Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "PragerU" channel.

  1. + ᚫᛞᚱᛁᚫᚾ ᛚᚢᛏᚺᛖᚱᚫᛞᚱᛁᚫᚾ ᛚᚢᛏᚺᛖᚱ System that creates perfect breeding ground for psychopaths and lazy people, while centralizes the power to the point that it will eventually create dictatorships is a bad system. Socialism discourages inventions and productivity while encourages living as a parasite. Socialism wasn't founded on idea to stop exploitation (which never happened in the first place), it was founded by a person who wanted to create excuses for his abusive relation toward closed ones. It was supported by people who envied those who had more talent than them.
    4
  2. Stupid reasoning... More companies get more customers? nope, only certain companies get more customers. Plus adding mininum wage would mean that the prices needs to get higher. Which itself negates the raise you just got. Making things worse... You cannot compete internationally when everyone else sells products cheaper than you. So enjoy your future hell.
    3
  3. Ragnar Falch If liberals were more open for change... Then why are they regressing? Why they want racial separation again? Why do they want to get rid of free speech? Why are they so racists?
    3
  4. ***** You're ignorant when it comes history and warfare.
    3
  5. +Dan Mac It takes longer grow a wheat than harvest it.
    3
  6. Waltham1892 I have never watched rambo movie. I never simply cared for it. "But they wouldn't surrender.  Not to French and not to the US." They still had money, food and troops, why would they?` "As long as the North Vietnamese fought and had safe havens, they couldn't lose.  They just had to wait us out." There is a limit how long they could run wars. As I said, armies run on money and food. Without them they will disappear.
    3
  7. Waltham1892 if I would be 16- year old. Then I would be glorifying communism as much as you do.
    3
  8. Antropovich It's not crony capitalism. That whole name is fucking retarded. Because it's only possible to exists if government  has socialist elements in it. Crony socialism would fit the term more. BEcause it's government interfering with business. That sort of monopoly is only possible when people are stupid enough to give more power to the government.
    3
  9. Antropovich Aka young enough not to realize what socialism was in estonia. In fact you were so young that you barely even understood what was happening when soviets did fall. Again monopoly isn't problem of capitalism. In fact monopoly is easy to deal in capitalism unlike in socialism, where it won't ever disappear. Good example is my country where no one likes ALKO, but government is having monopoly over it. You see voting doesn't help jack shit, especially when the people who you vote in lie about their opinions. " Those arent polar opposites." Capitalism is by defination polar opposite of communism.  In communism only government owns business and all the wealth. While in capitalism individuals are free to own their own business and wealth.
    3
  10. enjoy of not having any job as worker when it's actually cheaper to just have a robot doing your part.
    3
  11. Mrcharrio There are always customers. International ones for example. Also sales don't simply disapear. Sure less people having money will weaken the economy slightly for a while. But not on long term, because then business will focus on those people who have money. For example expensive restoraants etc... But hey what do I expect from an person who is illiterate when it comes to economics... Mininum wage hurts the people most who you think it will help.
    3
  12. It's example taught in every economic class. You're total idiot if you think that raising salary wouldn't have any affect on how business behaves. "A factory worker would have been a better example... since you know.. "kid who mows lawn" isn't really covered under wage laws" depends on which country's laws you're talking about.
    3
  13. Demockracy Complaining about grammar proves that you're an idiot. It shows that you are so stupid that you think that whole world speaks english as first language. "and no it's not the example "taught in every economic class". " It's taught in all of those. Name even one economist with good argument why it doesn't hurt economy.
    3
  14. auwli "I see taxes being reduced in the US to stimulate the economy," Yes? It's empirical evidence that lower taxes actually stimulate the economy. You don't find economist who disagrees with that. "Left is more about equal chances while right is more about equal treatments." Nope, left is about everyone should have equal result. Left supports mediocrity while right supports meritocracy. "No it doesn't." name even one economist who agrees with you. "The main objective is marco economy, not micro or meso." non-sensical words. You sound like creationist talking about micro and macro evolution. Get to the point.
    3
  15. You don't hire someone unless you need them.
    3
  16. Stephen Greenwood Encyclopedia britannica: Capitalism, also called as free market economy, or free enterprise economy, economic system, dominant in the western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most of the means of production are privately owned and productions is guided and income distributed largely through the operation of the markets. Nothing about profit mentioned here.
