cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply


Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?

  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Come chat and see that we're all a bit crazy on IRC!
  • Do not post any artwork from sexyfur.com and/or
    Jeremy Bernal. This is now a bannable offense.
Flockmod!

File: IMG_0443.JPG - (35.26 KB, 485x352) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
36107 No.3502157

Can't wait for those tariffs to Make America Great Again! Electronics will be too expensive for the average person! Maybe we can even price out video games from shitty Japanese companies, like Nintendo and Bandai-Namco, forcing people to buy Real American video games from classic American companies like EA and Activision! Seven more years, gotcha libs!

No.3502161

trump's game is unreal. what level dimension of chess are we on now? also if you know what chess is, please tell me. so I can kick your (((faggot soyboy ass)))

No.3502167

>>3502157

So.. Trump plan from the start was bankrupting the USA by fighting the biggest debt owner.. while causing increase of prices, losing jobs (carrier, coal plants) not creating any jobs, and rich people being richer than ever (specially Trump's donors).

I have to agree with Trump cultists now.
He's a winner!

No.3502179

>>3502157

>video games

gotta have priorities
>>3502161
3
>>3502167
Tariffs -> US industrial capacity -> military supply chain -> "Fun"

No.3502184

>>3502179

>electronics shooting up in price
>trade wars
>stock markets plummeting
>value of the dollar in the toilet
>china becomes the dominant geopolitical force

MAGA GOD EMPEROR 9001 MOAR YEARS TAKE THAT LIBTARDS

No.3502197
File: everything-went-better-than-expected.jpg - (24.17 KB, 300x244) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
24747

Stuff increases in prices, oh no, can't buy the $10 china trash any longer.

But wait, local employment increases and the money you spend doesn't vanish abroad. Suddenly the people have a lot more money to spend, and wages increase.

No.3502198
File: warface.jpg - (140.01 KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
143368

>>3502184

No.3502199

>>3502184

>>value of the dollar in the toilet

That merely increases exports, as the price of US made goods drops relative to the world market. That's a good thing, because it fixes the trade deficit caused by China's artifically low prices.

No.3502200
File: 1522700957.shin0r0z_1522631874188.jpg - (66.83 KB, 686x718) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
68439

I'm a liberal but only if it's not too much of an inconvenience. Slave labor and awful working conditions in china are bad but I can't be expected to pay more for the iPhone!

No.3502206

Plus, with the value of the dollar dropping faster than the interest on the national debt, guess what happens to the national debt?

Inflation eats debts because the real value of the debt drops faster than the cumulation of interest. Combine with re-vitalized exports and industry to sell stuff abroad, and you got money flowing in, and you got something nice going on.

Of course if fucks over people who have any savings, but the American public doesn't have any savings! Except the baby boomer pensionares who've hoarded all the wealth. How's that for social justice?

No.3502209

>>3502161
this but unironically
captcha: dag

No.3502274

>>3502200

>fucking up the global economy and pushing china to become the dominant world power is gonna be great for us workers

Rightwingers can't economy.

No.3502284

>>3502274
The world economy will collapse! China will become a superpower! All because.. trump added... some tariffs. Fuck off corporatist neoliberal. You'll say anything to get your cheep plastic toys made by chinese slave labor. Free ride is over.

No.3502290

>>3502274
China is dependent on other countries manufacturing everything over there. China is actively maintaining the trade imbalance by manipulating the exchange rate of Yuan vs. Dollar. Without that effort, the price of Chinese made products would quickly become less competitive and manufacturing would return to the west.

The same factories that used to employ people back home were basically shipped over and run at 1/10th the price. The real material cost to run the factories is still more or less the same. The savings come from the differences in currency value and relative living standards and the resulting levels of prices, because you don't have to pay your Chinese workers health insurance, dental care, or a living wage by any western standards - and you get cheap polluting coal power without having to care about environmental regulations. All this damage costs something, but to someone else.

Meanwhile, back at home, the social costs didn't vanish by moving the factories abroad. The same people who used to work in manufacturing are now unemployed, and still demand upkeep - only now this cost is socialized to the taxpayer. The profit for importing the stuff is privatized to the assholes who moved the factories to China, and the money that used to pay for the workers at home, that would be needed to pay their re-education and/or welfare now, is being exported down the trade deficit.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/09/chinas-peg-to-the-dollar.asp

>The true value of the yuan is difficult to ascertain, and although various studies over the years suggest a wide range of undervaluation - from as low as 3% to as high as 50% - the general agreement is that the currency is substantially undervalued. By keeping the yuan at artificially low levels, China makes its exports more competitive in the global marketplace. China achieves this by pegging the yuan to the U.S. dollar at a daily reference rate set by the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) and allowing the currency to fluctuate within a fixed band (set at 1% as of January 2014) on either side of the reference rate. Because the yuan would appreciate significantly against the greenback if it were allowed to float freely, China caps its rise by buying dollars and selling yuan.
No.3502292

>>3502290

>The same factories that used to employ people back home were basically shipped over and run at 1/10th the price.

But those people were the white working class in the rust belt so the bourgeois living in coastal cities don't care. Retired boomers don't care either so long as their retirement investment accounts increase in value.

No.3502294

>>3502274
So basically, what would happen if the US dollar suddenly lost a lot of value is that the Chinese dollar reserves would lose value and the Yuan would sink down with the dollar, forcing China to unpeg it from the dollar or lose their purchasing power on the world market. That in turn would shift the trade balance the other way around.

See, the Chinese are banking on the fact that the US wouldn't do anything drastic to the dollar's value, and Trump is exactly the sort of crazy that would, and will, and he's right: this trade war can be won. Even as the trade war itself is a losing game, the shakeup forces the Chinese to stop playing their little monetary games and restores balance to the world market.

Sometimes you got to drink a little poison to get rid of the parasites.

No.3502295

>>3502292

>But those people were the white working class in the rust belt so the bourgeois living in coastal cities don't care.

And?

Even they are being fucked over by the increasing social costs, because those rust belt workers would eventually defect from the republican party if nothing was done about the matter. You can shout MAGA all you want, but if you ain't actually doing it, come next elections, it's gonna be blue from coast to coast.

No.3502342
File: imgur_gallery_hZSfl_Its_Time_to_Stop_Posting.jpg - (30.89 KB, 500x375) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
31635

>>3502197

>Suddenly the people have a lot more money to spend, and wages increase.
>he really believes the rich bastards would EVER think of raising wages.. wages that they on purpose have fought to keep stagnant since Reagan took office.

Nigga please!

No.3502343
File: Agentsmith_mr.jpg - (36.10 KB, 290x302) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
36967

>>3502290

This is a BS statement by GOP akin to the "trickle down economics" bs(that has been confirmed again and again to never work and only made the rich richer) that they have spread ad nauseam.

Manufacturers would simply choose another shithole that they could get easy manufacturing from. It will be probably Taiwan again or India.

No.3502346
File: Wal-Mart_is_giving_500,000_people-726558b114f089c04a0eee02f76bc2c5.jpg - (84.73 KB, 800x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
86767

>>3502342

They have started raising wages. Wal-Mart was one of hundreds of companies to expand benefits and drastically increase base pay.

www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/01/11/walmart-to-boost-starting-wage-give-employees-bonus-after-tax-bill.html

No.3502366

>>3502346

I had a leftist socialist who never had a job say that was because Wal-Mart was "tricking" the workers and giving them that raise was pointless because the workers still couldn't buy a house.

Which is why we need socialism or something.

No.3502379

>>3502346
And then they cut everyone's hours so the problem starts all over again.

No.3502381

So here's the thing. If you're a liberal, you supposedly care about the poor. You care that they get a bigger piece of the pie.

If you're not middle class? Well guess what, you can get foundry work as America spins up manufacturing industry. You can get jobs as a machinist too.

You'll pay a little more, but hey, you'll get to drop that McJob and actually be able to get into a field where you will have a union!

Oh, you're middle class, and the soy tariff is going to make your whole foods experience a little more expensive? And your iPhone is going to cost more?

Too fucking bad. You're subsidizing American labor. You're indirectly helping the impoverished underclass of America. What happened to all that virtue signaling? Don't you like jobs coming back to poor black families in the rust belt?

Oh right. You don't want the poor helped if it's a fucking republican! Those poor people and their votes belong to YOU goddamnit!

The only reason the rich investor class in America is all for this, is borderline slave labor over seas maximizes personal profits. It fills up 401k, it fills up their bank accounts, it does jack shit, however, for the underclass.

