well because of the privatisations under Deng Xiaoping. It was doing poorly under the previous more socialist system.
The New Deal didn't fix the Great Depression O_o.
Poverty stricken countries are poverty stricken because countries like the US put them in that position? I suppose in the Medieval ages they were rich by your logic.
Excuse me for making an assumption, but your arguments are so wrong it makes me think you were taught these beliefs as a child.
I think ... I believe ... I think ... I believe, show some research to back up your claims or show some credentials that add authority to your opinions.
@leif09123g Political philosophy by it's nature is hard to simply "back up". What exactly do you expect him to do? Tell you to go read some Marx? Well, it does sound like you probably should...
If we look at China, Mao industrialized it HE made it what it is today, the upper-class media and "teachers" claim that China's economy got strong do to Deng Xiaping and the reintroduction of capitalism, this is a lie. the GDP was been rising equally and steadily since the 1950s to today, it did NOT "sky rocket" at all in the 80s, in fact it was when capitalism came to China when pollution sky rocketed (but still it pollutes less then the US). If it was not for Mao China would be enslaved.
@MaoistLeninistMarx Back it up? Frank Dikotter and a number of other professors here in China disagree with you. post a link that proves what you just said.
@MaoistLeninistMarx Lol, oh burden of proof. You so crazy. Say, can you prove that the lock-ness monster does not exist? and you can't say "because there's no evidence" because you're doing exactly the same thing.
Socialism/Communism HAS worked before, If we look at the USSR, 70% of it economy was destroyed from WWII, 28 MILLION Soviets died from the nazi-rats, and they quickly rebuilt everything through Socialism and were the first nation to space and a major threat to USA imperialism, even though when the USSR was founded to begin with it was already over 100 years behind the west.
Capitalism actually does not create innovationEven in the US the important innovations came from the Federal Government or NON-PROFITS (without profit motive), the polio vaccine (the USA's only medical innovation worth talking about) came from a NON-PROFIT organization, NASA was a government organization (not for profit), Computer-chips were created through government funds, so even in US capitalism is proven to not work and the profit motive is proven fake. The US has high unemployment 13%!!!
As long you do what he dems usefull it is ok to stay home (1:30). The big myth is FDR by goverment intervention ended the depression. As goverment intervened unemployment rose(4:06).
However, I really like how you pointed out that so many jobs pay without any contribution to society. Just think of all the wasteful jobs in banking, accounting, stock trading, and so forth...
I think we do need to force people to work - at least to do some of the less prestigious and enjoyable jobs. A doctor would have a sense of purpose, but a truck driver, although crucial to society, wouldn't have that same motivation and pride. But I think this would be better accomplished with government policies than our abusive and wasteful money system.
learn the difference between capitalism and corporatism. i love how people say they love or prefer communism, even though they havnt been to a communist country. china is more capitalist than america! america has the highest taxes against businesses in the world
I respect your view points on this topic. However it is my opinion that while we do pay 3rd world countries very little for their labor, if we didnt pay them anything at all they would be in a worse state than they are current are in. While the conditions of sweat shops are horrible in comparison to American work environments; they would have to seek alternate forms of employment such as scavenging or in some cases prostitution.
They are not poor because of America, they simply dont produce.
The earth is under the ownership of everyone but we must have good stewards to protect it's productive nature, which is the life force that man lives off of. When less than 10 percent own a vast majority of land, the most necessary part of production, then there's obviously a problem. Lets end this senseless quasi-feudal society and embrace the equal ownership of the earth. Poverty would vanish overnight.
Increased production would also increase the demand for labor. Wages would be much higher and people would only need to work if they want MORE. The LVT would also drastically reduce the market price for land because of the new burden put onto it. Basically, it would reverse all the current "negatives" of capitalism. Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and many others basically support this view.
No one would be "forced" to work because like the lucky landlords (serfs) of our current system, all the have to do is sit on it and make money by charging rent. The "rent" would be based on the land's value. This would be known as the Land Value Tax (LVT). Many interesting thing will come from the LVT! Since there's a new burden on land owners to pay the land value tax, production would sky rocket. Increased production would mean increased competition (lower prices).
You should look into Georgism and the Citizen's Dividend. It's capitalism but believes that all land (earth) is owned equally by all it's inhabitants or equally by all the nation's citizens. It flips the idea of "landlordism" on it's head. The people who own land have to pay a rent to the community. Each american would receive a check of 30k-100k depending on what stats you believe because no one has ever done a full assessment of land values in America.
To all those whom the user qwertypoiu4321 may accuse of being "violent people" for holding positions that may differ even slightly from his, he has openly admitted that his plan for achieving his personal "anarcho"-capitalist utopia is to build what he calls a "voluntary class" (band of Atlas Shrugged-reading sycophants) and violently overthrow the US government.
Please keep that in mind if he ever tried to infer that you hold "violent" beliefs ^^
@MsSexySocialist lol anarcho capitalism will be nothing but a dystopia. Well if he is planning on violently overthrowing the US government then he's obviously a terrorist and must be reported.
Overall good video. However when you said socialism solved the great depression by government agencies...That is not socialism. Had socialism actually been tried, that is: Democratic workers control of the means of production, then it would have fixed the problem, not circumvent it for another 70 years like capitalism and the reforms FDR introduced.
haha this dude is so funny. Hes sitting up there with his beard and his hat, talking about gold and money, telling other people how to live and whats right and wrong, whats fair and unfair. I just started rolling. Then he throws the TORA into it, of all things. Then I start looking at the last names of the worlds greatest Investment Bankers and I just LOST it! He just wants to share OTHER PEOPLES stuff! "Hey man, let me share some of your stuff with me!" haha
He who contributes, wants to reap the fruits of his labor, that's the idea but the reality is most work so that the few can reap the fruits of the labor of others.
china is actually not that communist.. They are more capitalist.
People do not have to be forced to work, you are right on that. But if people don't work they are not entitled to the fruits of others' work.
The New Deal did not fix the economy during the Great Depression. Other countries, such as Britain, actually healed much faster than the United States (1933) with no such New Deal.
Your opinion of capitalism is wrong. According to the library of economics and liberty,
"Adam Smith has sometimes been caricatured as someone who saw no role for government in economic life. In fact, he believed that government had an important role to play. Like most modern believers in free markets, Smith believed that the government should enforce contracts and grant patents and copyrights to encourage inventions and new ideas."
This doesn't fit your claim that capitalism allows cheating.
China's economy is doing great because of very low wages and the fact that, like Russia, they've managed to combine the oppressive nature of a Communist government with the advantages of Capitalism. People are more likely to overlook human rights abuses - and in China there are many of these every day - when they're making good money.
Btw, the New Deal largely failed and it was the Second World War which lifted the world out of the Great Depression. Crack a book (other than useless Torah).
@MsSexySocialist The VP puts a huge emphasis on self realization (for lack of a better word, people have to rethink what is valuable to them). The transition for capitalism to the venus project is huge, and is still being discussed among the group, but to think it is too far in the future is an extremely negative outlook. (MLKjr)
Technocrats are racist, believing races should be "separate but equal", the Vp has non such intent, and values individual beliefs. Happy to answer any more questions
Man didn't conceive of capitalism. It's not an idea of man. The concept of capitalism is entirely defined and forumulated under the auspices of God, vis à vis the Bible. That is to say the compilation known as the King James Bible, not Qu'ran or something of that nature.
Did God not give men free will just as a free market gives people economic free will? If a free market is evil by your logic then so is God's desire for us to have free will. "The Lord loves a CHEERFUL giver" not a coerced giver.
Belief in both is the mistaken belief that they freedom when in reality what both offer is subordination.
Subordination to the will of a fictional entity and subordination to the will of the 1% in the economy who own and control all its wealth. Unless you're part of that 1% of course, in which case you're free as can be due to other's lack of freedom.
@MsSexySocialist Subordination? I can believe or not believe in God. I can choose who to work for and who not to work for. These are my choices. I cannot however, tell the government that I don't want to support a giant ponzi scheme (social security), I can't tell the government not to obligate me to buy healthcare under the commerce clause of the US Constitution, and I can't tell them I don't want to pay for nonsensical wars. Government is oppression, not a free market, and certainly not God.
I agree. But what you seem to want in the wake of state and government is to simply give all the power it possesses to private institutions.
At least a government in a liberal democracy has some degree of accountability to their citizens. A corporation has no accountability to anyone but its shareholders.
"I can choose who to work for and who not to work for"
In other words, you want the freedom to choose your master.
@MsSexySocialist I never advocated an abscence of government, but I do believe it is the politicians who are truly unaccountable. Countless companies have died or suffered huge financial losses by doing things that consumers disagree with. Sparvo is a perfect and timely example of the power of consumer responsiveness. Finally, I can also choose to work for myself (which I now do). In a free market I'm my own master. Under socialism, the state and everyone who doesn't want to work is my master.