    3
  17. Stephen Greenwood It's not matter of paying attention because Youtube doesn't show me other comments unless I click "see previous ones". "regardless of that I guess you must be correct over the 6 or 7 economists listed in the sources." And most of those books didn't even agree with your view and one of them didn't define capitalism as something that seeks profit, but stated that it's typical that business tries to gain profit. "You should immediately contact Mensa as well as inform the NNC about your fantastic new theories about capitalism and profit!" Theory that has been supported by most economist already and is already supported by enclypedia as you asked me to quote it instead.
    3
  18. +Mario Mannella You could argue that it was the Caesar who corrupted it. Dictator was a huge taboo in roman society until Caesar came. Whole rome was builded on the idea that there wouldn't be kings anymore. Capable king can do good for country but average or bad king will crash it down. That is exactly what we saw in fall of rome. Incapable power hungry people failing to comprehend how dire the situation is.
    3
  19. Xesau Communism actually has been tried. The first colonies in america some of them did exactly like in communism. They ended up dying to starvation... Which seems to be common trend everywhere where people tried communism.
    3
  20. 666j1 Germany is currently leeching all the benefits from EU. You should actually study more what has been happening in Europe. German is pretty much gains most benefits out of it. Hence they are able to have more jobs. As overall most other european countries growth has been in decline.
    3
  21. AdamGabo " We need an effective government, which regulates the market, " Because that went so well with soviet russia, china, north korea and vietnam. "middle class" whole term is non-sensical. There are no longer class systems. "We must invest in the country to ensure that the future is preserved." OH like Finland and sweden did? Both which are currently screwed. ". If we leave it to the free market what is going to stop them from ravaging our ecosystems or providing fair wages for working class people." Common sense and destroying your own livelihood isn't profitable. "The issues we have today are caused by ineffective government" Literally caused by government interfering with stuff that they don't understand. " The best way to medicate the issue is not to make government smaller but to vote in  politicians who are effective at doing there job" oh please... It's not like politicians lie about their positions. It's not like most people who thrive to become politicians are psychopaths/narcissists,
    3
  22. great sage equal of heaven "It was actually the United States and its GVN client regime who violated the peace treaty" Really so they violated peace treaty by getting of from vietnam? Wow... Such excuses.... "The United States government even announced that it would disregard every essential provision of this treaty, and proceeded to do so, " So that is the reason to conquest neighboring country? HAHA excuses from communists regimes get even more retarded than ever.  Hey at least you didn't bomb shit out of your own village so that you could declare war on small country, like soviet russia did. xD " and proceeded to do so, attempting again to conquer South Vietnam," South vietnam was the one against communism. Why would USA try to conquest it? And if North was so worried over south then why did it keep it and enslave people in south? The fact it. North Vietnam was aggressor against south. And later conquested it and subjugated and enslaved people living there. Worst yet, you're defending this people... You make me sick.
    3
  23. great sage equal of heaven "The USA was "helping" the South Vietnamese in the same way the Soviet Union was " If it was "helping" like you say, then please explain south korea. Where Usa was also helping. You should stop believing leftist propaganda that never admits that left has done anything wrong.
    3
  24. Which is why I prefer alternative media. At least they provide sources for their claims which I can go and double check.
    3
  25. +Submarine Venezuela isn't only country that produces lot of oil. Yet it was only country that collapsed to this point when the prices went down. This is nothing more than excuse from socialists. Socialists policies led to fall of Venezuela.