Stop siding with the rich, moron.

No.3502382

>>3502295

How's that blue Texas coming?

>>3502342

Wages, moron. At least the workers will be paid. That's earning, not sharing. Investors being the leeching parasite class they are, will make less money, and the country over all, will make slightly less money... but there will be a new bloom of ascending workers in the lower middle class who are earning their way out of poverty. That's a good thing in my book. That'll make for a lot of first generation black college graduates in 40 years.

No.3502384

>>3502342

>he really believes the rich bastards would EVER think of raising wages.

It's not a question of wages, but of employment. Putting millions of people back into manufacturing and production and buying stuff "home-made" leaves the money in the US economy rather than in the Chinese economy, and increases prosperity here.

Even if 80% of the money "trickles up", that last 20% of the money is still a substantial increase in the living standards of everyone and a boost to domestic commerce.

No.3502385

>>3502382

>How's that blue Texas coming?

Fracturing the republican party will result in a situation where the democrats can win on a minority vote. Just like how fracturing the democrats with the hillary/bernie stunt allowed for Trump to win on a minority vote.

No.3502390

>>3502346

This is a myth.. the supposed "raises" were only temporal bonuses, and only those who had worked for like.. more than 15 years got them.

Infact, Walmart employees have pushed a lot of walkouts and or got fired because of the horrible pay.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/01/11/walmart-to-raise-starting-hourly-wage-to-11-offer-paid-parental-leave/?utm_term=.c4d2c72860a6

No difference fro the Trump's BS of Coal (whose main pusher for coal resurgence.. went bankrupt last month) and Carrier's (who never hired and actually fired most of these positions).

No.3502392

>>3502381

>Too fucking bad. You're subsidizing American labor. You're indirectly helping the impoverished underclass of America.

This is exactly why noone in Mexico took Trump seriously when he claimed the NAFTA was "bad deal to America". When they are pretty much subsiding a lot of the Electrical and Farms groups (despite records profits eyars after years.. General Electric still get subsidies, makes no sense) and farmers get huge boots/grants that are technically unfair competition as it gives unfair advantage above other NAFTA members.

Which is ironic, as USA has done this to put down the steel and tuna industries while pushing the advantage of subsidies and blocking import/export in a protectiveness way.

No.3502394

>>3502382

>Wages, moron. At least the workers will be paid. That's earning, not sharing. Investors being the leeching parasite class they are, will make less money, and the country over all, will make slightly less money... but there will be a new bloom of ascending workers in the lower middle class who are earning their way out of poverty. That's a good thing in my book. That'll make for a lot of first generation black college graduates in 40 years

Except they don't.

Thanks to Trump, these groups you claim are parasites are leeching even more out of the economy and "storing" it elsewhere with no help to boost the economy. This is a recipe for recession.

As for Salaries, how would it help to have 900 fired out of 1000, so 100 can have a tiny wage salary while the CEOs pat their back at their amazing "cost cuts" maneouver and rack the doug in Wall Street and less wages paid?
These 100 remaining will probably have to work 3x times as hard for a tiny amount more.

No.3502402

>>3502394

The problem in the first place is how unregulated investment is.

It pushes companies to be crazy, and strive harder. Oh, maintaining the same number of customers, staff, and products moved? Your business is deemed a failure. Your stock gets dumped.

It makes our "top economists" who are investors push pro-investment anti-american policies like favoring suicide near-slave labor factories.

No.3502404
File: popping_corns.gif - (366.02 KB, 267x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
374801
>orange retard bumbles into protectionism with no clear plan or understanding of the issue
>retarded libertarian rightwingers screech that this is bad because the gummit should keep its hands off the precious wonderful pure free market
>retarded altright rightwingers screech that this is good because the orange retard must have a clever secret plan to protect poor white workers after causing market chaos
>they start tearing each others throats out

I love it.

No.3502407

Who's the "alt-right" again? Anyone with a Y chromosome?

No.3502409
File: stateofthealtright.png - (36.75 KB, 489x625) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
37632

>>3502407
I don't think the alt-right knows who the alt-right is, but to a lot of people it's anybody politically right of Marxist Communists.
Pic related is the best I've seen it put, and from a Facespace meme page no less!

No.3502411

>>3502407
No, just fucknob losers like you. :-)

No.3502413

>>3502409
hm
>>3502411
thx for the clarification.

No.3502424

>>3502413
Any time, fucknob loser. :-)

No.3502425

>>3502402

>Oh, maintaining the same number of customers, staff, and products moved? Your business is deemed a failure. Your stock gets dumped.

And why should this matter?

Companies use stock as money when they don't have money and they want to spend some, so they effectively sell part of the company away. How people value the stock afterwards is irrelevant as long as you're still the majority owner of your company.

If you were foolish enough to sell so much stock you're now the stockholders' bitch, that's your problem. You don't own the company anymore anyhow - you're just working there.

No.3502434
File: Eating-Popcorn-GIF-Image-for-Whatsapp-and-Facebook-10.gif - (494.89 KB, 226x309) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
506767

>>3502404

    >orange retard bumbles into protectionism with no clear plan or understanding of the issue, Makes America Great Any Way.
    >retarded liberal leftwingers screech that this is bad because the gummit should keep its hands off our precious wonderful feels.
    >retarded altleft uberlibs screech that this is bad because they have a clever not so secret plan to exploit the poor by blaming white workers after causing market chaos.
    >they start tearing the right's throats out.
    >People get tired of their sickening bullshit and having their throats torn out. 
Wow, you're so transparent. I love how you want to see America fail just because you dislike Trump so much
No.3502435

>>3502434
I want America to fail because it's an imperialist parasite filled with people like you. The orange retard is just the latest manifestation of the great American sickness.

No.3502436

>>3502435
replace "america" with "humanity"

No.3502438

>>3502436
Humans become astoundingly less nauseating without Capitalism turning life into a cynical race to the bottom.

No.3502439

>>3502436
fuck yeah, VHEMT.org

>>3502438
true but i dunno if i wanna be a part of the transitional period. i didnt sign up for this shit

No.3502445

>>3502439
Unfortunately there's no avoiding it. Capitalism is unraveling as we speak, and our only choice is whether we want to forge a better system or collapse into some rightwing nightmare.

No.3502446

Yeah lets just all be poor. That'll work out great.

No.3502456

>>3502438

>cynical race to the bottom
>created everything you have right now

Socialists be mad because those who do get all the goodies and those who don't get the dregs.

No.3502458

>>3502445

>Capitalism is unraveling as we speak, and our only choice is whether we want to forge a better system or collapse into some rightwing nightmare.

As you try, you will fail. If you don't try, you might succeed. There's no system to replace capitalism, because any system you try to implement that has the power to steer the whole economy will corrupt itself, become dysfunctional, collapse, and then return to capitalism.

What we're actually seeing is the collapse of crony capitalism, otherwise known as social democracy, where the government is so deep in shit with its own machinations, laws, regulations, debt, monetary policy, identity politics, "social justice" and trying to save everyone from themselves that it's become infeasible to maintain anymore. Half the people don't even vote any longer because it makes no difference.

No.3502461
File: evola_quote_2.jpg - (94.27 KB, 738x646) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
96530

>>3502458

Capitalism and communism are two sides of the same semitic coin.

No.3502463
File: 13828188562376.jpg - (76.53 KB, 959x721) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
78362

>>3502435 'I want America to fail because...'

>Stopped reading there.< If you want America to fail, then I have no reason to hear anything further you have to say.

What I find most amusing is so many of these Neo Marxist marchers, mocking maga's calling us parasites, who themselves are these unemployed moochers. So you're trying to sell that working class people like me... are the "parasites", while petitioning to push our welfare system to every hand that comes to it, sucking away and mad it's not providing more?

Wow... you are really are a walking contradiction.

>>3502445 If you think capitalism is going anywhere... you are so delusional that it is literally laughable. Capitalism is what has allowed you your fancy computer gadgets, your comfortable lives, your twitters, your omnoms. It has made people, in general, the globe over waaaaaay more comfortable than your neoswag commie bearshit ever has.

Unfortunately, there's no avoiding it. Communism has never worked, the marxist agenda is unraveling as we speak. Their tactics are becoming more obvious every day. Our only choices are whether we want to forge a better system with everything we already have and progress as a people or throw it all, freedom falls, constitution canned & we all suck up to this "Brave New World'' forged in social justice tears, collapse into a lets throw standards, common sense, and critical thinking right out the window, virtue signaling all day every day, censorship everywhere, lets make being mad angsty dooshers our central policy, leftist literal nightmare.