"Under socialism, the state and everyone who doesn't want to work is my master"
In anarchism and libertarian socialism as a whole; there is no state. There is no master but yourself
"Countless companies have died or suffered huge financial losses by doing things that consumers disagree with"
Shell hasn't; even after destroying the Niger delta, Chevron hasn't despite destroying the lands of indigenous Ecuadorians, BP hasn't even after a certain incident involving oil you may know of
In order to have socialized programs like national healthcare, college, and wellfare that are NOT voluntary, you must have a governing body that forces participation. Ergo, there must be a "state" in one loose form or another. Whatever the tax rate that "state" imposes is the degree to which your state is your master. The oil companies haven't died because demand exceeds negative perception. How would this change under socialism? Are you advocating an end to fossil fuel use?
No you don't. All provisional social programs which the state now provides could be done much better by community-owned and democratically-controlled cooperatives. There's no need for a "monopoly on the use of coercion" to carry these important services out.
As for fossil fuel companies, they haven't gone out of business because the privatist market economy can only give an indication of scarcity and demand, not social or ecological cost which is equally important.
@MsSexySocialist So what- these programs would be purely voluntary? Because if they aren't voluntary, anyone who may not want such an institutuion would be forced into participating. Now you need a "state" to make it work.
You're right on the fossil fuel companies, but that is where I believe, and this is one of the few times, that a gov must intervene in an economic capacity to shift supply and demand curves to account for enviro-costs. This would be tough on a municiple level as you suggest.
I'll respond in my next PM if that's okay as i feel this one would need some context which would take more than 400 charters to elucidate.
But in summary; yes they would all be voluntary. And anyone who didn't like them could either go elsewhere or start their own; same goes for commercial enterprise.
Do not let Rachel fool you, she is a State-Socialist.
State-Socialist Rachel: "The means of production (productive property) [...] are under common ownership"
State-Socialist Lenin: "the private property of individuals. Socialism converts them into common property. [...] the common ownership of the means of production,"
I refuted her for 4 months until she could no longer evade her quotes and she gave up.
All you have to do with violent people is bring up consent and they lose it.
@qwertypoiu4321 I completely agree my friend. Like I told her she wants the cake and to eat it too. She desires the things socialism can "provide" e.g. college, healthcare, and welfare but claims there would be no coercive government to enforce participation. The problem is: without the threat of jail, what incentive would someone who can already afford those things have for joining a socialist co-op ?
We disagree sure, but I can still be cordial with her. You catch more flies with honey!
@andyconomics Once you get a quote out of her (like the one I gave you of her below) and start trying to make her accountable to it without misdirecting she will stop being cordial and have a tantrum fit; trust me.
I literally wasted months 'debating' her until she gave up, I would start making her accountable to her violent, State-Socialist quote immediately before you waste any more time.
@qwertypoiu4321 So far she seems to be nice enough with me but I agree with your point. As I said, she thinks socialism could exist without big government but this would be impossible. Like most socialists of any dogma, I believe (and as you are saying) when push comes to shove, she will side with the state to enforce "equality." The thiing is, equality can never exist in any capacity, economic or otherwise, since people are born with different talents, gifts, opportunities, etc.
She was nice to me for weeks until I finally distilled that quote out of her and pointed out violent 'common' 'ownership'=State ownership.
She misdirected, reframed, outright lied, and misrepresented among countless other red-faced tantrums when I demanded she be accountable to that violent State-Socialist quote.
Ask her if she believes in voluntary ownership of capital goods and I 100% guarantee she will not agree and will say the 'common' ownership quote. Then watch the tantrums begin.
@qwertypoiu4321 By voluntary ownership of capital goods are you refering to the means of production or private property in general? I'll be honest, many of her answers to my questions seemed a little nebulous. They weren't concrete ideas like yes, you can own the means of production yourself or no, the state trumps private property rights. I think the reason the details are cloudy is because she knows they can't actually work without a controlling state, but doesn't want to admit it.
I use Capital goods as synonymous with means of production ('factors' of production usually includes all three production inputs, not just the capital goods one of three).
I consider any property voluntarily owned 'private property', but Proudhon/Chomsky/Anarchist FAQ-types specifically consider 'private property' just capital goods (as an artificial distinction to legitimize stealing CGs).
I brought her down mentioning if I grew a pineapple tree capital good (I will send you a PM with more).
@MsSexySocialist Who do you think you're kidding? You don't even know what qualifies as evidence. You're one of those people who think that they can just invent what they want to be true, and then believe it. Those people are either stupid, or pathological liars. You certainly don't believe in telling anyone what evidence you have to support your views, another thing common to the dishonest and/or stupid.
The "evidence" I was referring to was actually what anarcho-capitalists keep claiming is evidence but is actually nothing but assertion, blind faith, and a willful distortion of history.
It's quite clear you couldn't even understand what I was saying. lol
"Based on her username alone, she's not going to be listening to reason any time soon"
So you're claiming that because I identify as supporting a certain set of beliefs, I am somehow incapable of utilizing reason? And yet you have the audacity to accuse ME of being unable to distinguish between facts and "unsupported opinion".
"Anyone who disagrees with you is accused of being, among other things, one of the "anarcho-capitalists""
You aren't very smart. Anarcho-capitalism is not some sort of slur, it is a political and economic ideology which many people do follow; and whom I oppose as I happen to disagree with said ideology.
"or operating on blind faith"
Which in my experience is exactly what such people do.
@MsSexySocialist Based on what I wrote in my reply I did understand you. I was just pointing out that, based on many of the things you've said here and elsewhere on YouTube, you don't understand what qualifies as evidence - you can't make the distinction between unsupported opinion and opinion backed by evidence. So, obviously, you can't evaluate what you can't recognize. Duh.
Actually, I "gave up" so to speak on our exchange after I gave you an ultimatum numerous times that I would stop answering your PMs unless you provided answers to that list of problems that would inevitably occur under your proposed psuedo-anarchist capitalist utopia.
You failed to do so. Even after repeated attempts at asking you.
Hence I explained that further coversation was pointless and a waste of my time - which it was.
You need to come up with some original material. Seriously.
Stop just copy and pasting the same three out-of-context quotes in a futile bid to somehow prove guilt by association. It didn't work the first 20 or so times you tried it and it's not gonna work now.
Also, how exactly am I "nameless" when you list my name in your comment? lol
You're actually pretty funny all things considered.
Exactly what business is it of yours to know what my last name is?
I suspect at this point you just want to mark me down on a list of targets to have murdered when your terrorist voluntary class decides to overthrow the government.
As for the out-of-context "quotes", your association fallacy didn't work the first 20 or 30 times and it doesn't work now.
Also, "common ownership" (indivisible stewardship) is not the same thing as "owned by the whole people". Sorry.
You are hiding your name after you solicited my name; just a nameless, adolescent State-Socialist.
Red-haired people, short people and voluntary class are descriptions, not organizations; you have no physical evidence of anything else for your malicious hearsay.
Stalin: "social ownership of the means of production has been established in our country,"
Rachel: "The means of production [...] are under common ownership"
Physical *quotes* speak for themselves: State-Socialism.
Notice you do not deny your violent *quote*. Whole People (Mao), Common (Marx, Lenin, You), Social (Stalin) are all the same thing: Legal Provocation (theft/robbery).
When you violently initiate Legal Provocations (theft/robbery), screaming 'Whole People', 'Common' or 'Social' changes nothing, sorry.
Maybe this is time for you to start up a Spice Girls fan club, or 100 other useless activities 100X more effective than rambling violent, Stalinist nonsense that will go nowhere.
Once again you display in a public forum viewable by anyone how you're utterly incapable of forming a coherent argument against anarchist principles.
You're far more content to fall back on a myriad of repeated logical fallacies; straw man, equivocation, either/or reasoning, argumentium ad communum, and guilt by association.
All amazingly present in your last comment.
You can't respond to the fact that ownership in common is a completely different thing to . . .
. . . social, collective, or whatever ownership, thus you utilize equivocation to make them SOUND like the same thing, erect a straw man (communism), attempt to claim I believe in it (argumentium ad communum and the association fallacy in one).
You are literally the only person I've ever conversed with claiming to be an "anarcho"-capitalist who can't give any actual critique of anarchism on it's own terms and feels the need to resort to attacking fiction.
First you set up a statement regarding *property*, then regurgitate the same three out-of-context quotes yet again, then conclude by contradicting yourself by claiming it involves people.
Oh yeah, I forgot, people ARE just property in your world aren't they?
Another thing, QUOTES aren't "physical". lol
Tell you what, renounce your current plans of violent terrorism and violent insurrection by you and your "voluntary class" and I might take your opinions seriously
Marx: "capital is converted into common property, [...] instruments of production owned by the state;"
Rachel: "means of production [...] under common ownership"
Give me your computer, wrenches, garden, vehicle and clothes used to work and any other capital good or I will get out the club and kidnap/murder you: Legal Provocation (theft; robbery; assault; solicitation).