    3
  26. +TheFinnishSocialist "I did look it up recently. The state owns all the major exports." Which kind of proves my point. Rest of them are simply some minor local pubs, street vendors etc... Imagine what would happen to Finland for example if suddenly we would stop exporting. Exporting is vital in modern world. "Difference being that socialism can be put to work, if you follow the ideology. " just like religion can be put to work if you just follow what the book tells you to ;) There would be world peace if everyone just simply agreed with one another, no matter what the system is. But that is not the reality, people will never agree with one another on everything. Heck... That sounds pretty dystopian anyway, if people were forced to become identical mindless drones like borg. "This reminds me of the joke "Communism looks good on paper, but in practice it's usually sabotaged by a military coup d'etat financed by the CIA." Which has some truth to it lol." nah, it's simply famous excuse. Look Communists did sabotage capitalists as well. A system which cannot handle sabotage, is a weak system. Not only that, but CIA haven't had really no reason to do anything with socialist/communist countries for decades. Cold war is over, capitalists won. "It's no coincidence that socialist states like Brazil and Venezuela are allowed to do the shit they're doing; it effectively misrepresents socialism and everyone will think it's about high taxes and total government control" no, it's the actually socialism. Your form of socialism is something that almost no other socialist supports. Your form is simply capitalism where people share their stocks among people who work with them. You may call it socialism as much as you want, but definitions are defined how most people understand something. "after which everyone will keep on bootlicking the closest capitalist so they don't starve." Not true on any level. There is less starvation in capitalists systems than in socialists. Not to mention that lot of capitalist countries have adopted welfare state, which makes sure that no one needs to lick anyone's boots in order to survive. In fact your proposed system wouldn't be any different from "bootlicking" perspective. Because now those people have to lick people of said company in order to get majority to like you. As I said, your system exploits the talented, productive and anti-social people. Making things worse... IT makes sure that those people won't be able to have offsprings, hence you will suffer from genetic brain leak and lower amounts of people being productive. You will basically end up having country filled with narcissistic psychopaths/sociopaths. Because in the environment that you created, will benefit them the most.
    3
  27. +Daniel mills What about scandinavia? We are free market capitalist countries. Don't confuse welfare into socialism simply because socialist generally advocate it.
    3
  28. +TheFinnishSocialist I did, but you ignored like my last reply in another thread. I even told you that your form (or solution to it) of "socialism" is actually what we call as ponzi scheme in real life. As I also explained before, you're not actually socialists. Since socialism seeks to abolish private sector and there are only two sectors. Private and public. There is no such thing as collective sector. Since you keep thinking that collective ownership is some sort of third option. Collective ownership that you describe is actually capitalism. Since it's about someone else than public sector owning said factory. " I did tell you that the whole scenario you proposed was fallacious in the first place" There wasn't a single fallacy in there. It was actual scenario that can happen. "After my answer, you proceeded to type a huge amount of text, which required 11 whole parts for it" There was no huge amount of text. Those parts were actually small, and you should know well enough why I made them in small parts. Simply because youtube's habbit of remove comments, hence it was based way to see if you missed any comment. " I'm pretty sure you're not aware of what socialism is. " I have given you dictionary and encyclopedia's definition of it. I even directly quoted marx's definition of it. "(Assuming you're talking about socialism) How?" If you tell people what they are allowed to do and what not. And use force to enforce those rules. Then how it's so hard you to understand that your system forces people?
    3
  29. + ᚫᛞᚱᛁᚫᚾ ᛚᚢᛏᚺᛖᚱᚫᛞᚱᛁᚫᚾ "I'd listen to her rather than you." Because of your bias. "Also can you stop ignoring the definition of voluntary sector, dude?" That is you guys moving the goalpost. It's not same as collective sector. It's literally talking about charity organizations. "He's getting psychotic imo." That would be every socialist on the planet. Including you. After all... You psychos believe that you have right to kill someone over your cult ideology. Also why are you still here? You haven't really contributed here at all. Instead of trying to create circle jerk with her. That only makes you guys look weaker. Need two vs one? :D
    3
  30. +Yamamoto Shinjuku They are panicking after they accidentally revealed to be leninist. Now they are trying to do damage control. Even though Leninism was cut and dry statist. In fact google the state and revolution. You will find free marxists page providing that book. These idiots cannot deny what is written in it. Whole book is about lenin explaining states role in the society. Oh and btw, lenin believed that state is simply means of force.
    3
  31. ´+Xavier Rodriguez Seems like I hit the nerve. Now that plot has been revealed. You guys aren't socialists. You were Leninist. Trying to create useful idiots by feeding misinformation and manipulating the language. Funny how that weird wolf guy at first denied her being leninist and now he goes on and tries to say that lenin was libertarian socialist. Even though he was orthodox marxists according to himself, and a communists. This is too easy. Socialists and communists have never been intellectual giants... Their plots are easy to see. Their actions are easy to manipulate, and they are incapable of seeing their own shortcomings. Not only that, but they are easily angered as seen from your comment.
    3
  32. +Yamato Shinjuku See... She actually wants to go out and kill people she disagrees with... It's astonishing that they are trying to claim moral high-ground in here. They are extremist who are incapable of feeling empathy.
