Comment on Think of the children
Dissasterix@lemmy.world 1 year agoIt was always obvious, lol. Just trying to get you out the closet, sheesh. Lemmy is hilariously more Commie than Reddit, somehow. You’re pretending to be a radical enlightened centrist, who dont really actually exist. Stop it :p
I dont think you’ve made points, tbh. You showed me a .png, deflected moral questions, and deferred to current state power whenever possible. But we’re getting a lil candor now ;]
If right wing means ‘ultra capitalistic’, and capitalists dont like paying taxes, would it not be fair to assume that right-systems favor low taxes… Can you fund an excessive, wasteful, state on low taxes? Can you fund sweeping tyranny? This is just syllogistic reasoning. Its not some slippery academic nonsense. Im not appealed by authority.
You can say a Commie totally-not-a-state doesnt use money, man. But it will still exist in a world that does. Scarcity will always exist. And thus markets/economies will always exist. Even if they’re black (aka the real free market, lol).
irmoz@reddthat.com 1 year ago
What are you talking about? I haven’t pretended anything, certainly not that.
I’ve made two, which I’ve continued to elaborate on:
Hey! I spent time making that! It roughly describes the left right spectrum. You barely even commented on it.
I’ve answered your questions dude… Wtf are you talking about?
Um, wtf are you talking about? I keep criticisng state power… Are you trolling me?
Yes, and they do. On the rich, anyway.
I’m not the one saying they actually want low taxes. They just want low taxes for the rich, by using either flat tax or very minor progressive taxing.
Why say “totally-not-a-state”? Now you’re the one deferring to state power by assuming it’s necessary. And why should it use money if all goods are freely available?
A world that does what? Use money? Well, if we’re for some reason assuming this end-stage communism has been reached without a global revolution, then methods can be set up for external trade, assuming this hypothetical communist society hasn’t been embargoed by the world for daring to try communism, like has happened to Cuba.
Or invaded, like Vietnam, Argentina, Chile, etc…
Who ever said it didn’t? But we already possess the capability to feed the world and still have some left over. The issue isn’t scarcity, it’s economics.
Economies maybe, but markets aren’t inevitable. They haven’t always existed.
If you’re gonna appeal to the black market as some sort of ideal free market for the world market to aspire to, then I worry that I’ve been taking you far too seriously.
Dissasterix@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Im actually pleased if you did produce the .png yourself :] Barely commented on it? Ive flipped it over because it DOES describe taxation if you assume (correctly) that UltraCapitalists dont like paying taxes and dont want their companies to go public-sector. Im merely reframing your view by making inferences. Simple assumptions.
You DID deflect questions. Theres some you missed still, but its cool. We’ve had a lot to say. I dont think your a robot (anymore) :] Im on mobile, so forgive me if I dont hit all your comments, too. Also we really should condense to one reply thread. Been here before, makes things easier. Im gon try to wait until you reply to my last to make it happen.
I am a Libertarian, not an anarchist. I like the idea of a State. They just also happen to suck in practice. Im giving you hell about Communism but I have criticisms of ‘Neo-Libralism’ and cuckservatives. For instance, if our nation has open borders then how do I still have property rights if Uncle Sam cannot establish their own rights to property! How can I enjoy my (positive) liberty when the dollar is failing to poor economic planning?! And so on. Technically this will make me a statist, sure. But given the need to redistribute, AnComns are just a larp. AnCaps almost make sense, but its squirrely.
I agree foreign intervention is fucked up and beyond the scope of what our nation was intended to achieve. Retaliation? Maybe, but only if Congress approves and the budget isnt skyhigh. However I go even farther. US founders specifically warned of ‘estranged and entangling foreign relations.’ This is describing UN/NATO and so on. Im against those sorts of councils.
I would like to hear YOU (not wikipedia) explain the difference between markets and economies. I suspect all you’ll come up with is scale…
We have the ability to feed the world on paper. Heres how you can tell its BS though… We havent worked out water yet. Water is virtually imparishable, comes in 1 flavor, is needed everyday, cannot be deformed, can be transported by static pipes… But its not done. Imagine how much harder of a problem food is than water. Its incalcuably more difficult.