Yeah... No thank you.

>>3502439 A Transitional period isn't really the kind of thing anyone "signs on" for.

No.3502488

>>3502461

>duh joos keepin muh wite huratige down

You deserve to be poor and miserable. I wish Jews actually were oppressing filth like you. You deserve worse.
>>3502458
Retarded rightwinger bullshit, didn't read.
>>3502463
Autism, didn't read.

No.3502495

>>3502488

Spoken like an up-and-coming mass shooter.

No.3502510

>>3502456

>really thinks that all inventions were made by capitalistic morons.
>ignores that a ton of inventions are unrelated of capitalism or socialism agendas.. but the inventors were just seeking rename an fame.
>most modern capitalist inventor was the glorious American "inventor" T. Eddison.. who was actually a fucking thief who stole inventions of others and patented them on his name. (including movies, communication, sound and electricity)

As for capitalism, its a race of the bottom when using the "American Way(tm)" because with the current corruption, laws and bought politicians in levels never seen since the industrial age thanks to the neoliberal capitalism movement.
Corporations are becoming feudal lords, wealth is being concentrated in less people now than what it was during the imperial age. And everyone is losing rights left and right with not even the government to save them.

No.3502514

>>3502495
No it wasn't. Mass shooters are rightwingers, because Rightwingers are terrorist vermin.

No.3502521

>>3502510

>>most modern capitalist inventor was the glorious American "inventor" T. Eddison

WHoo boy, you got a hundred years of history to catch up.

But hey, at least Soviet Russia had the world's biggest transistors. They got that going for them.

No.3502522

>>3502521

>soviet union
>the nation that beat America at the space race
>gotcha commies (?)
No.3502559

>>3502521

I was using him as an example, thanks to Eddison.. most research groups were then gathered into corporations to push for Patents than actually use the inventions.

Aka a shitshow that undermines the advancement of humankind based on greed.

No.3502560

>>3502157
As for Trump.. he's going rampant again now that his lawyer was raided by the FBI lol.

No.3502561

>>3502522

Best part is that the biggest push in tech during world war 2, werent even americans. Von Braun initiated the Rocket race.. Atomic bomb? the initiators werent even American either.

No.3502565

>>3502522

>>the nation that beat America at the space race
>beating America in "who can build stolen German rocket designs the fastest".

Oh boy, you got another 70 years of history to catch up.
>>3502559

>Aka a shitshow that undermines the advancement of humankind based on greed.

Nobody would spend any effort to come up with anything if they couldn't personally profit from it. Some individual altruists can, but they often have weird intentions. See Alfred Nobel who invented dynamite to create a weapon so powerful it would end all wars - ended up enabling more wars.

No.3502567

>>3502565

Yeah, sure Germans had awesome super-heavy ICBMs and crewed spacecraft ready to go, right.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but A-4 (or V-2) had a measly 320km range, didn't even go into space in normal operation and had a measly 1 ton warhead.

Yeah, Russians reconstructed the German design. And they were very successful selling it to all the world's shitholes - it's the SCUD missile.

It took the genius of Korovlev - someone Von Braun couldn't measure up to - to get spacecraft into orbit.

No.3502571

>>3502514

There's a dead vegan transgender persian youtube activist -- who can't shoot straight except when she's aiming at 'her'self -- that proves you wrong.

No.3502589

>>3502567

>It took the genius of Korovlev - someone Von Braun couldn't measure up to - to get spacecraft into orbit.

The Americans didn't employ Von Braun at first.

"At Peenemünde, von Braun had thousands of engineers who answered to him, but was now answering to "pimply" 26-year-old Major Jim Hamill who possessed an undergraduate degree in engineering. His loyal Germans still addressed him as Herr Professor, but Hamill addressed him as Wernher and never bothered to respond to von Braun's request for more materials, and every proposal for new rocket ideas was dismissed."

When the Americans couldn't get their rockets working, they went back to von Braun for help, and he made them the Saturn V which won the moon race over Korolev, whose main contribution to the race was dying out of injuries sustained in a Soviet prison camp where the glorious leaders had tossed him.

No.3502596

>>3502589

>only capitalism can produce technology, the Soviet Union was technologically incompetent!

But they beat the US in the space race

>uhhm, uh but they stole all their rocket tech from the nazis!!!!

No they didn't, that was the US. Soviet rocket tech vastly surpassed nazi tech.

>b-b-b-but Stalin was a real mean guy!

The goalposts just keep sprinting backwards!

No.3502599

>>3502596

>>only capitalism can produce technology, the Soviet Union was technologically incompetent!
>The goalposts just keep sprinting backwards!

Strawman. You made up the "only capitalism can create technology" argument, and now you're arguing against yourself.

Are you living in the west? Then capitalism created everything you have - see, the claim wasn't about inventions per se, but your general living standards which includes all the technology. Without capitalism, you'd be like what's left of the eastern bloc - a bunch of shithole countries that stopped contributing anything to human existence after their glorious socialist system dissapeared up its own anus half a century ago.

Even after the collapse of the system, they haven't recovered - except for Estonia which embraced capitalism and experienced unprecedented economic growth and skyrocketing living standards. There too, people can soon say "everything we have is made by capitalism", since they re-started from almost zero.

And the Soviet Union was technologically incompetent, precisely because it kept killing anyone who wasn't. In the end, they managed to practice reverse eugenics where all the competent people were sent to the gulag to die because exceptional and talented individuals were a threat to the soviet system - they could rise in power by doing what nobody else could, and people would be depending on them instead of the socialist leadership, so they had to be killed.

No.3502601
>But they beat the US in the space race

Like making the first goal of the match. Then the US beat the Soviets back 10 - 1.

See, leftist always cling on to simple points like that to deny their own corruption. 100 million people are dying of hunger, but oh look, comrade Stakhanovich just invented a diesel powered dildo. We must build him a statue! Then send him to Siberia.

No.3502603

>>3502601

> Like making the first goal of the match. Then the US beat the Soviets back 10 - 1.

...and now can't even get anyone into space without nicely asking the Russians to do it for them.

No.3502604
>the Soviet Union was technologically incompetent!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressed_research_in_the_Soviet_Union

>Suppressed research in the Soviet Union
>Biology
>In the mid-1930s, the agronomist Trofim Lysenko started a campaign against genetics[4] and was supported by Stalin. (...) Soviet physiologists were forced to accept a dogmatic ideology; the quality of physiological research deteriorated and Soviet physiology excluded itself from the international scientific community.
>Cybernetics
>Cybernetics was also outlawed as bourgeois pseudoscience. A 1954 edition of the Brief Philosophical Dictionary condemned cybernetics for "mechanistically equating processes in live nature, society and in technical systems, and thus standing against materialistic dialectics and modern scientific physiology developed by Ivan Pavlov". (...) this early attitude hampered the development of computer science and engineering in the Soviet Union.

Cybernetics is especially important in systems design, as it deals with control loops and modeling of physical systems - so you can develop a guided missile or an industrial robot.

>Physics
>In the late 1940s, some areas of physics, especially quantum mechanics but also special and general relativity, were also criticized on grounds of "idealism". Soviet physicists, such as K. V. Nikolskij and D. Blokhintzev, developed a version of the statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics, which was seen as more adhering to the principles of dialectical materialism.

The poor level of soviet understanding in QM was the reason why they had so many nuclear accidents. They just went about it by touch and feel, trying this and that, because they didn't have proper theoretical understanding of the field.

>Statistics
>The Marxist theoreticians of the Party considered statistics as a social science; hence many applications of statistical mathematics were curtailed, particularly during the Stalin era.[30] Under central planning, nothing could occur by accident.[30] Law of large numbers or the idea of random deviation were decreed as "false theories".[30] Statistical journals and university departments were closed; world-renowned statisticians like Andrey Kolmogorov or Eugen Slutsky abandoned statistical research.

Statistics is an essential tool in evaluating your progress in science and technology, and without adequate statistical tools your factories don't produce consistent outputs, your scientists are blind to the results of their research, and your leadership is oblivious to what's really going on in the society.

No.3502605

>>3502603

>...and now can't even get anyone into space without nicely asking the Russians to do it for them.

The manned space program was a cockwaving contest of the cold war. The ISS is simply a huge boondoggle - there's actually nothing commercially interesting in flying people to space, except for people like Elon Musk who milk money out of stupid peope by selling them Jetsons fantasies.