That will *never* happen, sorry.
What an uncivil, degrading, sexist comment at the end.
I'm surprised you were more offended by the "boy" part than the "silly" part ^^
Probably says a lot.
Again, sorry to break this too you, but your infantile attempt at guilt by association didn't work the first dozen or so times and it's not gonna work in the future.
Literally every other "anarcho"-capitalist I've debated or conversed with possesses the ability to critique anarchism on it's own terms without resorting to foolish association fallacies - all bar you
1. Explain what exactly you believe *common ownership* to be in practice.
2. Who exactly "charges" people who commit what are considered "crimes" in your ideal world?
This world of yours sounds more Orwellian the more you speak of it. I'm confident that it'll thankfully never be actualized, as I believe you and only you seem to support it, but it does truly trouble me that someone could be capable of the doublethink to want both statelessness AND totalitarianism.
Once again I ask you a straight question and you refuse to answer it.
You're not helping your case.
Also, I googled your username and observed your comments on other websites. LITERALLY everyone thinks your views are a joke. You seem to be an example of Poe's Paradox in action.
Look, you may not believe me but I am trying to help you here, if you want to be taken seriously and engage in civil discourse with others, stop doing the following things . . .
have you researched the venus project? i think their idea of a resource based economy would be right up your alley. Many of the same concepts you speak of ( they intend to remove money and allow technology to create abundance). Should check them out!
The VP does offer a very good illustration for what we should ideally be working towards in the future (perhaps by the end of this century), but it doesn't seem to offer much in the way of actually getting there. Nor does it have any concrete solutions to problems in the here and now.
In my own research on the VP, I can't find any indication for what its political system would be like, is it seen as being democratic?
Because from what I can see it seems disturbingly technocratic.
"China is providing for a billion people"??? WTF are you serious? The vast majority of Chinese live on pennies a day and scrape their living from the ground. It's ignorance and downright deceptive to paint the picture otherwise.
Every single man made political, economical and social structures are destined to fail. Human desires towards all Utopian ideals always tend to end in the selfish exploitation of others. Though all humans are industrious they are not met to live in a socioeconomic structure. It's all processed living.
The big difference is that a lot of the jobs we do today have nothing to do with human needs. When you are doing farm work, atleast you know you produce something usefull to society. When you work in some callcenter calling random stranger about some 'deal' for example, you would just feel like you are a pest to society and the only reason you do it is to pay your bills.
A lot of jobs are no forfilling because people feel their jobs are useless.
@ShadowofaRoar In current society, you can't expect people to be enthusiastic about work. A lot of people feel forced to work to survive. Ofcourse they aren't going to be very happy to do that work that is enslaving them.
@Zidriz I've experienced farm work. Believe me, it's not something to be enthusiastic about, either. Between the Stone Age and now, I don't think there's ever been a point where people didn't work to survive. Only now we have air conditioning.
let me also add that one of the reasons that communism doesnt work is because the amount of energy put forth by capitalist countries to sabatoge them. the usa dropped more bombs on viet nam than all of world war 2 combined. capitalist countries also use sanctions and embargos to starve people in communist countries. capitalist countries have also been known to poison food supplies of communist countries. check out the secrets of the cia video for more
China's economy is not doing great. I dont know where you're from man but China's is the definition of few have's and many have not's. They dont have pension systems, social securities, or many other luxuries you and I take for granted. Yes, people do wish to work and be known their work is valuable. However, it is easy for a government to approach you, tell you, clean this bathroom floor for 10 hours a day, and our nation will become great. But it is not easy for you to see and feel the change.
I guess in American, ignorance is a right.... I cannot believe that you think China is a communist country and the New Deal got the U.S. out of the Great Depression.
collectivism is wrong. all men are not created equal. nature, biology is a random natural or artificial selection of humans and brains. he who creates must keep what he earns. charity can help those less endowed.
Read a little Ayn Rand., she lived under your utopian vision of big brother. Capitalism allows those with a REAL vision of being allowed to prosper for your creativity the efforts you expend to see those ideas come to fruition. Perhaps you should become a red chinese citizen for a while and see how well they accept or tolerate your own beliefs of which your own personal garb and beard represent ( I respectfully assume you are of the Jewish faith). Try it and let us know how long you last.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves hobbits, elves, and wizards.
This clown cites China. China - - before 'liberalization' and adopting a free market system - - had walls to keep its subjects from fleeing to capitalist Hong Kong.
Like every socialist crypto-marxist I have encountered he is unable to provide an example of a country that the US should emulate.
@alphecca2539 Vietnam is doing really well. More and more jobs every year, and a lot less violence too. America should at least see what Vietnam is doing right. There is an example for you.
I just have to say that Americans are really allowing their Government to bleed them dry and leave them with nothing, the fact that so many of your own people are living on a dollar a day? You're a first world Country with 1.6 million homeless people! And you allow them to live like that? Your Government have suckered you good!
@zg76 youre one of those folk who believe the rich deserve their wealth. that they deserve their excess and debauchery. let me tell you something, dude. whatever you have can be taken from you, ask che guevara. ill leave you with this quote from the 1848 revolutions: "those who have nothing united in common envy, those who have everything united in common terror" heed those words bcuz the revolution is coming.
@anthonymbichara I sincerely believe that I deserve to keep what I honestly earn! And neither you or someone else have a right to take that from me! And dude, you can try if you will!!!
Yap, the revolution is coming, but not the one you wish for: watch?v=B7jyYpYgOeE
@zg76 rights dont matter here. we have a right to take from those who hoarde. we will try, and we will succeed. and if the bourgoise and their supporters resist youll all be put up against a firing squad. just ask che.
@zg76 i have. no more tshirts, action time, bourgoise. those who have nothing united in common envy. those who have everyhing united in common terror.
@zg76 well, why do you advocate the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer? why do you advocate the upper class making a killing off of the blood and sweat of the working classes? i can just tell youre rich or better off than most and a well established member of the bourgoise.
Where do you see me writing "I wish rich getting richer..bla bla bal"??? Your whole world view is deducted aand poisoned by the Marxist idea of class struggle, witch in turn has its origins in critics of "Das eherne Lohngesetz", or Iron law of wages!
That stupidity, my friend, has been repudiated 150years ago! There is no class struggle.
P.S. this is some now phrase you commies use now?? Sadly I am not, but I am young and ambitious..
4000 children leave us from starvation every hour due to capitalism. Capitalism is garbage and so what if it brought us worldly things for a chance to run our government that's the same as saying it's ok to sell your soul for a cool car. Go look up what freedom is and tell me if we have it anymore and I do not want to hear the freedom of speech shit because that's the only freedom. If you notice even freedom of assembly is gone because you have to have a permit for it.
@NewRevolutionLeader why should 5% control 95% of everything while 95% don't even have authority over 1%? the revolution is coming but we cant go so far as to give in to socialism and communism. but change must happen bcuz i hate nothing worse than the rich.
I do not hate rich people I just hate rich people who want no one else to prosper EXCEPT THEM. America is full of greed and corruption which is the worst in Washington. Revolution is a idea not a violent uprising but thing is we are forced to vote for either one of two parties because that's the way they want it. Both parties are one in the same really because it seems like both their goals are to serve themselves and not the people.
The ones most responsible are the ones sending American jobs to foreign countries and still making plenty of profit in America. For example look at gas companies who do not pay nothing in taxes and raise gas prices for NO REASON JUST TO SQUEEZE EVERY LAST DIME OUT OF OUR POCKETS. This country will be fruitful again when it stops its love fest with capitalism and dumps it for good.
@HaleFire7 let me ask you something about that lie of working for what you earn? ive had to struggle and hustle and work my ass off for my pititful meager life, while the rich can do as they please when they please and if they lose a little, whatever who gives a fuck? not only that but they pass their wealth on to their descendents. theyve created a new nobility and aristocracy and i promise you we will bring it down. that is a promise.
Wonder why China has a good economy? Because american's started believing they deserved something because they lived in America. They didn't want to live tough, they lived outsidetheir means. Now look, America produces nothing and exports nothing, besides debt. We switched from a country of producers to a country of consumers literally overnight. Overseas countries (like china) will be the first to profit from the mentality American's have gotten.
But wait a minute: Abraham was a capitalist as shows when he sat down to discuss the sale and purchase of Sarah's grave. The Hitite's were going to give him the plot of land, but Abraham said no. I think that your anti-capitalist tendencies and fears stem from the fact that you are of Kazar racial stock and you being Ashekenasi do not know business. I am of Sephardi stock and was not poisoned by the eastern European mentalities. I do truly appreciate your help to help via all your videos.
You're right. I feel sorry for the Ashkenazim as they were force-fed that commie stuff actually for centuries even before Karl Marx codified it. That's why the State of Israel today is actually socialist/communist for the kicked out commies, aka Ashkenazim hold the power. Unbelievable they think that those old German clothes from over 200 years ago is now a Jewish uniform. They look like bootleg Amish. Sorry but it's true.