    3
  33. +TheFinnishSocialist You have been throwing insults and being passive aggressive all the time. As I said... You have no moral high ground. And every argument that you refuse to address, only strengthens my cause in eyes of every observer of this debate. You running away while trying to put all blame on me, is simply act of cowardliness and admission of defeat. As I said, you system is inherently flawed and it will never work. IT will only create exploitation and eventually turn society into dictatorship. And your methods to reach this society of yours are vile and barbaric. The moment you admitted to be lenninist. Was the moment when you proved that you deserve no respect from anyone.
    3
  34. +Yamamoto Shinjuku Leninism isn't simply "seize the means of production". It's method how they seize. Since lenin didn't believe in peaceful transition. Therefore lenism is precisely about violent and murderous revolution. She is trying to trick you once again into becoming useful idiot, which she would kill the moment her "socialist" agenda happens. You're dealing with actual sociopath who is unable to feel empathy.
    3
  35. +TheFinnishSocialist Oh how ironic... Queen of mass murder comes back and complains about me "ignoring" her, while she in fact didn't respond to my counter arguments even after I reposted them. As I said.. You have no moral high ground.^ "Tertiary workers don't use the means of production. They don't take/use what is owned collectively." In other words they are being exploited. " This doesn't create private ownership at any point, because there is nothing else to be owned but their skill for the service they want to give." So now you're advocating communism. Apparently owning your own car is now illegal as well. "You can be greedy and self centered" Literally can't, according to you you can only be like that collectively. Since you magically believe that being greedy and self centered can be stopped by a law. " but you can't stop helping the collective by producing something and selling them in the market to gain money. " You're contradicting yourself. Previously you had said that people can sell their own products and now you say they cannot sell their products for money. Also to provide quote from lenin himself. Since you promote his ideology. "The supersession of the bourgeois state by the proletarian state is impossible without a violent revolution. The abolition of the proletarian state, i.e., of the state in general, is impossible except through the process of “withering away". " -Lenin
    3
  36. +el gusanillo del juego No, scandinavians aren't socialists. They are free market capitalist countries with extended welfare system.
    3
  37. +Some Random person Communism is against state, not against government. In fact even marx stated that communists will organize governmental body. ". Paris Commune, Makhno's Free Territory, Zapatistas, Rojava, Catalonia. " Most of them were too short lived to see inevitable results of communism and some of those VERY NEW states. I ahve debunked each and everyone of them. Only idiot thinks that a political system that has existed merely 5-years is good example of how well it will end up. "Your body is considered PERSONAL property. " Your body is considered as means of production. What is a prostitute's means of production? It's her body. What is the actor's means of production? It's his mind and body. What is politicians means of production? His tongue. What is scientists means of production? His mind. "Most philosophers discount her of even being a philosopher" Anyone who discounts her as philosopher is not philosopher. Because that means that they do not know the essence of philosophy. "Third, socialism is when the WORKERS own the means. " Not a single definition online says that. "Is it because the USSR claimed it was "communist"?" They followed communists' manifesto perfectly. "an you call it socialism if the means are controlled by a government with no democracy?" Actually they had democracy. What you fail to realize that socialism is way to destroy democracy. Socialism centralizes too much power in hands of the couple people. Which will eventually be used to destroy democracy. This is why every socialist country ends up being dictatorship when given time. Why haven't you ever asked that question of yourself of why the end results are always the same? "Fourth, Hitler was never a socialist. In fact, he even purged the entire left-wing of the Nazi Party, the SA and the Strasserists." He was purging his political opponents who supported different kind of socialism. Soviet did the same. Hitler was socialists, national socialists. It was his own form of socialism that him and his supporters were for.
    3
  38. +Hakasedess There is no heritage since it's private property that is inherited. Marx would laugh at you and hang you if he heard you speaking such things. According to him heritage was only for middle-class.
    3
  39. +Some random person I"t's got workable examples" Not a single workable exmple " it's got solid theory." Extremely flawed theory.
    3
  40. +Hakasedess "Oh, you mean in terms of inheritance, I thought you meant heritage in the lofty "Oh I'm proud of my ancestors, they did the thing" way." Well that as well. There is a reason why soviets went far away to destroy ethnic and national heritages of other countries. Including their own. Same with china etc... "Yes, we commies want the big state to own your body!" You may not want, but that is because you never read marx nor do you understand communism. You are what communists call as useful idiot. Aka person who they use to create communism and then execute. "Well of course you couldn't write such a contract, there's no money in communism." Another reason why communism cannot work without big government. Afterall.. how do you trade with other communes without money?