No.3502606

>>3502603
Also, they're not asking. They're buying the rockets to ISS.

And again, capitalism gets the job done while the government sits on its thumbs and continuously re-de-re-de-re-de-funds NASA.

No.3502611

A little bit more socialist reality to fill up this shit thread:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_emulation

>Socialist competition or socialist emulation was a form of competition between state enterprises and between individuals
>Implied was that "capitalist competition" only profited those that won, while "socialist emulation" benefited all involved.
>An important component of socialist emulation was "socialist self-obligations" (социалистические обязательства). While the production plan was the major benchmark, employees and work collectives were supposed to put forth "socialist self-obligations" and even "enhanced socialist self-obligations" (повышенные соцобязательства) beyond the plan.
> It was enforced by the collective pressure orchestrated by state security services (KGB) and local communist party representatives using collective responsibility and laws on dronery or wrecking. The race between teams and team members for overcompletion of the plans led to increasingly unrealistic targets, which could be only satisfied with cheating, double accounting, hoarding of resources, and shturmovshchina (last-minute cramming)—which, in the long term, led to a collapse of the supply chain in the economy.
> In 1987, Soviet economist Nikolai Shmelov estimated that out of 450 billion roubles worth of inventories of raw materials and parts, around 170 billion was kept as surplus, with the sole purpose of securing the successful completion of plans.

So the soviet leadership first made unrealistic demands of productive output, expected people to "voluntarily" exceed the unrealistic demands on the penalty of imprisonment or death, and if they did manage to do what was demanded they were inevitably found guilty of some sort of cheating and put to prison anyhow. Do or don't, you're fucked, unless the leadership decided to keep you.

Hence the old joke where two soviet men meet in a prison camp and ask each other, why are you here. One man answers:

-"I was frequently late from work because I don't have a watch, so I was accused of sabotage".

The other man replies:

-"I was always on-time for work, so I was accused of smuggling in a watch from the west."

Or this guy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_von_Meck

He was a railway engineer who was put to trial and executed by the KGB, over the accusation that he was trying to sabotage the Soviet railways - by suggesting that railway cars could carry larger loads to improve transportation efficiency. The court spun this into "sabotage by trying to make the rails wear out faster".

No.3502616

>>3502605

Elon Musk has made all of his money by getting dumb California socialists to give him state money for his utopian schemes

Pretty brilliant actually, and better than giving it to poor people, especially minorities

No.3502619

>>3502616
Actually, he's using federal loans and incentives for the most part, so he's actually nabbed about $50 out of your pocket as well.

No.3502623

wmpJNxZg wins the biggest autists on the board award for spamming another thread with giant walls of text that nobody is going to read.

No.3502627

>>3502623
I read them. Faggot. Fuck commies.

No.3502628

>>3502627
How embarrassing for you. Get a life, dude.

No.3502631

The main reason why socialism always collapses on itself is this:

http://osaarchivum.org/files/holdings/300/8/3/text/58-4-133.shtml

>Centralized guidance of state industry is exercised by the highest and central administrative agencies of the USSR and the Union republics; this stems objectively from the very nature of socialist relations, which are based on public ownership of the implements of production. The point is that territorial agencies, no matter how well they carry out the tasks of Soviet state administration, in themselves cannot comprise a single system of socialist economy.
>The highest and central state administrative agencies of the USSR and the Union republics, expressing the collective experience and will of the working class and of all the working people, direct and coordinate the development of state industry for the country as a whole.

Tl;dr public ownership of the means of production does not mean you, the public, owns the means of production, but the collective public identified in the state, owns it. The task of interpreting and expressing the "collective experience and will" of the public is left to the ruling elite, which results in a situation best coined by the socialist tyrant Maximilien Robespierre: "I am not the courtier, nor the moderator, nor the tribune nor the defender of the people, I am the people myself."

Of course the socialist elite would then go on banning all sorts of science and research that would actually prove them to be full of shit, like shutting down studies of statistics to hide the fact that your census is showing you're 8 million people short of your claims that the population has grown by 3 million.

No.3502632

>>3502623

>another thread with giant walls of text that nobody is going to read.

Then why does this thread exist, if you don't want to read politics?

No.3502638

>>3502632
Nobody wants to read your drivel. People are here for articulate points, not an endless series of gish gallops from your dumb ass.

No.3502659

>>3502638

I want to read it.

What I don't want to read is your stupidity.

No.3502691

>>3502659
This website has been annexed for Glorious Communism. Dissenters will not be tolerated. You go to gulag.

No.3502696
File: apple taxes.jpg - (61.84 KB, 619x608) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
63327

>>3502157
The sad thing is, these tariffs are now required because every company manufacturing shit over seas (AKA everything since we don't make anything domestic any longer) uses the tax loopholes to never pay taxes. As an example, because everything Apple manufacturers comes from China now, and they "officially" have every single physical and online transaction listed as being done in Ireland, Apple has paid zero in taxes to the US government since 2010. And yes, they've tried closing these loopholes, but the shit gets lobbied and filibustered to never pass.

Pic related. Its out of date as the number has risen to over 150 billion in taxes they've dodged at this point.

No.3502699

>>3502696
Tariffs are a worthless gesture. The world is controlled by a global capitalist oligarchy composed of a select few giant multinational corporations, and they decide what rules are actually passed. Tariffs are inconvenient, so they will simply be removed if they can't be prevented entirely.

The only solution to this problem is for workers across the world to unite under global Communism. Hang the oligarchs in public squares across the planet, destroy Capitalism, and refocus the economy toward benefiting the people, instead of the oligarchs. One of the first steps is recognizing that classcucks who defend the oligarchs are equally guilty.

No.3502701

>>3502425
Except it does matter. Do you remember that "corporations are people" bill that passed last decade? This allowed stock holders, even if they aren't majority shares, to sue the company because they aren't making enough money.

No.3502703
File: wut.jpg - (319.54 KB, 716x794) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
327205

>>3502699
But communism has never worked. Ever.

No.3502704

>>3502703
According to capitalists, who have steadfastly worked to undermine any system that benefits the workers. The entire reason the CIA exists is to try to destroy nations that defy capitalist hegemony.

No.3502707
File: cat jar.jpg - (47.47 KB, 634x478) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
48609

>>3502704

No.3502708
File: 393d.jpg - (24.62 KB, 720x533) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
25206

>>3502707

No.3502730

>>3502699 Yeah but... You Kinda actually have to have a job to be considered a worker.

No.3502731
File: cap_com_ns.jpg - (23.56 KB, 396x396) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
24128

STILL stuck in the capitalism vs communism dichotomy, eh?

No.3502733
File: CapitilistCat.jpg - (33.60 KB, 480x360) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
34404

>>3502704

Ohhhhhh.... So it's the CIA's Communism never works... Riiiiiiiiiight

No.3502740

>>3502704

Ugh... no...

Look, inequality exists everywhere. It is not unique to humanity. It exists in nature, and it exists in physics. In a forest, the vast majority of sunlight is absorbed by the trees that can grow the tallest and spread themselves out the farthest. In a wolf pack, the meat from a recent kill is divided up disproportionately among the members in the pack, with the alphas getting the most, then the betas and gammas, with the omegas getting scraps, if they're lucky. In any star system, the vast majority of stellar mass (not including the star) is centered around gas giants before planets.

In humanity, the vast majority of resources find (or found) their way into the hands of the hyper-productive. Whether that's due to putting in the labour necessary to overproduce, finding new and better ways to increase production with the same (or even less) effort, or a combination of both. Most people are content with producing 'enough,' in order to meet the needs necessary to live their lifestyle. Some people aren't satisifed merely with 'enough,' some people want more, and do what is necessary to make that happen, whether that's work to excess or develop new and better ways of production, in order to sell off their excess or perhaps just prepare for the future in case of bad times that will surely come one day. Some people don't provide or produce any labour that's worth buying (Selling freezers to eskimos, for example). Some people are just lazy, and aren't motivated to be productive enough in order to meet even their basic needs.

The amount of capital resources available are finite, and because inequality is a naturally occurring phenomenon, it is fair to assume that the majority of it -- capital resources -- will end up in the hands of a few. Who those few will be changes over time. The rich and powerful elite change frequently. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were nobodies when they started out. Thirty years ago, no one knew the name Zuckerberg, (Markus) Persson or Musk, yet now they are names on everyone's lips and in print all around the world (or at least, products they've made). Some of the elite come from humble beginnings, and some are born into it. Those born into it are the descendants of other people cut from the same cloth as Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg and Musk; ambitious, determined, daring, risk-taking. People who saw an opportunity to take something new, something innovative, and sell it to the people. Some people, in the case of Persson, get insanely lucky (though, to his credit, he did put in the work to develop Minecraft from scratch).