China is -not- a communist country. It is an oligarchy with little or no input of the workings of the economy or policies. They manage with great masses of people by having the majority live in disgraceful poverty. Even the U.S.A. is more socialist, having things like public high school.
Gold or paper money they both have inflation. The reason why they input lots of new money into the economy during a crisis is to replace the lost equity burst in that bubble. (fight deflation with inflation)
You are confusing capitalism with statism. Statism creates the problems, not capitalism. Both communism and capitalism would work a hell of a lot better without any government.
words fail what the mind takes in.... theres too many definitions of slightly different perturbations in market theory imo... too difficult to discuss
You do realize america was created to be a REPUBLIC, not a DEMOCRACY. The problem is people got them confused, they actually think a DEMOCRACY is a good thing, its not. Its a MOB rules all mentality that leads to Oligarchy, which is a country ruled by the elite, which is what we have today. THIS IS NOT CAPITALISM. Capitalism is a great thing, but it has to be practiced correctly, and in a REPUBLIC, not an OLIGARCHY. The real myth is that we are not practicing true capitalism and havent forawhile
@anthonymbichara This is incorrect. Look at the history of both Greek and Roman systems, the rise and fall based on the change from a republic to a full democracy. Republic means the law for the populace is above all, even the rulers, a democracy puts the mob's oligarchy above the law. Mob rule leads to an unstable law based system in which the law is not for the people nor is it reliable.
"There can be only one permanent revolution - a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man." Leo Tolstoy. I love the guy. I recently did a research report on him for school. However, I got that little quote of his off wikipedia-I'm not sure what book, or whatever else, its from.
may be you should make new games like paper airplane that can fly around the kissmass tree and back in the hand with £5. try playing other games that bring all together in places
Actually I completely disagree with you on this. Here's a good quote for you "Capitalism is the worst form of economy except for all the rest." As Peter Schiff says, "We didn't get out of the Great depression because of the New Deal; We got out of the Great depression despite the New deal." The government is terrible at allocating capital. The government doesn't have money. It can only take from the private sector, and inefficiently distribute it.
Anything the government does to get us out of the depression we're in will only make it worse. Socialism and government manipulation of markets are the reason we are in this mess. It was the federal reserve who dropped the interest rates down to 1 percent, and the bush regime who told everyone to go buy a house. Also, the government shipped all of our industry out of countries with all of these so called "free trade" agreements.
To blame this on free market and capitalism is just wrong. Unfortunately what's going to happen is the problems are just going to get worse and worse. The Obama team is going to say look at how bad capitalism failed we need more government. The worse it gets the more freedoms, and the larger our government will get until we have no economy and no freedoms. The problem isn't capitalism, the problem is socialism and new world order trade policies.
I think when communism reigns supreme, it takes away from the power of the mind and puts it into that of human nature.
To my understanding, what it comes down to is that men who are ugly, need to become more powerful than others to get women. Communism does not take this into effect.
I think capitalism is the perfect balance of elements.
"China's economy is great right now" Ask the workers that. In fact, what gives you the right to tell someone else what they want? Would you let someone tell you what you want? No, because only you know what you want.
DMAN123223 1 month ago
Man, you are so confused and uneducated on the subject - it blows my mind.
Do yourself and your viewers a favor and learn something before you try to educate someone else.
Here's a one good source on youtube: gz6-d50WWHM - start with this video and then subscribe to the LearnLiberty channel and watch all of their short videos to learn about capitalism, economy, freedom etc.
trino26 1 month ago
China's economy is doing well because of the privatisations under Deng Xiaoping. It was doing poorly under the previous more socialist system.
The New Deal didn't fix the Great Depression O_o.
Poverty stricken countries are poverty stricken because countries like the US put them in that position? I suppose in the Medieval ages they were rich by your logic.
Excuse me for making an assumption, but your arguments are so wrong it makes me think you were taught these beliefs as a child.
BloodskullMannoroth 1 month ago 4
I think ... I believe ... I think ... I believe, show some research to back up your claims or show some credentials that add authority to your opinions.
leif09123g 2 months ago
@leif09123g Political philosophy by it's nature is hard to simply "back up". What exactly do you expect him to do? Tell you to go read some Marx? Well, it does sound like you probably should...
kwaal 2 months ago
If we look at China, Mao industrialized it HE made it what it is today, the upper-class media and "teachers" claim that China's economy got strong do to Deng Xiaping and the reintroduction of capitalism, this is a lie. the GDP was been rising equally and steadily since the 1950s to today, it did NOT "sky rocket" at all in the 80s, in fact it was when capitalism came to China when pollution sky rocketed (but still it pollutes less then the US). If it was not for Mao China would be enslaved.
MaoistLeninistMarx 2 months ago
@MaoistLeninistMarx Back it up? Frank Dikotter and a number of other professors here in China disagree with you. post a link that proves what you just said.
leif09123g 2 months ago
@leif09123g can you give me a link that proves it wrong .........
MaoistLeninistMarx 2 months ago
@MaoistLeninistMarx Lol, oh burden of proof. You so crazy. Say, can you prove that the lock-ness monster does not exist? and you can't say "because there's no evidence" because you're doing exactly the same thing.
DMAN123223 1 month ago
@leif09123g ............I guess you can not
MaoistLeninistMarx 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Socialism/Communism HAS worked before, If we look at the USSR, 70% of it economy was destroyed from WWII, 28 MILLION Soviets died from the nazi-rats, and they quickly rebuilt everything through Socialism and were the first nation to space and a major threat to USA imperialism, even though when the USSR was founded to begin with it was already over 100 years behind the west.
MaoistLeninistMarx 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Capitalism actually does not create innovationEven in the US the important innovations came from the Federal Government or NON-PROFITS (without profit motive), the polio vaccine (the USA's only medical innovation worth talking about) came from a NON-PROFIT organization, NASA was a government organization (not for profit), Computer-chips were created through government funds, so even in US capitalism is proven to not work and the profit motive is proven fake. The US has high unemployment 13%!!!
MaoistLeninistMarx 2 months ago
As long you do what he dems usefull it is ok to stay home (1:30). The big myth is FDR by goverment intervention ended the depression. As goverment intervened unemployment rose(4:06).
nobhiker 2 months ago
However, I really like how you pointed out that so many jobs pay without any contribution to society. Just think of all the wasteful jobs in banking, accounting, stock trading, and so forth...
IseeRightThrough2you 2 months ago
I think we do need to force people to work - at least to do some of the less prestigious and enjoyable jobs. A doctor would have a sense of purpose, but a truck driver, although crucial to society, wouldn't have that same motivation and pride. But I think this would be better accomplished with government policies than our abusive and wasteful money system.
IseeRightThrough2you 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MsSexySocialist Your *quote* is incriminating beyond repair. (Your *quote* answers your obfuscating question, has that really gone over your head?)
"means of production"=My wrench.
"under common ownership"=My wrench stolen.
________I own a wrench_______you steal my wrench
Rachel: "means of production [...] under common ownership"=*Robbery*.
R O B B E R Y.
Fess up, you can obfuscate no more; it all ends here: *Robbery*. Admit it.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
Comment removed
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
learn the difference between capitalism and corporatism. i love how people say they love or prefer communism, even though they havnt been to a communist country. china is more capitalist than america! america has the highest taxes against businesses in the world
kazbh89 2 months ago
Please realize that Obama is NOT a capitalist. Using QEII as an example does not strengthen your case.
dalecookson1 2 months ago
I respect your view points on this topic. However it is my opinion that while we do pay 3rd world countries very little for their labor, if we didnt pay them anything at all they would be in a worse state than they are current are in. While the conditions of sweat shops are horrible in comparison to American work environments; they would have to seek alternate forms of employment such as scavenging or in some cases prostitution.
They are not poor because of America, they simply dont produce.
chocolatetoastify 2 months ago
China has a price system. Small scale self-sufficient areas are as large as true communism can be without everything collapsing.
SecondAgeOfReason 2 months ago
The earth is under the ownership of everyone but we must have good stewards to protect it's productive nature, which is the life force that man lives off of. When less than 10 percent own a vast majority of land, the most necessary part of production, then there's obviously a problem. Lets end this senseless quasi-feudal society and embrace the equal ownership of the earth. Poverty would vanish overnight.
ihatemoses 2 months ago
Increased production would also increase the demand for labor. Wages would be much higher and people would only need to work if they want MORE. The LVT would also drastically reduce the market price for land because of the new burden put onto it. Basically, it would reverse all the current "negatives" of capitalism. Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and many others basically support this view.
ihatemoses 2 months ago
No one would be "forced" to work because like the lucky landlords (serfs) of our current system, all the have to do is sit on it and make money by charging rent. The "rent" would be based on the land's value. This would be known as the Land Value Tax (LVT). Many interesting thing will come from the LVT! Since there's a new burden on land owners to pay the land value tax, production would sky rocket. Increased production would mean increased competition (lower prices).
ihatemoses 2 months ago
You should look into Georgism and the Citizen's Dividend. It's capitalism but believes that all land (earth) is owned equally by all it's inhabitants or equally by all the nation's citizens. It flips the idea of "landlordism" on it's head. The people who own land have to pay a rent to the community. Each american would receive a check of 30k-100k depending on what stats you believe because no one has ever done a full assessment of land values in America.
ihatemoses 2 months ago
To all those whom the user qwertypoiu4321 may accuse of being "violent people" for holding positions that may differ even slightly from his, he has openly admitted that his plan for achieving his personal "anarcho"-capitalist utopia is to build what he calls a "voluntary class" (band of Atlas Shrugged-reading sycophants) and violently overthrow the US government.