    3
  41. +Hakasedess It's MOP, as I explained before. What means of productions does escort use to earn her living? Her body Roughly same person? No, they all believed in same thing, but they all thought different routes to achieve it. USSR was exactly socialist paradise. They did implement all the policies that bernie would have a hard on. Yeah just like there is no hard evidence that North-Korea kills it's own people, other than people who escaped there with their lives.
    3
  42. +Some Random Person + Finnishsocialist Socialism is centralizing. It will always create central organization that overseers everything. Also What is opposite of private property? Public property, when private property exists then there is only public one. That finnish guy keeps confusing shared ownership of a company into socialism.
    3
  43. +TheFinnishSocialist Collective ownership without private ownership means collective ownership through government. Beside even your form of "socialism" has the workers council which decides literally everything. as shown in last time you replied in other comment section. So if you abolish private ownership, then there is only public ownership. Which means that government owns everything. You don't even know your own ideological system. You're like christian who has never read a bible. "who e.g. built the world's biggest blast furnace in Magnitogorsk as an example." Sounds like world's most inefficient furnace. "What I build, I build for myself. Every rivet in this plant - we all have a share. Right now I have just one potato, but when we've done building the blast furnace, we will be able to make metal" Aka workers didn't own it. It was public. Otherwise only the workers who build it would be able to make metal, not everyone else.
    3
  44. +Some Random Person Giving all the power in hands of politicians isn't centralizing? You what mate? "libertarian socialism " Doesn't exists. Socialism is by definition against freedom of individual. "Shared ownership of a company IS socialism." no it's not. Lot of companies share their stocks with other people. Private ownership doesn't mean singular ownership. Private ownership means everything that is not owned by the government. "Socialism can (albeit in a very reductionist way) be described as simply, "sharing your shit with people"." No it's not. It's being a victim of a robbery. You're forced to give your stuff to other people. Which again... Promotes psychopaths and parasites, while harming intelligent and creative people who are productive.
    3
  45. +Some Random person "Socialist government does not "represent" the collective UNLESS it is democratic" Which all socialists states were in beginning. Until the major flaw of socialism came obvious. It's vulnerable to being turned into dictatorship. Higly vulnerable I might add.. "and UNLESS the companies are at least PARTIALLY worker owned." Then it's private. Very definition of public property is that it's handled by government. Private is when individuals or group of individuals control it.
    3
  46. +TheFinnishSocialists Part 1. "Oh, so a tax funded public body has the power to abuse people from doing businesses. Wow. Dictatorship achieved" The fact that you laugh at this make me think that I were wrong about you simply not thinking things through. You are actually mentally incapable of doing so. Look... When they have power to decide who and who is not allowed to create business. Then they can abuse that power in a way that they will only grant permission to those who swear loyalty to them in one way or another. Either in public or in the shadows. No laws can prevent corruption. It never has. So since you're incapable of fathoming the real influence of such power let me explain this to you. Let's say that me and my friends somehow get into the council. We are either majority or everyone is my contacts. (if not at start, it can be turned though scheming). Now I have the power to decide who is allowed to create business. I will give all the best parts of the land to the people who I prefer. Either they pay me and my friends the most, we have some connections with them or they simply support same political line as I do. Now they become more successful than their rivals, due having better parts of the land. Especially since I can regulate and demolish all rivals who become too big. This is even more powerful if I only allow people who I like to create media companies. Are you starting to get the point of such power? With such power I could easily amass enough influence to control whole society. Enough control to even take over the whole system. "They'd only be digging their own graves for not only trying to avoid being lynched by the people for not letting people doing labor" Oh, they are allowed to do labor. Only the labor that I allow them to do. Aka nothing that actually holds large amount of influence. While army, police, hospitals, major industries, media, agriculture is all in my pockets. That is all I need. With police I can arrest whoever I view as political threat. With hospital I can ensure that my political enemies will die in operating table. With media I can spread lies to support my claim. With agriculture I literally control lives of everyone. ", but also would anyways soon see their tax funds wither away, since people barely have income without work." So? They don't have weapons and I control the army. All weapon factories are controlled by people who I trust, and they only sell their weapons to the army. " I see no reason to do this, they should be striving to create a very competent regional economy, no? " You don't see why someone would want to become a dictator?