Are they undermining any system made to benefit the workers? I personally don't think so. There hasn't been genuine, commonplace worker exploitation in decades. At least, not in first-world countries. One could certainly make the argument that Chinese and Indian sweatshops are exploitive, if you compare them to their Western counterparts. After all, they're willing to work harder, longer, and for less pay than their counterparts in the West. And the cost-savings from using such cheap labour allows companies that make use of that cheap labour to sell their products to us consumers at lower, competitive prices. Some products take off (iPod/iPhone/iPad), some fall flat (Zune, Minidisc, BlackBerry). And while no one in the West would lower themselves to work for such a pitiful wage, it does on the other hand allow for people in those countries to lift themselves up out of poverty. It doesn't happen right away, of course; it takes generations to see the benefits of an employed parent being able to afford to send their children to school, to get a job that's more valuable than their parents, raise their own children and educate them even better, etc.

Are these companies obliged to keep those outsourced and offshored jobs within the country? No moreso than any one of us would be obliged to buy a Mercedes when a Ford serves the same function for a lot less. The unfortunate reality, the elephant in the room that no one wants to admit is there, is that some people's labour and skillset is just not as valuable as they think it is. Maybe it was for their daddy when he worked at the factory, but the times they are a-changing. Hard work doesn't mean much if nobody wants to buy what you're working on.

The argument that was put forth is that capitalists have steadfastly worked to undermine any system that benefits the workers. I have argued that instead, those who are wealthy got there either because they saw a need that needed filling, and were willing to do whatever it took to provide it, or they are the descendant of someone else who did. That takes work. A LOT of work. More than even I am willing to fathom. I, who have never run a business that didn't exist inside a computer game, don't have the slightest clue what it takes in order to provide a product to the community such that they would be willing to come in droves and trade me their resources to get it. Have you ever run a business with 20 people in your employ? 200? 2000? Try it. It's not as easy as you might think it is.

But socialists never see that. They pay little attention to the ivory tower as it's being constructed. In fact, they may even mock it, thinking it a folly venture. They only notice the tower after it's finished, and it's owner standing proudly on top with all their wealth looking down on the rest of us. As George Orwell so succinctly put it in 'The Road To Wigan Pier,' "Socialists do not care about the poor, they just hate the rich." They hate that the rich got to where they are because they seized opportunities presented, opportunities their haters may have missed. They got there because they worked their asses off to capitalize on that opportunity, when their haters weren't willing. They got there because they risked more than their haters were willing to risk. THEY are the reason that Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, SpaceX etc exist, not the workers that work for them. The workers that work for them didn't risk anything to get those companies built, but they do see how vast their resources are and want a piece of that pie for themselves. But if they want a piece of that pie, they had better prove themselves to be deserving of it. After all like the Little Red Hen says, 'None of you helped me harvest, thresh, mill the wheat, or bake the bread even when I asked you to. So now that I have done all this and made the bread, none of you deserve any of it. I shall eat it all, along with my offspring."

That isn't to say that worker exploitation never happens. Indeed, it has happened numerous times throughout history, and each time it happens it leads to the same inevitable eventuality: violent, bloody revolution. It overthrew Rome, it exiled itself from Britain and overthrew the French aristocracy, it overthrew Russia, it overthrew monarchs and nobility. And each time it did, things got a little bit better than before, bit by bit. I acknowledge that the wealthy do have a little responsibility to be philanthropic. It's in their best interests to be so. But they must be convinced to do so freely and voluntarily, because compelling philanthropy by the State only makes them resentful of it. How much is enough? Just enough so that even the lowest among us is capable of self-determination. If they be worthy, they'll handle the rest.

Of course, since this post is longer than a twitter post, I don't imagine you'll read any of it. Your attention span does not allow you to dedicate the necessary time and energy to learn this valuable life lesson. You'll probably brush it off and dismiss it as the raving of some autistic rightwinger, thus demonstrating that you have learned absolutely nothing. This post isn't for you; it's for everyone else willing to read, willing to think, willing to introspectively relate it to their own life, and take the first step to making life better for themselves.

No.3502742

>>3502740

Nah, oversights there;

Actually, there's growing evidence that "super earths" are very common in other solar systems - specifically several rocky planets that have masses up to around 10 earths. Just that such make those solar systems unstable enough that they eventually fall into their star or get flung out into space. Ours would be a fluke where they all got rid of very early in the formation of ours.

Having a chance to be rich by making the next best thing is good, that is a positive part of capitalism, but the cancerous part is how many shady people behind the scenes rig things to prevent others from accomplishment but also steal these new ideas, screwing over the potential for more improvement.

No.3502744

>>3502731
Still haven't eaten a bullet? This is why Antifa are such heroes. They put vermin like you in the hospital.

No.3502746

>>3502744
trying to be edgy while playing the role of a liberal is like telling someone to go fuck themselves while you've got a foot-long black dildo crammed in your ass

No.3502747

>>3502746
Trying to be edgy while being a rightwinger is like trying to look edgy while wearing a padded helmet and an Elmo t-shirt.

No.3502748

>>3502747
ok this is really low effort.

No.3502756

>>3502748

>low effort
>Downher
No.3502762
>furi is so dead these days
>this /pol/ thread is one of the most active, in a board full of furry related things, this shit gets bumped and replied to the most
>been this way for a few years now
>confirms furi has been garbage for a long time now, Americunts just can't shutup about politics.

FA could get hacked tomorrow, and with the current climate of this board, no one would give a shit anymore and just keep talking your gay ass politics.

No.3502771

>>3502762
It wasn't like this before the right started wrapping their tendrils around the internet, injecting their political ideology into everything they could reach. Things were awesome when the net was a leftist haven.

No.3502797

>>3502604

all of these were obviously set up by stalin to maintain his status quo. When did these blocks stop applying and science resume?

Because sure as hell science didnt stop as they made rockets, space faring stuff, advanced planes, poison and drug boosters, etc..

No.3502798

>>3502696

And that is why you need to remove and declare lobbying illegal and put the real name where it belongs.. aka BRIBERY.

>>3502696
Anyway they should pay income tax and sales tax.

>>3502701

This was the most dumbastic GOP approved rule of them all.
They pretty much gave companies and shareholders stupid levels of protections.

IF they were people, they should be executed (the leaders and CEOs) when people die of negligence.

Plane manufacturers and car makers cars would be thousand times more safe it that happened to apply.

No.3502804

>>3502797

Because under the old Soviet Union, when things went right, they crowed about it, but when things went wrong, silence.
Good example, their rockets.
They built a gigantic rocket bigger than the Saturn 5, but both blew up on launch tests, one just off the pad the other on the pad.
Their airline, Aeroflot, used to "never have accidents."

No.3502824
File: popcorn.gif - (1738.03 KB, 320x179) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
1779740

>>3502771
to

>the right

of crazy

No.3502830

>>3502797

>When did these blocks stop applying and science resume?

They never fully did, because whole generations of people were raised believing that genetics and QM are bourgeoisie lies.

No.3502831
File: theft-meme.jpg - (32.58 KB, 297x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
33359

>>3502798

While we're calling it like it is, "Taxes" must be re-named "Government Legalized Extortion"

No.3502834

>>3502831
Only when your taxes help line the pockets of the bourgeoisie.

No.3502919

>>3502831

>While we're calling it like it is, "Taxes" must be re-named "Government Legalized Extortion"
>still listening to GOP bs about taxes when its convenient (aka when it affects the GOP's donors and lobbyists)

>>3502830
Sure Jan!

No.3502984
File: DSAvK9FX0AE5jZZ.png - (154.23 KB, 409x247) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
157929

>>3502834

>Taxes are eeeevil.

Ok, what's your alternative to fund the programs needed for society to function?

No.3502985

>>3502984

>to fund the programs needed for society to function?

If the government actually did its job, the amount of tax funded programs needed for the society to function would decrease over time - not increase. The sole point of government in society is to make itself reduntant and then vanish. Nobody benefits from wasting money on management.

When the common issues are solved, there's no more need for government. That's why a government that grows in size means the social problems are increasing, and a government that fails to shrink and reduce spending is failing to solve the issue it sets out to solve.