Please keep that in mind if he ever tried to infer that you hold "violent" beliefs ^^
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@MsSexySocialist lol anarcho capitalism will be nothing but a dystopia. Well if he is planning on violently overthrowing the US government then he's obviously a terrorist and must be reported.
joekopor 2 months ago
@joekopor
I don't think the US government has very much to worry about regarding his plans.
His "voluntary class" at the moment appears to have a total membership of one.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
Overall good video. However when you said socialism solved the great depression by government agencies...That is not socialism. Had socialism actually been tried, that is: Democratic workers control of the means of production, then it would have fixed the problem, not circumvent it for another 70 years like capitalism and the reforms FDR introduced.
joekopor 2 months ago
That's a VERY good looking guy!! not to the point of course but he is... Interesting what he says too.
brlum 3 months ago
haha this dude is so funny. Hes sitting up there with his beard and his hat, talking about gold and money, telling other people how to live and whats right and wrong, whats fair and unfair. I just started rolling. Then he throws the TORA into it, of all things. Then I start looking at the last names of the worlds greatest Investment Bankers and I just LOST it! He just wants to share OTHER PEOPLES stuff! "Hey man, let me share some of your stuff with me!" haha
Gloomshadow100 3 months ago
He who contributes, wants to reap the fruits of his labor, that's the idea but the reality is most work so that the few can reap the fruits of the labor of others.
TheDano1947 3 months ago
china is actually not that communist.. They are more capitalist.
People do not have to be forced to work, you are right on that. But if people don't work they are not entitled to the fruits of others' work.
The New Deal did not fix the economy during the Great Depression. Other countries, such as Britain, actually healed much faster than the United States (1933) with no such New Deal.
1Pantikian 3 months ago
Your opinion of capitalism is wrong. According to the library of economics and liberty,
"Adam Smith has sometimes been caricatured as someone who saw no role for government in economic life. In fact, he believed that government had an important role to play. Like most modern believers in free markets, Smith believed that the government should enforce contracts and grant patents and copyrights to encourage inventions and new ideas."
This doesn't fit your claim that capitalism allows cheating.
thegreatapologist 3 months ago
China's economy is a bubble. Estimates indicate that it will burst in 10-20 years and that they're government will collapse.
thegreatapologist 3 months ago
China's economy is doing great because of very low wages and the fact that, like Russia, they've managed to combine the oppressive nature of a Communist government with the advantages of Capitalism. People are more likely to overlook human rights abuses - and in China there are many of these every day - when they're making good money.
Btw, the New Deal largely failed and it was the Second World War which lifted the world out of the Great Depression. Crack a book (other than useless Torah).
davenielsen78 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist The VP puts a huge emphasis on self realization (for lack of a better word, people have to rethink what is valuable to them). The transition for capitalism to the venus project is huge, and is still being discussed among the group, but to think it is too far in the future is an extremely negative outlook. (MLKjr)
Technocrats are racist, believing races should be "separate but equal", the Vp has non such intent, and values individual beliefs. Happy to answer any more questions
ProTipd 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Man didn't conceive of capitalism. It's not an idea of man. The concept of capitalism is entirely defined and forumulated under the auspices of God, vis à vis the Bible. That is to say the compilation known as the King James Bible, not Qu'ran or something of that nature.
stratoleft 3 months ago
Did God not give men free will just as a free market gives people economic free will? If a free market is evil by your logic then so is God's desire for us to have free will. "The Lord loves a CHEERFUL giver" not a coerced giver.
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics
God doesn't exist.
And neither has a "free market" ever existed.
Belief in both is the mistaken belief that they freedom when in reality what both offer is subordination.
Subordination to the will of a fictional entity and subordination to the will of the 1% in the economy who own and control all its wealth. Unless you're part of that 1% of course, in which case you're free as can be due to other's lack of freedom.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Subordination? I can believe or not believe in God. I can choose who to work for and who not to work for. These are my choices. I cannot however, tell the government that I don't want to support a giant ponzi scheme (social security), I can't tell the government not to obligate me to buy healthcare under the commerce clause of the US Constitution, and I can't tell them I don't want to pay for nonsensical wars. Government is oppression, not a free market, and certainly not God.
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics
"Government is oppression"
I agree. But what you seem to want in the wake of state and government is to simply give all the power it possesses to private institutions.
At least a government in a liberal democracy has some degree of accountability to their citizens. A corporation has no accountability to anyone but its shareholders.
"I can choose who to work for and who not to work for"
In other words, you want the freedom to choose your master.
Not freedom from masters.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist I never advocated an abscence of government, but I do believe it is the politicians who are truly unaccountable. Countless companies have died or suffered huge financial losses by doing things that consumers disagree with. Sparvo is a perfect and timely example of the power of consumer responsiveness. Finally, I can also choose to work for myself (which I now do). In a free market I'm my own master. Under socialism, the state and everyone who doesn't want to work is my master.
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics
"Under socialism, the state and everyone who doesn't want to work is my master"
In anarchism and libertarian socialism as a whole; there is no state. There is no master but yourself
"Countless companies have died or suffered huge financial losses by doing things that consumers disagree with"
Shell hasn't; even after destroying the Niger delta, Chevron hasn't despite destroying the lands of indigenous Ecuadorians, BP hasn't even after a certain incident involving oil you may know of
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist
In order to have socialized programs like national healthcare, college, and wellfare that are NOT voluntary, you must have a governing body that forces participation. Ergo, there must be a "state" in one loose form or another. Whatever the tax rate that "state" imposes is the degree to which your state is your master. The oil companies haven't died because demand exceeds negative perception. How would this change under socialism? Are you advocating an end to fossil fuel use?
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics
No you don't. All provisional social programs which the state now provides could be done much better by community-owned and democratically-controlled cooperatives. There's no need for a "monopoly on the use of coercion" to carry these important services out.
As for fossil fuel companies, they haven't gone out of business because the privatist market economy can only give an indication of scarcity and demand, not social or ecological cost which is equally important.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist So what- these programs would be purely voluntary? Because if they aren't voluntary, anyone who may not want such an institutuion would be forced into participating. Now you need a "state" to make it work.
You're right on the fossil fuel companies, but that is where I believe, and this is one of the few times, that a gov must intervene in an economic capacity to shift supply and demand curves to account for enviro-costs. This would be tough on a municiple level as you suggest.
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics
I'll respond in my next PM if that's okay as i feel this one would need some context which would take more than 400 charters to elucidate.
But in summary; yes they would all be voluntary. And anyone who didn't like them could either go elsewhere or start their own; same goes for commercial enterprise.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Sounds good! Although I feel bad for everyone else who can't see our conversation anymore haha!
andyconomics 3 months ago
Do not let Rachel fool you, she is a State-Socialist.
State-Socialist Rachel: "The means of production (productive property) [...] are under common ownership"
State-Socialist Lenin: "the private property of individuals. Socialism converts them into common property. [...] the common ownership of the means of production,"
I refuted her for 4 months until she could no longer evade her quotes and she gave up.
All you have to do with violent people is bring up consent and they lose it.
qwertypoiu4321 3 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 I completely agree my friend. Like I told her she wants the cake and to eat it too. She desires the things socialism can "provide" e.g. college, healthcare, and welfare but claims there would be no coercive government to enforce participation. The problem is: without the threat of jail, what incentive would someone who can already afford those things have for joining a socialist co-op ?
We disagree sure, but I can still be cordial with her. You catch more flies with honey!
andyconomics 3 months ago
@andyconomics Once you get a quote out of her (like the one I gave you of her below) and start trying to make her accountable to it without misdirecting she will stop being cordial and have a tantrum fit; trust me.
I literally wasted months 'debating' her until she gave up, I would start making her accountable to her violent, State-Socialist quote immediately before you waste any more time.
qwertypoiu4321 3 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 So far she seems to be nice enough with me but I agree with your point. As I said, she thinks socialism could exist without big government but this would be impossible. Like most socialists of any dogma, I believe (and as you are saying) when push comes to shove, she will side with the state to enforce "equality." The thiing is, equality can never exist in any capacity, economic or otherwise, since people are born with different talents, gifts, opportunities, etc.
andyconomics 3 months ago
She was nice to me for weeks until I finally distilled that quote out of her and pointed out violent 'common' 'ownership'=State ownership.