    3
  47. +TheFinnishSocialist Part 2. "Yes, best suiting positions would be picked for companies." Yes, the companies which support the council's political agenda. You do realize that all companies compete on who gets what part of the land? If they cannot buy the land, then they bribe it from the council members. " Land with rich iron deposits? There goes blast furnaces." Expect you fail to understand... Which group gets to make blast furnace. One that supports council or one who doesn't? You clearly didn't get the problem of council deciding things. Problem is not where to place what. But who is allowed to put and where. You fail to understand that there are multiple different groups wanting to make their own furnace. Even in that case if there were one, government can still refuse unless they think that this group would fall into their pocket.
    3
  48. +TheFinnishSocialist Part 3 "Odd, you don't seem like you'd be running out of words though, why go so low?" IT was objective statement. You have demonstrated multiple times that you don't understand what wealth is, what is private and what is public. You think economics is a zero sum game. You don't even understand supply and demand. " it doesn't mean that they're 100% collectively owned." In public they are 100% collective. Google definition of collective. Government can and is collective. "but can put it for collective use. " It's for collective use when government use it. "I just quickly read that you were dissing the USSR for achieving the world's biggest blast furnace and gave you some production numbers and you turn that in to an argument against socialism? " Creating big furnace is no special feat. Creating world biggest pizza is as relevant. IT doesn't make it world's most delicious pizza. I can create world's biggest hammer. Does that make it the best hammer? Production numbers doesn't tell efficiency. One can produce lot of stuff with extremely high cost. While you could produce same number with less cost if things are done differently. The argument against socialism was that, the achievement that USSR did was pointless and wasn't effective. It was waste of resources. Efficiency is not determined how much something produces. It's the cost of production. "So now all in all, to you, collective is a government that represents a private organization." Your sentence makes no sense. There was no private organization. There was group of workers who created pointless construct for the government. "If you say so, hun" literally the very idea of socialism. Even marx stated this. Also hun? Are you a girl?
    3
  49. +TheFinnishSocialist Part 1. "So all in all you just do your job, which is appointing businesses to places where they profit the most." You really can't be this thick... Do you have any idea how much people would be willing to do me favors just so that I could give their company special privileges like good marketing spot? You clearly don't understand nature of corruption. You just basically said that it's my job to create dictatorship. "Also somehow discriminate all media outlets you dislike without giving them any reasonable reason for it and getting away with the organized discrimination and then control the regional media." This literally happened in soviet Russia. It's happening even in today's russia. This happened in North-Korea as well. In china. In vietnam. In Cuba. In every socialist country on the planet. When I control who is allowed to do business. Then I can discriminate groups who are about to form media outlets. Hence only people who swear loyalty to me are allowed to create media company. Therefore I will have monopoly on "truth". " I should've known you already imagined workers' councils as dictators. " They are not at start, but they will end up being there due accumulation of influence and power. I "Even though they hand out permits and make strategic decisions" That power itself is key to create dictatorship. " I did say organized discrimination is punishable by law, didn't I" Well now you need to prove it, and how are you going to do that? Now that press, and police are under my control. In fact I will blame you to be secret capitalist and send you to gulag to live as a slave rest of your life. Also bribery and corruption are against law in all countries. Yet it happens. Fun fact... Sociopaths generally think that laws are perfect and no one ever breaks them. "Why make conclusions that regional public bodies have total dictatorship on these subjects" Because the amount of power you grant them. Is enough for them to bypass any law and become dictators.
    3
  50. +TheFinnishSocialist Part 2 "You have a power to not give permits, while needing a reason for it, while needing to abide by the law." You haven't stated a single law yet, which prevents me to pick and choose my favorite group to perform these actions. You haven't even explained how law would prevent any of my actions before it's too late. Not only that but you live under assumption that sociopaths follow the laws. "You don't hold the power to literally control what's going on in said businesses or public services. " Expect I do. Since I only give permit to people who let me control them. If they refuse to follow orders, then I can simply take their permit and confiscate their business. While throwing them to jail with excuse of them exploiting others. Not only that, I can even bribe some of them. As I said... All of those businesses that would now exists are held by sociopaths who don't care about rules or others. " You can try and push your luck with organized discrimination and end up in a labor camp fairly quickly by authorities, escorted by your lovely police." I'm the authority and police is in my pockets. Your move. This is too easy... You do realize that everything I had said now, HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN REAL LIFE?
    3