Government programs that require perpetual funding, like continuous wealth redistribution, are symptoms of either government incompetence, or the government assimilating the problem and making it systemic in order for the government to continue existing for the benefit of the political classes.

No.3502994

>>3502984

While >>3502985 is partly correct (and batshit wrong on others), the jist is what's important. It is correct, that the more social programs (and the more money spent on those social programs) a government runs, the greater the likelihood of the problems those social programs are meant to solve become systemic.

When it comes to a free country, it is ultimately in both the people's interest and the government's to have as small a government as possible. Fewer government responsibilities in the form of social programs means greater individual responsibility and autonomy. It also means fewer taxes.

They go off the rails when they imply that government is supposed to make itself redundant and vanish. The government can never entirely vanish. It does need to exist in order to administer things like the military, foreign policy, emergency efforts, a judiciary branch, national police force, and national infrastructure (off the top of my head).

Some social programs can and should be done away with entirely, like anything to do with the arts, the environment, and social sciences.

Unfortunately, government social programs create government jobs. CUSHY government jobs. Jobs that no one who has one would ever want to give up voluntarily. So once they're set in place, people work very hard from within to make themselves seem important and necessary, when the reality is they're likely nothing of the sort.

Personally I'm of the opinion that income tax ought to be 10% - 12% across the entire population, and not one percent more. State (or province) and Federal included. If the government cannot function on that, then it needs to cut back on the funding of social programs until it can.

And yeah, that means some people will lose their jobs. But since they're living off the collective teats of the taxpayer, that's akin to salting and removing a leech that's latched on to your thigh.

No.3502996
File: IMG_20180413_122614_957.jpg - (36.04 KB, 720x593) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
36901

>>3502985
fart noises

No.3503000

>>3502994

>the greater the likelihood of the problems those social programs are meant to solve become systemic.

Not likelyhood, but inevitability.

The first priority of a politician is to ensure their own future employment as politician, the success of their party etc. and so the first task of a government is to ensure that the society always needs that government. The politicians need to secure funding, to spend on the voters for allegiance, to secure their own future re-election.

For example, the government puts a tax on cigarettes on the basis that smoking is bad for you and people should not do it. But this tax is nothing but a slap on the wrist and too small to actually stop people from smoking. In fact it's nothing more than a money grab that is only just bad enough to maximize tax revenue instead of ending cigarette use.

The secondary effect of such tax is that it punishes poor people who are under a greater risk to be addicted to smoking, and spend a disproportionate amount of their income on cigarettes. Poverty becomes a bigger issue in general thanks to the government tax policy, and whoops, suddenly there's a need for government intervention and social programs for the poor - in exchange for votes of course.

And this isn't even planned. It's just the inevitable way a government works. The political elites want money so they grab the money wherever they can, over whatever excuse they can, and this taxation ends up causing social problems because all taxation causes distortion of the free market. This distortion then requires the government to ride in to rescue, and whoops, the government has another excuse to hike up the taxes "for the common good".

The circle is complete, and the government can only grow until it stifles the economy and becomes too dysfunctional to operate. Then we have a little revolution, a bit of social collapse, and the cycle starts anew.

No.3503003

>>3502994

>The government can never entirely vanish. It does need to exist in order to administer things like the military, foreign policy, emergency efforts, a judiciary branch, national police force, and national infrastructure (off the top of my head).

That's not government. That's administration. The definition being: "the execution of public affairs as distinguished from policy-making". A government makes policy. Administration runs it. Administration doesn't have the power to "raise their own pay" like the government does - they just work for the state.

A government is best a temporary organization set in place to change how the administration runs - not a permanent installation of politicians continuously messing up the economy with ever-increasing number of laws and regulations, and new branches of administration to enforce the new laws and regulations.

No.3503006

>>3502985

>the amount of tax funded programs needed for the society to function would decrease over time - not increase.

This is a retarded argument.

Population increases, the infrastructure and services deteriorate and require repairs of replacements. Services such as security (police, military, firefighters..etc..) should increase as well.
Then you count inflation...

Therefore the amount will always increase.

This is something that the ultrarich do their best to skim taxes at all costs using loopholes or buying politicians.

They want the wake, the crumbs, the platter and to let others clean their dirt.

No.3503012

>>3502985

>When the common issues are solved...

How do we solve these societal issues without an organized effort?

No.3503013
File: DQBQr_uUQAAWiLq.png - (119.42 KB, 356x264) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
122282

>>3503003

>A government makes policy. Administration runs it.

Ok, in your perfect world, what would replace the government which tells the administration what to do?

Do you have an answer? You seem to keep avoiding the question. I don't think you have an answer. I think you just like to bitch and whine.

No.3503014

>>3503006

>Population increases, the infrastructure and services deteriorate and require repairs of replacements.

You don't need a government for that. You need a bridge, you build a fucking bridge. You don't need to go to Washington to ask "can we please pay you taxes so you would perhaps spend a tiny portion of it to allow us to work on our own infrastructure, please?"

No.3503015

>>3503013

> You seem to keep avoiding the question. I don't think you have an answer. I think you just like to bitch and whine.

I've told you a number of times. You just ain't listening.

Government is best a temporary organization that is called to service and then disbanded, like a jury to a trial. Hence, it should be called to service exactly like a jury to a trial: you pick a number of people out of the general population, provided they're not criminals or illiterate/retards, and you run whatever proposals you have through them, and then you leave well enough alone for the next 5-10 years.

No.3503016

>>3503013
Also, the fucking constitution and the law tells the administration what to do. The rest is handled by local authorities.

If the law is good, there's no need for further governing. The society essentially runs itself. If you try to run a society by governing it continuously, micromanaging and adjusting here and there, two things are going to happen: the economy and the people suffer out of a lack of predictability and stability, and whoever is doing the constant fiddling is going to get constantly fiddled themselves and therefore either accomplish nothing or accomplish harm.

No.3503020
File: Never_stop_getting_owned.png - (105.19 KB, 326x576) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
107713

>>3503015

>Select random people and let them decide the policy...

Ok, so they get to be politicians for 1 day. How many? What kinds of people? If you select them at random you'll almost always get a majority white jury that votes in it's own interest. What incentive do the jurors have to listen to the public will?

What's to stop them from being bought off if there is no oversight organization and no other branch of government to override them if they make a horrible, horrible choice?

Who chooses what laws get a vote? Who pays for the random citizens to fly to Washington to take the vote as the jury?

Who defines what mentally fit to vote is? Is owning 20 guns reason enough to not let someone vote on gun legislation? Is owning 200?

Is being gay reason enough to stop someone from being part of the jury? Why not? If you are just going to choose random assholes then why not make being gay a crime? What's to stop them if there is no other branch of government but mob rule?

What's to stop one crazy ass bitch from bringing all legislation to a stop and living off the dime of the goverment for months or even years by just prolonging the debate?

No.3503028
File: how-about-instead-of-theirs-giving-me-back-my-own-15282549.png - (130.81 KB, 498x495) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
133951

>>3502984

You're a lunatic liberal commie piece of shit and should eat broken glass, but I'll reply anyway.

I'm taxed on my dollar when I earn it. Then I pay more tax on that same dollar when I spend it. When I buy a TV, I pay for it, and it belongs to me. I don't have to keep paying the store for the right to keep what I own. But every year I have to pay extortion to the government to keep what I allegedly own. And if I DON'T pay their extortion, they come and take my property, and put me in jail.

They "sin tax" my alcohol and cigars by ridiculous amounts because "morals and we know what's best for you".

Fuck you and fuck your fucking taxes and legalized racketeering.

No.3503044

>>3503020

>Ok, so they get to be politicians for 1 day.

The assembly of government for changing the policy should be like a court of law, where people who wish to change policy present their case and their evidence to the jury, and then the jury decides on the matter. They don't get to be "politicians for a day" - they merely decide whether the idea is good or not. That way the politics becomes a public matter where everyone is involved - not something prepared behind closed doors and decided by a group career politicians with vested interests.

>How many? What kinds of people?

A statistically significant and representative random sample. Probably something between 2,000 - 4,000 individuals.

>If you select them at random you'll almost always get a majority white jury that votes in it's own interest.

The point of representative democracy is to represent the people. If you don't select them at random, you get the exact same problem: who selects the jury gets the power.

> if they make a horrible, horrible choice?

Then they do. If you try to constrain the democratic process then you negate the whole thing, because the real power then goes to the people who define what choices you can have. Democracy means the freedom to make bad choices as well as good choices, because the people are responsible for themselves - not to some nanny state.