She misdirected, reframed, outright lied, and misrepresented among countless other red-faced tantrums when I demanded she be accountable to that violent State-Socialist quote.
Ask her if she believes in voluntary ownership of capital goods and I 100% guarantee she will not agree and will say the 'common' ownership quote. Then watch the tantrums begin.
qwertypoiu4321 3 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 By voluntary ownership of capital goods are you refering to the means of production or private property in general? I'll be honest, many of her answers to my questions seemed a little nebulous. They weren't concrete ideas like yes, you can own the means of production yourself or no, the state trumps private property rights. I think the reason the details are cloudy is because she knows they can't actually work without a controlling state, but doesn't want to admit it.
andyconomics 3 months ago
I use Capital goods as synonymous with means of production ('factors' of production usually includes all three production inputs, not just the capital goods one of three).
I consider any property voluntarily owned 'private property', but Proudhon/Chomsky/Anarchist FAQ-types specifically consider 'private property' just capital goods (as an artificial distinction to legitimize stealing CGs).
I brought her down mentioning if I grew a pineapple tree capital good (I will send you a PM with more).
qwertypoiu4321 3 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 That's business as usual for her. She's made up her mind and won't even consider the evidence that would challenge her opinions.
davenielsen78 3 months ago
@davenielsen78
Actually, I've "made up my mind" precisley because I HAVE considered the "evidence" (assertions of ancaps) that challenge my views.
It sucks = )
Hence why I have the views that I do.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Who do you think you're kidding? You don't even know what qualifies as evidence. You're one of those people who think that they can just invent what they want to be true, and then believe it. Those people are either stupid, or pathological liars. You certainly don't believe in telling anyone what evidence you have to support your views, another thing common to the dishonest and/or stupid.
davenielsen78 3 months ago
@davenielsen78
The "evidence" I was referring to was actually what anarcho-capitalists keep claiming is evidence but is actually nothing but assertion, blind faith, and a willful distortion of history.
It's quite clear you couldn't even understand what I was saying. lol
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist - No, it's evidence YOU don't know what you're saying. You're so indoctrinated you're BEYOND stupid.
thomaserossi 2 months ago
@thomaserossi
Word of advice: don't assume that each and every individual who happens to disagree with you is "indoctrinated".
Also; calling someone "stupid"? Really?
What are you, seven?
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
Comment removed
davenielsen78 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@davenielsen78
"Based on her username alone, she's not going to be listening to reason any time soon"
So you're claiming that because I identify as supporting a certain set of beliefs, I am somehow incapable of utilizing reason? And yet you have the audacity to accuse ME of being unable to distinguish between facts and "unsupported opinion".
Talk about doublethink.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@davenielsen78
"Anyone who disagrees with you is accused of being, among other things, one of the "anarcho-capitalists""
You aren't very smart. Anarcho-capitalism is not some sort of slur, it is a political and economic ideology which many people do follow; and whom I oppose as I happen to disagree with said ideology.
"or operating on blind faith"
Which in my experience is exactly what such people do.
You however don't appear to have such beliefs.
You feel content to merely insult
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@MsSexySocialist You know, I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Are you sure you didn't intend this reply for someone else?
davenielsen78 2 months ago
@thomaserossi Based on her username alone, she's not going to be listening to reason any time soon.
davenielsen78 2 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Based on what I wrote in my reply I did understand you. I was just pointing out that, based on many of the things you've said here and elsewhere on YouTube, you don't understand what qualifies as evidence - you can't make the distinction between unsupported opinion and opinion backed by evidence. So, obviously, you can't evaluate what you can't recognize. Duh.
davenielsen78 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 You repeated yourself.
leftwingersunited 3 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
Actually, I "gave up" so to speak on our exchange after I gave you an ultimatum numerous times that I would stop answering your PMs unless you provided answers to that list of problems that would inevitably occur under your proposed psuedo-anarchist capitalist utopia.
You failed to do so. Even after repeated attempts at asking you.
Hence I explained that further coversation was pointless and a waste of my time - which it was.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Six months later and you are still a nameless State-Socialist.
Marx: "capital is converted into common property, [...] factories and instruments of production owned by the state;"
Lenin: "Socialism converts them into common property. [...] the common ownership of the means of production,"
Rachel: "The means of production [...] are under common ownership"
No one will ever submit to be 'under' your violent 'ownership', sorry.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
(sigh)
You need to come up with some original material. Seriously.
Stop just copy and pasting the same three out-of-context quotes in a futile bid to somehow prove guilt by association. It didn't work the first 20 or so times you tried it and it's not gonna work now.
Also, how exactly am I "nameless" when you list my name in your comment? lol
You're actually pretty funny all things considered.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
You are hiding your last name, just another nameless, adolescent State-Socialist.
You hate *quotes*, the fact you have not been able to make a glimmer of a case to disprove these *quotes* after months says it all.
No one will ever submit to be 'under' your violent 'ownership', sorry.
Mao: "the socialist economy [...] where the means of production are owned by the whole people"
Rachel: "The means of production [...] are under common ownership"
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
Exactly what business is it of yours to know what my last name is?
I suspect at this point you just want to mark me down on a list of targets to have murdered when your terrorist voluntary class decides to overthrow the government.
As for the out-of-context "quotes", your association fallacy didn't work the first 20 or 30 times and it doesn't work now.
Also, "common ownership" (indivisible stewardship) is not the same thing as "owned by the whole people". Sorry.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
You are hiding your name after you solicited my name; just a nameless, adolescent State-Socialist.
Red-haired people, short people and voluntary class are descriptions, not organizations; you have no physical evidence of anything else for your malicious hearsay.
Stalin: "social ownership of the means of production has been established in our country,"
Rachel: "The means of production [...] are under common ownership"
Physical *quotes* speak for themselves: State-Socialism.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
"Social" ownership isn't the same thing as common ownership (the restoration of the commons) either.
Please at least do some BASIC research.
No wonder no one takes you seriously.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
Notice you do not deny your violent *quote*. Whole People (Mao), Common (Marx, Lenin, You), Social (Stalin) are all the same thing: Legal Provocation (theft/robbery).
When you violently initiate Legal Provocations (theft/robbery), screaming 'Whole People', 'Common' or 'Social' changes nothing, sorry.
Maybe this is time for you to start up a Spice Girls fan club, or 100 other useless activities 100X more effective than rambling violent, Stalinist nonsense that will go nowhere.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
Once again you display in a public forum viewable by anyone how you're utterly incapable of forming a coherent argument against anarchist principles.
You're far more content to fall back on a myriad of repeated logical fallacies; straw man, equivocation, either/or reasoning, argumentium ad communum, and guilt by association.
All amazingly present in your last comment.
You can't respond to the fact that ownership in common is a completely different thing to . . .
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
. . . social, collective, or whatever ownership, thus you utilize equivocation to make them SOUND like the same thing, erect a straw man (communism), attempt to claim I believe in it (argumentium ad communum and the association fallacy in one).
You are literally the only person I've ever conversed with claiming to be an "anarcho"-capitalist who can't give any actual critique of anarchism on it's own terms and feels the need to resort to attacking fiction.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@MsSexySocalist lol, once again, mention consent to a violent child and watch hilarity ensure:
Physical *quotes*:
Marx: "capital is converted into common property, [...] factories and instruments of production owned by the state;"
Lenin: "Socialism converts them into common property. [...] the common ownership of the means of production,"
Rachel: "The means of production [...] are under common ownership"
No one will *ever* submit to be under your violent 'ownership', sorry.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
First you set up a statement regarding *property*, then regurgitate the same three out-of-context quotes yet again, then conclude by contradicting yourself by claiming it involves people.
Oh yeah, I forgot, people ARE just property in your world aren't they?
Another thing, QUOTES aren't "physical". lol
Tell you what, renounce your current plans of violent terrorism and violent insurrection by you and your "voluntary class" and I might take your opinions seriously
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@MsSexySocialist As I said, bring up consent with violent people, hilarity ensues:
Short people, red-haired people and voluntary class are *descriptions*, not groups; your malicious hearsay has *zero* evidence, sorry.
Notice you do *not* deny your violent *quote*: No one will *ever* submit to be 'under' your violent 'ownership'; *ever*. Get that?
You: Malicious hearsay with *zero* evidence.
Me: Actual *quotes*.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
Common ownership involves the means of production of a given economy.
People are not property, hence they cannot be means of production, hence no one CAN be "under" ownership.
Silly boy.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
Marx: "capital is converted into common property, [...] instruments of production owned by the state;"
Rachel: "means of production [...] under common ownership"
Give me your computer, wrenches, garden, vehicle and clothes used to work and any other capital good or I will get out the club and kidnap/murder you: Legal Provocation (theft; robbery; assault; solicitation).
That will *never* happen, sorry.