Awful things happen in the black market. Human trafficking and hitmen and so on. However it is infact a free market. Most critiques of capitalism come post-robber barron. When the FED was formed. Then blew our load fighting for Europe whoch tanked our finances. So we switched to fiat to fund endless wars and dick with other free peoples. And everyone lives in debt to the banks named after the same robber barrons now. Charming. I would suggest you and I probably never saw a free market.
For instance: Opening a gas station. Gas prices are set by OPEC. US agencies tell you the tax rates, they tell you all the expensive standards they want you to achieve. Then across the street another gas staion opens up. If you charge way more than him, its ‘price gouging.’ Way less, ‘predatory prices.’ The same?! ‘Price collusion.’ Gas stations net profit in selling chips than gas. “Free market.”
Most ironically, the practice of making gouging/collusion/predatory tactics unlawful is to prevent monopoly. Meanwhile, the oligarchs openly lobby the government.
irmoz@reddthat.com 1 year ago
Not just scale, but category. Economy describes the entire flow of goods around a given area. Market is a specific way to distribute goods, that is predicated on competition between sellers to sell goods to consumers. Economies don’t necessarily have to be market economies.
Because of capitalism. The infrastructure is already there to freely give water to entire nations. But certain people would lose out on money if it were nationalised… and those people have lots of money to lobby with.
LOL no. Socialism has been a movement since capitalism began, dude.
Seems pretty free right now. Ask Jeff Bezes and Elon Musk. They’re living pretty free.
I’m not sure why you’re not a socialist if you see the problems inherent in capitalism. The core difference between the two is that capitalism is set up to enrich owners of a business, and socialism is set up to enrich the workers. I’m honestly asking, why do you object to that?
Dissasterix@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Pffffffffft! You point to Bezos and Musk as ‘free market’ guys yet Bezos in prticular made his monopoly through non-compete practices and Musk through govt subsidy. Bro, plz. These are the oligarchs. Dont put them anywhere near a gas station worker! Further, these are people, not markets. I dont… I just dont, lmfao.
Monopoly is not a problem with capitalism, it is a problem with government. Of coure a business seeks to grow/profit. But govt was supposed to protect consumers from monopoly. They didn’t. Clearly. Do I blame Bezos/Musk (whom I give $0) or the government that was supposed to protect me (whom I give a significant percentage of net-wealth). Arguably, we would not have our current oligarchs without the collusion between State and corporation… Whats the word for that again?
Socialism has existed since capitalism began? So are you calling Communism Socialism now? Do you agree with V. Lenin when he said ‘The goal of Socialism is Communism.’? The slope is slippery, lmao.
Its funny, man. You’ll play appologist for the USSR (re: Holodimur) but then go to say no, it wasnt real Communism. This strikes me as an inconsistency. Its easy to find flaws in things that actually exist ;]
The infrastructure for water kind of exists in the West. But its also pretty piss-poor. I live near Detroit/Flint. It took ~9yrs to fix the shitty infrastructure. This how I know you’re an idealist-- You’re diminishing the seriousness of the differences in the problems. Water is baby-mode compared to food.
Consider my experience of public services. Roads: Detroit. Schools: Detroit. Living standards: Detroit. Police response: Detroit. Fire response: Detroit… The public sector is a joke.
Go back to the very beginning where I mention Thomas Sowell. You have the anoited vision, you think that impossible things can be achieved with enough money (which is tantamount to force). I don’t, I think some problems are legitimately impossible by their nature. If you shrug off food shortages and starvation as a ‘capitalits’ problem then I know you guys are damned, lol. It IS a hard problem. Try and tell me that it’s not.
You can assure me that I wont get the bullet, but what if Im only gulag’d? :p What if you’re just some prole and have no say?! People like me are a problem for you guys. Once you get enough FORCE you wont be talking with me… This talking/pseudo-intellectual phase is merely the boot getting put on the foot. I know, Ill be re-educated and made to say I love the State. Hell, maybe you’ll get an extra [widget] if you turn me in ;]
Im going to go to work, but I would like to make a little consensus between us :] “Fuck this bullshit neo-liberalism.” Agreed?