>Who chooses what laws get a vote?

I think it will be obvious which laws work the worst and have to be changed. The question is a matter of public opinion anyhow, so the answer is "everybody".

>Who pays for the random citizens to fly to Washington to take the vote as the jury?

That's not going to be such a great expense to matter.

>Who defines what mentally fit to vote is?

Let's pick a jury and vote on it. A random pick is still going to include a majority of sane people. It's not strictly necessary to remove the crazies, but it helps to speed up the process.

No.3503045

>>3503020

>What's to stop one crazy ass bitch from bringing all legislation to a stop and living off the dime of the goverment for months or even years by just prolonging the debate?

Reaching full consensus within a sample of a couple thousand people is impossible in the first place, so it cannot be a requirement. Therefore that's a non-issue. Come time to vote, they vote, and go home.

No.3503046

Point being that since policy becomes a public matter, a random representative sample of people will already know what the most important public issues are, and will know what to have on the short list.

Small local issues can be handled on a small local scale. They don't even need to be decided on by the national government assembly.

>Is being gay reason enough to stop someone from being part of the jury? Why not?

I can't dictate that. We'll have to ask the public. If you want to push the decision one way or another, you'll have to go to the people and argue why.

No.3503072

>>3503028 In europe they steal your money 9 months out of the 12.

No.3503079

>>3503028

Go back to gold and buttcoins if you hate the full faith and government credit backing of the US dollar so much, focks, lol

Seriously, what do you think taxes are for? Welfare queens only? Claim more allowances on your w-4 if you hate giving Uncle Sam an interest free loan and stop bitching like a libertarian with sun stroke

No.3503091

>>3503028

>But every year I have to pay extortion to the government to keep what I allegedly own.

Where does the roads you use, the street lights and security, the police and military services? the epa and fda that protects you from third party problems fit in your magical world?

You're delusional. Next you will say that everyone should test their own food and die if its poisoned and make their damn roads.

Society evolved away from that Wild West and Barbarian bullshit.

No.3503110

>>3503091

>Next you will say that everyone should test their own food and die if its poisoned and make their damn roads.

this is the kind of diy attitude today's america is sorely lacking.

No.3503119
>implying Drumpf isn't trying to kill the whole video game industry because he thinks games cause violence

He thinks some light bulbs cause cancer too, I guess voting for a literal retard who can't do a good job is okay if it "pisses off SJWs" even if some of his shit ends up falling in line with them in the long run.

Conservatives deserve to be shot. They prove daily they are dumber than Chris-Chan. They don't deserve to be called "human" or "intelligent".

I mean this this their dumbass logic-

>Hollywood is full of pedophiles! So many liberals are pedophiles! How disgusting!
>Milo Yiannopoulos defended pedophilia! He is NOT WRONG! It is normal and natural! Based Milo is right!
>So what if Roy Moore raped underage girls, I will support him!

This is absolutely the shit logic senile old man Clint Eastwood is displaying right now.

No.3503130

>>3503110

>this is the kind of diy attitude today's america is sorely lacking.

Sure, put yourself in the front line to test untested food or drugs with no chance to sue back.

>>3503119

This!
The damn hypocrisy is disturbing.
Ask anyone in foxnews and they will reply with a joy of "Who cares if he raped, killed or molested 543563463 people! at least he isn't a liberal like nigger obama!"

No.3503134

>>3503119
>>3503130
But do you remember that time Zoey Quinn slept with some guy and then he wrote an article about a game that she made? Checkmate libtards.

No.3503218
File: frog.jpg - (39.68 KB, 800x561) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
40633

>>3503134

No.3503338

>>3503130

FDA is overbearing.

Several toothpastes aren't approved and allowed here, despite being good enough for Canada and U.K. yet we allow more bug parts in our dry grain and more pus in our American milk.

We can't have heritage cheese, as all raw milk products are banned despite the probability of them being dangerous as a cheese being so low.

Then when we do ban something sensible, like that cancer causing hormone killing popcorn flavoring, we give the market 10 years to phase in said ban.

We also ban the making of pasteurized cheese by mom and pop shops, in the last 10 years, by making it illegal to age cheese or culture cheese in anything short of laboratory conditions. Oh, don't have a bio-reactor, and a specific kind of plastic shelf to age cheese on? Don't have the dosh to put down on these high tech tools? Too bad, you're not allowed to make and sell cheese.

No.3503344

>>3503338
FAA is equally overbearing, but in uneven and fucking crazy ways.

No.3503408

>>3503338

>>Several toothpastes aren't approved and allowed here, despite being good enough for Canada and U.K. yet we allow more bug parts in our dry grain and more pus in our American milk.

Then complain.

>>We can't have heritage cheese, as all raw milk products are banned despite the probability of them being dangerous as a cheese being so low.
>Forgets that certain elements, when raw can actually harbour dangerous bacteria.

I bet you also believe mad cow disease is a myth.

No.3503410

>>3503338

But.. but.. leftists say companies will INTENTIONALLY poison products if the US relaxes regulations.

I mean, I don't really get how that's a way to get people to buy more of your product, but leftists claim if we get rid of ONE regulation, McDonalds will start putting cyanide in hamburgers.

No.3503470

>>3503410

>implying they wont, just like companies would love to pollute and have polluted while doing their best to get away with it.

Oh you sweet summer child.

No.3503475

>>3503470
Killing your customers isn't a great business stategy.

And there's going to be private labs and consumer organizations who do independent testing. Class action lawsuits still exist without the FDA, so trying to slip industrial waste into food is going to get your ass in jail anyhow.

In fact, most of what the FDA does is just sin-police and nanny the people, like banning products which contain "too much caffeine" etc. If someone wants to buy raw caffeine powder and manages to kill themselves with an OD, that's their problem.

The whole leftist narrative is that the people are powerless without the state, but that's not true. There exists this thing called common law and the constitution:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#Common_law_as_opposed_to_statutory_law_and_regulatory_law

No.3503478

>>3503470
This is especially relevant to the case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#The_common_law_evolves_to_meet_changing_social_needs_and_improved_understanding

>The common law is more malleable than statutory law. First, common law courts are not absolutely bound by precedent, but can (when extraordinarily good reason is shown) reinterpret and revise the law, without legislative intervention, to adapt to new trends in political, legal and social philosophy. Second, the common law evolves through a series of gradual steps, that gradually works out all the details, so that over a decade or more, the law can change substantially but without a sharp break, thereby reducing disruptive effects.[47] In contrast to common law incrementalism, the legislative process is very difficult to get started, as legislatures tend to delay action until a situation is totally intolerable. For these reasons, legislative changes tend to be large, jarring and disruptive (sometimes positively, sometimes negatively, and sometimes with unintended consequences).
>One example of the gradual change that typifies evolution of the common law is the gradual change in liability for negligence. The traditional common law rule through most of the 19th century was that a plaintiff could not recover for a defendant's negligent production or distribution of a harmful instrumentality unless the two were in privity of contract. Thus, only the immediate purchaser could recover for a product defect, and if a part was built up out of parts from parts manufacturers, the ultimate buyer could not recover for injury caused by a defect in the part. In an 1842 English case, Winterbottom v. Wright,[48] the postal service had contracted with Wright to maintain its coaches. Winterbottom was a driver for the post. When the coach failed and injured Winterbottom, he sued Wright. The Winterbottom court recognized that there would be "absurd and outrageous consequences" if an injured person could sue any person peripherally involved, and knew it had to draw a line somewhere, a limit on the causal connection between the negligent conduct and the injury. The court looked to the contractual relationships, and held that liability would only flow as far as the person in immediate contract ("privity") with the negligent party.
>A first exception to this rule arose in 1852, in the case of Thomas v. Winchester,[49] when New York's highest court held that mislabeling a poison as an innocuous herb, and then selling the mislabeled poison through a dealer who would be expected to resell it, put "human life in imminent danger". Thomas relied on this reason to create an exception to the "privity" rule. In, 1909, New York held in Statler v. Ray Mfg. Co.[50] that a coffee urn manufacturer was liable to a person injured when the urn exploded, because the urn "was of such a character inherently that, when applied to the purposes for which it was designed, it was liable to become a source of great danger to many people if not carefully and properly constructed".

See, the FDA tries to establish permanent rules and laws that apply the same in all cases, which leaves no room for common sense, while the common law has the power to judge according to the case so it doesn't lead into absurdities where cottage cheese gets banned because one guy made some bad cheese.

No.3503480

>>3503410 Capitalism does need moderation though.