What an uncivil, degrading, sexist comment at the end.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
I'm surprised you were more offended by the "boy" part than the "silly" part ^^
Probably says a lot.
Again, sorry to break this too you, but your infantile attempt at guilt by association didn't work the first dozen or so times and it's not gonna work in the future.
Literally every other "anarcho"-capitalist I've debated or conversed with possesses the ability to critique anarchism on it's own terms without resorting to foolish association fallacies - all bar you
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
@MsSexySocialist Would you like me to call you a silly kitten? Just more of your adolescent, uncivil shallowness.
Rachel: "means of production [...] are under common ownership"
Robbery (MW): the act or practice of robbing; specifically: larceny from the person or presence of another by violence or threat.
Any *criminal* that commits *robbery* should be *charged* as such, period.
Finally understand?
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321
1. Explain what exactly you believe *common ownership* to be in practice.
2. Who exactly "charges" people who commit what are considered "crimes" in your ideal world?
This world of yours sounds more Orwellian the more you speak of it. I'm confident that it'll thankfully never be actualized, as I believe you and only you seem to support it, but it does truly trouble me that someone could be capable of the doublethink to want both statelessness AND totalitarianism.
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
Robbery (MW): the act or practice of robbing; specifically: larceny from the person or presence of another by violence or threat.
Capital Good (MW): 1(a)2: accumulated goods devoted to the production of other goods.
I own a wrench and you commit robbery against me=*Robbery*.
Rachel: "means of production [...] under common ownership"=*Robbery*. Period.
Admit it.
qwertypoiu4321 2 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 (A)
Once again I ask you a straight question and you refuse to answer it.
You're not helping your case.
Also, I googled your username and observed your comments on other websites. LITERALLY everyone thinks your views are a joke. You seem to be an example of Poe's Paradox in action.
Look, you may not believe me but I am trying to help you here, if you want to be taken seriously and engage in civil discourse with others, stop doing the following things . . .
MsSexySocialist 2 months ago
have you researched the venus project? i think their idea of a resource based economy would be right up your alley. Many of the same concepts you speak of ( they intend to remove money and allow technology to create abundance). Should check them out!
ProTipd 3 months ago
@ProTipd
The VP does offer a very good illustration for what we should ideally be working towards in the future (perhaps by the end of this century), but it doesn't seem to offer much in the way of actually getting there. Nor does it have any concrete solutions to problems in the here and now.
In my own research on the VP, I can't find any indication for what its political system would be like, is it seen as being democratic?
Because from what I can see it seems disturbingly technocratic.
MsSexySocialist 3 months ago
"China is providing for a billion people"??? WTF are you serious? The vast majority of Chinese live on pennies a day and scrape their living from the ground. It's ignorance and downright deceptive to paint the picture otherwise.
ghiisga 3 months ago
wtf
asamlang5 3 months ago
Excellent video... :0)
DavinaFaerie 3 months ago
Every single man made political, economical and social structures are destined to fail. Human desires towards all Utopian ideals always tend to end in the selfish exploitation of others. Though all humans are industrious they are not met to live in a socioeconomic structure. It's all processed living.
echoes1234567891 4 months ago
I like this dude. Good job I'll subscribe
pistolpete667 4 months ago
anarcho-jew for the win
SyndicalistTimes 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why are Jews so radically liberal?
gitchigoomi 5 months ago
great stuff! you are an anarchist and you dont even know it ;)
TheVibratory 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Want to see a worldwide proposal for a workers' walkout on Profit? Jackdempseywriter.wordpress.c-o-m
37Dionysos 5 months ago
The big difference is that a lot of the jobs we do today have nothing to do with human needs. When you are doing farm work, atleast you know you produce something usefull to society. When you work in some callcenter calling random stranger about some 'deal' for example, you would just feel like you are a pest to society and the only reason you do it is to pay your bills.
A lot of jobs are no forfilling because people feel their jobs are useless.
Zidriz 7 months ago 3
"People are industrious by nature. He's productive; he wants to do." Tell that to the lazy co-workers. They're obviously doing it wrong.
ShadowofaRoar 8 months ago
@ShadowofaRoar In current society, you can't expect people to be enthusiastic about work. A lot of people feel forced to work to survive. Ofcourse they aren't going to be very happy to do that work that is enslaving them.
Zidriz 7 months ago
@Zidriz I've experienced farm work. Believe me, it's not something to be enthusiastic about, either. Between the Stone Age and now, I don't think there's ever been a point where people didn't work to survive. Only now we have air conditioning.
ShadowofaRoar 7 months ago
let me also add that one of the reasons that communism doesnt work is because the amount of energy put forth by capitalist countries to sabatoge them. the usa dropped more bombs on viet nam than all of world war 2 combined. capitalist countries also use sanctions and embargos to starve people in communist countries. capitalist countries have also been known to poison food supplies of communist countries. check out the secrets of the cia video for more
JAVILDSEN 8 months ago
you are a sadly ignorant person
albcwc 8 months ago
You're orthodox and you read Karl Marx? I thought orthodox sit around reading nothing but Torah.
bapyou 1 year ago
China's economy is not doing great. I dont know where you're from man but China's is the definition of few have's and many have not's. They dont have pension systems, social securities, or many other luxuries you and I take for granted. Yes, people do wish to work and be known their work is valuable. However, it is easy for a government to approach you, tell you, clean this bathroom floor for 10 hours a day, and our nation will become great. But it is not easy for you to see and feel the change.
helloiam2mas 1 year ago
I guess in American, ignorance is a right.... I cannot believe that you think China is a communist country and the New Deal got the U.S. out of the Great Depression.
soldierz18 1 year ago
Hahahahahaha
oJKBo 1 year ago
But China has a more capitalist system than most socialist countries.
xx1994xxversion2 1 year ago 2
collectivism is wrong. all men are not created equal. nature, biology is a random natural or artificial selection of humans and brains. he who creates must keep what he earns. charity can help those less endowed.
Rico8458 1 year ago
Read a little Ayn Rand., she lived under your utopian vision of big brother. Capitalism allows those with a REAL vision of being allowed to prosper for your creativity the efforts you expend to see those ideas come to fruition. Perhaps you should become a red chinese citizen for a while and see how well they accept or tolerate your own beliefs of which your own personal garb and beard represent ( I respectfully assume you are of the Jewish faith). Try it and let us know how long you last.
calinten 1 year ago
@calinten "Read a little Ayn Rand"
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves hobbits, elves, and wizards.
bapyou 1 year ago 5
@bapyou Childish fantasy? Lifelong obsession? Stunted, socially crippled psychotics? You must be talking about readers of Das Kapital, surely.
Or perhaps not. You didn't mention that the readers become anti-Semites too.
DrCruel 1 year ago
You were not born in America, but here you are. Not in wonderful China or where ever it is you came from.
keepitwildtv 1 year ago
well said.
sugarcanegray 1 year ago
Socializm didnt work because West diid everything to sabotage it Almost West was going bancrupt with cold war but finaly West broke to
zagashow 1 year ago
@zagashow And socialism did not do everything to sabotage "west"!?!?! Ha ha ha, I take it as yet another example of superiority of capitalism!
Bankrupt are going to big, too soc.-governments, not capitalism ;)
zg76 1 year ago
This clown cites China. China - - before 'liberalization' and adopting a free market system - - had walls to keep its subjects from fleeing to capitalist Hong Kong.
Like every socialist crypto-marxist I have encountered he is unable to provide an example of a country that the US should emulate.
alphecca2539 1 year ago
@alphecca2539 Vietnam is doing really well. More and more jobs every year, and a lot less violence too. America should at least see what Vietnam is doing right. There is an example for you.
TheEmilio16 1 year ago
I just have to say that Americans are really allowing their Government to bleed them dry and leave them with nothing, the fact that so many of your own people are living on a dollar a day? You're a first world Country with 1.6 million homeless people! And you allow them to live like that? Your Government have suckered you good!
MarilynFilth 1 year ago
@MarilynFilth AS governments tend to do, always, and everywhere!
zg76 1 year ago
all I can say is thank you,bruddah.
BobbyMilk305 1 year ago
There is nothing wrong with capitalism, its corporatism, interventionism and statism thats wrong
!
China is not prosper because of its communistic ideology, in fact progress came about after backing off from those.
"If something didn't worked in past it dose not mean it will not work in future"?? I assume you didn't mean that for serious.
Capitalism actually brought prosperity to the masses, by producing for the masses!
New deal did not solved anything! It just prolonged the agony.
zg76 2 years ago
@zg76 youre one of those folk who believe the rich deserve their wealth. that they deserve their excess and debauchery. let me tell you something, dude. whatever you have can be taken from you, ask che guevara. ill leave you with this quote from the 1848 revolutions: "those who have nothing united in common envy, those who have everything united in common terror" heed those words bcuz the revolution is coming.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara I sincerely believe that I deserve to keep what I honestly earn! And neither you or someone else have a right to take that from me! And dude, you can try if you will!!!
Yap, the revolution is coming, but not the one you wish for: watch?v=B7jyYpYgOeE
zg76 1 year ago
@zg76 rights dont matter here. we have a right to take from those who hoarde. we will try, and we will succeed. and if the bourgoise and their supporters resist youll all be put up against a firing squad. just ask che.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara ha ha ha ha, yeah? Rights dont matter. You've sad it all!
Than drop them and be obedient servant.
Off course you don't, who are you to take away from anyone!? What moral superiority do you have over the others?!
You should grow up and see beyond you student days wearing Che Guevara t-shirts
zg76 1 year ago 17
@zg76 i have. no more tshirts, action time, bourgoise. those who have nothing united in common envy. those who have everyhing united in common terror.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara ahaaa... I see you have, ha ha ha... Why do you then advocate terror so hard???
zg76 1 year ago 7
@zg76 well, why do you advocate the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer? why do you advocate the upper class making a killing off of the blood and sweat of the working classes? i can just tell youre rich or better off than most and a well established member of the bourgoise.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara ahhh, answering question with a question!
Where do you see me writing "I wish rich getting richer..bla bla bal"??? Your whole world view is deducted aand poisoned by the Marxist idea of class struggle, witch in turn has its origins in critics of "Das eherne Lohngesetz", or Iron law of wages!
That stupidity, my friend, has been repudiated 150years ago! There is no class struggle.
P.S. this is some now phrase you commies use now?? Sadly I am not, but I am young and ambitious..
zg76 1 year ago
@zg76 Shut up
Jasonthegaiface 1 year ago
Its funny how you seem to skip over the GOOD things capitalism has brought. What about self-determination and WORKING for what you earn?
HaleFire7 2 years ago
You are wealthy or on a sure track to become wealthy. Don´t lie.
pappapaps 2 years ago
4000 children leave us from starvation every hour due to capitalism. Capitalism is garbage and so what if it brought us worldly things for a chance to run our government that's the same as saying it's ok to sell your soul for a cool car. Go look up what freedom is and tell me if we have it anymore and I do not want to hear the freedom of speech shit because that's the only freedom. If you notice even freedom of assembly is gone because you have to have a permit for it.
NewRevolutionLeader 2 years ago
@NewRevolutionLeader why should 5% control 95% of everything while 95% don't even have authority over 1%? the revolution is coming but we cant go so far as to give in to socialism and communism. but change must happen bcuz i hate nothing worse than the rich.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara
I do not hate rich people I just hate rich people who want no one else to prosper EXCEPT THEM. America is full of greed and corruption which is the worst in Washington. Revolution is a idea not a violent uprising but thing is we are forced to vote for either one of two parties because that's the way they want it. Both parties are one in the same really because it seems like both their goals are to serve themselves and not the people.
NewRevolutionLeader 1 year ago
@NewRevolutionLeader and its the rich who hoarde and have caused all these problems with their appetite for excess.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara
The ones most responsible are the ones sending American jobs to foreign countries and still making plenty of profit in America. For example look at gas companies who do not pay nothing in taxes and raise gas prices for NO REASON JUST TO SQUEEZE EVERY LAST DIME OUT OF OUR POCKETS. This country will be fruitful again when it stops its love fest with capitalism and dumps it for good.
NewRevolutionLeader 1 year ago
@HaleFire7 let me ask you something about that lie of working for what you earn? ive had to struggle and hustle and work my ass off for my pititful meager life, while the rich can do as they please when they please and if they lose a little, whatever who gives a fuck? not only that but they pass their wealth on to their descendents. theyve created a new nobility and aristocracy and i promise you we will bring it down. that is a promise.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
Wonder why China has a good economy? Because american's started believing they deserved something because they lived in America. They didn't want to live tough, they lived outsidetheir means. Now look, America produces nothing and exports nothing, besides debt. We switched from a country of producers to a country of consumers literally overnight. Overseas countries (like china) will be the first to profit from the mentality American's have gotten.
HaleFire7 2 years ago
Hmm.
It looks to me like China is just going into their Industrialisation mode. Going from a mainly agricultural society to a more modern society.
We've seen this happening in Europe, the US, Russia, pretty much every developed country. From these areas the Sovjets did this the most humane.
The future of the world is communism, but first complete socialism. Just like the future of 1500 years ago was feudalism.
pulsatingremedy 2 years ago
/sigh the new deal didn't fix our economy and get us out of the depression, WWII and the war profiteering did.
edog5005 2 years ago
But wait a minute: Abraham was a capitalist as shows when he sat down to discuss the sale and purchase of Sarah's grave. The Hitite's were going to give him the plot of land, but Abraham said no. I think that your anti-capitalist tendencies and fears stem from the fact that you are of Kazar racial stock and you being Ashekenasi do not know business. I am of Sephardi stock and was not poisoned by the eastern European mentalities. I do truly appreciate your help to help via all your videos.
vassephardi 2 years ago
He's a typical brainwashed liberal Ashkenazi, what do you expect. Don't forget that Karl Marx was an Ashkenazi too!
Vagrant8 2 years ago
You're right. I feel sorry for the Ashkenazim as they were force-fed that commie stuff actually for centuries even before Karl Marx codified it. That's why the State of Israel today is actually socialist/communist for the kicked out commies, aka Ashkenazim hold the power. Unbelievable they think that those old German clothes from over 200 years ago is now a Jewish uniform. They look like bootleg Amish. Sorry but it's true.
vassephardi 2 years ago
China is -not- a communist country. It is an oligarchy with little or no input of the workings of the economy or policies. They manage with great masses of people by having the majority live in disgraceful poverty. Even the U.S.A. is more socialist, having things like public high school.
Gold or paper money they both have inflation. The reason why they input lots of new money into the economy during a crisis is to replace the lost equity burst in that bubble. (fight deflation with inflation)
metalorg 2 years ago
You are confusing capitalism with statism. Statism creates the problems, not capitalism. Both communism and capitalism would work a hell of a lot better without any government.
ExquisiteDoom 2 years ago
words fail what the mind takes in.... theres too many definitions of slightly different perturbations in market theory imo... too difficult to discuss
RamzGT 2 years ago
You do realize america was created to be a REPUBLIC, not a DEMOCRACY. The problem is people got them confused, they actually think a DEMOCRACY is a good thing, its not. Its a MOB rules all mentality that leads to Oligarchy, which is a country ruled by the elite, which is what we have today. THIS IS NOT CAPITALISM. Capitalism is a great thing, but it has to be practiced correctly, and in a REPUBLIC, not an OLIGARCHY. The real myth is that we are not practicing true capitalism and havent forawhile
Shiftfallout 2 years ago
@Shiftfallout a republic is nothing more than a representative democracy.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
@anthonymbichara This is incorrect. Look at the history of both Greek and Roman systems, the rise and fall based on the change from a republic to a full democracy. Republic means the law for the populace is above all, even the rulers, a democracy puts the mob's oligarchy above the law. Mob rule leads to an unstable law based system in which the law is not for the people nor is it reliable.
Shiftfallout 1 year ago
@Shiftfallout its based on democracy tho. a republic i think just organizes it better than just mob rule.
anthonymbichara 1 year ago
"There can be only one permanent revolution - a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man." Leo Tolstoy. I love the guy. I recently did a research report on him for school. However, I got that little quote of his off wikipedia-I'm not sure what book, or whatever else, its from.
crumolater 3 years ago
may be you should make new games like paper airplane that can fly around the kissmass tree and back in the hand with £5. try playing other games that bring all together in places
winkissy 3 years ago
Actually I completely disagree with you on this. Here's a good quote for you "Capitalism is the worst form of economy except for all the rest." As Peter Schiff says, "We didn't get out of the Great depression because of the New Deal; We got out of the Great depression despite the New deal." The government is terrible at allocating capital. The government doesn't have money. It can only take from the private sector, and inefficiently distribute it.
bdc03 3 years ago
Anything the government does to get us out of the depression we're in will only make it worse. Socialism and government manipulation of markets are the reason we are in this mess. It was the federal reserve who dropped the interest rates down to 1 percent, and the bush regime who told everyone to go buy a house. Also, the government shipped all of our industry out of countries with all of these so called "free trade" agreements.
bdc03 3 years ago
To blame this on free market and capitalism is just wrong. Unfortunately what's going to happen is the problems are just going to get worse and worse. The Obama team is going to say look at how bad capitalism failed we need more government. The worse it gets the more freedoms, and the larger our government will get until we have no economy and no freedoms. The problem isn't capitalism, the problem is socialism and new world order trade policies.
bdc03 3 years ago
I think when communism reigns supreme, it takes away from the power of the mind and puts it into that of human nature.
To my understanding, what it comes down to is that men who are ugly, need to become more powerful than others to get women. Communism does not take this into effect.
I think capitalism is the perfect balance of elements.
brian12934 3 years ago