No.3503487

>>3503475

>There exists this thing called common law

enforced by who/what?

>and the constitution

the constitution of what?

think carefully before answering these questions

No.3503488

>>3503487

>enforced by who/what?

You're trying to pull off a slight of hand because in English the words "state" and "government" are usually synonymous. The state - the government - isn't strictly necessary to enforce anything becase the law already grants the limits and uses of force to all the people.

In the western idea of a society, the law actually stands above the state in authority anyhow - that's the point of a constitution. The constitution is not upheld and enforced by the state as an arbitrary piece of legislation the state chooses to apply because the state wants to - the constitution defines the state.

No.3503490

>>3503487
Basically, if you take a critical look at a democratic society, it is a system where the people are saying to themselves, "The president must be elected."

That's what really sets the game and defines who can use force and why. Everything in a democracy works because the people believe it must be done, because they've defined to themselves that it must be so. That means, any idea of a state separate of the people is going to be an a departure from democracy.

So the idea that the people are powerless without the state, that the people need the state, is absurd. It's a lie told by people who wish to pervert democracy to mean electing dictators. Lefties who say "you need us, the state, because otherwise corporations would put poison in your food", are lying. You don't need the lefties to stop that - the people already have the ability and the power to institute a system that punishes corporations for poisoning the food.

No.3503491

Also, one of the strong points of common (case) law is that it's not easy to determine at any given time what the law actually is. You can tell from a number of recent rulings what the gist of the law is, but you can't say something dodgy is or isn't definitely illegal. The law evolves as it is being applied, so if you're getting away with doing something dubious today you might find yourself paying billions in fines tomorrow.

So if a corporation wants to risk it, they're going to need to hire an army of lawyers, and still they might lose a class-action lawsuit. Such spending is bad for business - doing the right thing is more profitable in the long run.

Meanwhile, with statutes and regulations, corporations can take the exact wording of the rules and be sure they can do all the nasty things that they forgot to rule out, and nobody can do shit to them because they're in full compliance with whatever alphabet soup agency codes. That's why crony capitalists like big government: tying the hands of the common courts by creating all sorts of administrative agencies to rule on these particular subjects allows the corporations to make their own law.

No.3503496

>>3503480

It does. Unmoderated capitalism leads to violent, bloody revolution. And not just of the communist variety.

However, that moderation must not be compelled. Compelled moderation breeds resentment in the hyper-productive. Who, having vast resources, will simply choose to pack up and leave to avoid being forced to give their resources away to less productive people.

They need to be convinced that "giving back to the community" should be something they ought to strive for voluntarily.

No.3503497

>>3503496

>Unmoderated capitalism leads to violent, bloody revolution.

Typically by people who aren't happy that the market isn't rewarding their non-efforts, so they put all their strength into troublemaking and raising waves where there's no wind.

See for example every leftist who, despite enjoying a historically unprecedented high living standards across the whole social strata of any society, aren't satisfied because they aren't at the top of the heap, so they complain about this "social injustice" and start divvying up everyone's money: "One for you, one for me, one for you, two for me, one for you..."

So yeah, capitalism needs moderation, but not moderation of capitalism itself - it needs moderation against politicizing the society in a way that would shift it away from capitalism and into cronyism and corruption.

No.3503531

>>3503497

Numbers and raw data disagree. Try again.

No.3503544
File: 18767851_657245264481512_9149968803073118687_n.jpg - (17.84 KB, 480x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
18265

>>3503497

>See for example every leftist who, despite enjoying a historically unprecedented high living standards across the whole social strata of any society, aren't satisfied because they aren't at the top of the heap, so they complain about this "social injustice" and start divvying up everyone's money: "One for you, one for me, one for you, two for me, one for you..."

America is the only country on earth (along with the UK soon), where the poorest people, are also the fattest, mostly because the government gives them free money to go buy steaks and lobsters and whatever kind of fatty food they want to eat.

But you are right. There exists on the left really shitty people, who can't do things like work hard, work towards a goal, etc... It's always someone else's fault (and they need to be punished) because leftie lenny can't afford a giant TV or Ferrari.

IE: The average Bernie Sander voter.

No.3503546
File: IMG_0445.PNG - (26.91 KB, 456x311) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
27555

>>3503544
The CIA during the Cold War disagreed with your "starving communists" meme.

No.3503639

>>3503546
That could use a full citation.

No.3503640
>the highest living standards ever!!!!!111

everyone who goes on about this spuriously ignores (a) wage stagnation, particularly for the US poor and (b) that unemployment never dropped back to pre-1970s levels after spiking in the 80s.* by the standards of the 1960s, we have never had full employment since about the mid 1970s. (we now cheat and call 4-5% "full employment" but that's bollocks - the UK was running at 2% for thirty years.)
instability, precarity and stagnation cannot be offset by a greater variety of consumer goods. if you want the proof of this, look at the 1970s - everyone forgets the massive explosion in consumerism identified with the 1960s only really spread to the average joe in the 70s, but everyone remembers the queues for petrol, the 3 day working week (to save electricity), and the economic troubles.
*this is harder to show definitively in the US, where the method of measuring unemployment is shonky as fuck. nonetheless when you take the average each decade, 1950-1970 comes up lower than 1980s-onward.
>>3503544

>steaks and lobsters

yeah this is definitely what poor people eat to get fat, not tesco value chicken dippers and microwave chicken tikka masala

No.3503647

>>3503497

>Typically by people who aren't happy that the market isn't rewarding their non-efforts, so they put all their strength into troublemaking and raising waves where there's no wind.

Lol sure, Might want to open a little book of history and read about the abuse of companies against their workers.

If they could, there could be the return of almost slavery (12+ hours of work, no protections, no safety, minimal slave like salary). But sure, try to blame it all on "lazy people". "LAzy People" who probably work 2+3 jobs to barely survive while the rich only wipe their asses with 1000 bills and do nothing but gamble with money in Wall Street trying to get as much as they can while having ZERO responsibility if something tanks.

After all, they can just get their private planes to the government and pray to get a bail out.

No.3503648

>>3503475

>Killing your customers isn't a great business stategy.

The auto industry and airline industry did kill and didn't care. Thanks to the internet and the media frenzy, they CANT GET AWAY WITH IT THAT EASY ANYMORE.

But sure, keep dreaming.

>>3503475
Companies used to refuse to note the real quantities of components of their products.
That would mean the dead of people who were allergic to something. The pushes for more safety forced them to show at least something. Its not perfect but at least its there.

But cool story bro.

>>3503487
This!
>>3503488
You still need authority to implement said law you clown.
>>3503544

>fattest...

Fat means nothing if the person is dying because they cant buy more healthy food or with nutrients enough.
Also irrelevant if they are unable to pay basic minimal health or have a home.

No.3503658

maybe if poor people would stop eating so much caviar, they wouldn't be obese.

No.3503703
File: Da_pa1LUMAAD1FF.jpg - (90.22 KB, 731x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
92388

>>3503544

>You can't be poor if you are fat...

This is patently false. The very opposite is true. The more poor a country becomes the more obesity rises as the food market moves to cheaper and cheaper to produce food.

Because the customer has less money to pay for food the quality of the food drops, the fillers and unhealthy content increases and soon you have an obesity epidemic. It's happened to America and Mexico just in your life time.

Mexico actually took longer because they had a wide-spread farming culture that provided some fresh vegetables for almost free but as more people moved to the cities looking for jobs those small farms have died out. Now obesity is skyrocketing.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/mexico-obesity-taxes-junk-food-sugary-drinks-exercise

They were the fattest, but not to be outdone, America is yet again #1!

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-us-is-the-most-obese-nation-in-the-world-just-ahead-of-mexico-2017-05-19

No.3503713

>>3503703

>Mexico actually took longer because they had a wide-spread farming culture that provided some fresh vegetables for almost free but as more people moved to the cities looking for jobs those small farms have died out. Now obesity is skyrocketing.

Actually, the US farming killed Mexico's farming.

As soon Mexico joined the NAFTA.. the US farmers were getting a ton of incentives and subsidies. Making an impossible way to win against the prices the farmers of the US could throw.

Which is ironic, as USA has punished Mexico many times for supposed "dumping" an dother BS accusations on the industries of Iron, Concrete and Tuna.

So pretty much the tuna industry is dying, being slowly replaced by the better prepared (in a war of attrition) US fleet, The mining, steel and concrete are either being taken again by foreign companies or forced to close.


Delete Post []
Password