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

  1. +TheFinnishSocialist " I've posted evidence that very many socialist countries are targeted by a military coup when about to form or already formed. " You posted that somewhere in distance past. While ignoring every time socialist did target military coup to capitalist country like Finland. Not to mention you ignored the results after USA didn't bother to do anything with them. Like north Korea or vietnam after vietnam war. Only embargoed country was cuba, and only USA was part of. Rest of the world didn't join it it and kept trading with Cuba. This is where I also point out the flaws of your reasoning since you blame that africa is poor because west trades with them. " Chile went down because of a military coup" In result chile became most prosperous country in southern america. Unlike Cuba or vietnam. "USSR's Russia defeated 16 capitalist countries who attacked them during civil war, introduced work and meritocracy" I'm sorry. How USSR was meritocracy when only way to get up was family connections and all talented and intelligent people were killed? "industrialized, boomed their economy" Boomed state economy. not the citizens economy. And economy boom was false. They forced people to work on something which was never used. Everyone earned pretty well, but there was no food to buy. So earnings were pointless. May I remind you... War time makes it look like that economy is booming, while in reality people are starving. "doubled the life expectancy, eliminated illiteracy," Russia was in war before it, and industralization was the thing which double life expectancy. They only taught kids to read in order to make indoctrinate and brainwashing easier. "became the 2nd superpower," Not really. They were considered as superpower only because of the nukes. "won WWII" Objectively false. IT was all thanks to gay british guy who did break the enigma. Without the intel that his discovery provided, soviets would've lost eastern front. In fact same intel made sure that attacking German from two fronts was possible. " had constant population growth despite wars and famines" Just like african countries... So prosperous... You do realize that population growth is tied to poverty. Because more poor people are the more likely they are to rely in their family. While population is in decline in every country that is actually prosperous. Look at our country for example. It's envied all over the world, yet our population growth is in decline. Same with japan, other nordic countries etc.. " You will also point out the famines and blame socialism for it, even though you don't know how. " Bad planning. And in case of urkaine's famine they actually starved them in purpose and sold all the food to the western countries instead of giving it to ukraine people who farmed them. For mao, he killed natural enemies of the pestilences that ate crops... etc... Not only that but after modern china privatized farm industry. They experienced huge growth in productivity. Clearly people are more motivated to work over profit than for "collective good". "Even if I say that kulaks (capitalists) burned their crops and killed their livestock" Well it wasn't about to be theirs anymore since they were about to be stolen. Also citation needed. "where I point out capitalist USA, Germany and Netherlands have all had famines" nope, no famine. " USA had a great depression" made by feds. This has been confirmed by themselves. "USA now has seasonal crises" Only because government keep distorting the prices until they cannot keep up with the lie. " Even if I say that the world has more debt than money already, specifically because of capitalism" All socialist states on the planet has debt. This is not because of capitalism. It's because government officials love to spend money that they don't have. So instead of cutting funds they take debt.
    2
  2. +European nihilist "Communist Think? Do you want to tell us that parents have not sold their children?" Rofl.. Do you want to tell us? And communist think in this context. You actually are communists :D. The way you put words reveals it. No, parents haven't sold their children. Nor is that relevant to anything what I had said. "This has been observed and documented!Do you deny it?" Observed by an idiot who has never worked in his life, and literally abused everyone who was near him. Aka marx. Documented? Nope. If you're talking about children sold in literal sense to actual slavery. This does not happen in the west. Nor does it happen in capitalist countries. you see forcing people to work is against capitalism. "You have failed so far at any point!" You just provided lot of quotations without providing any counter arguments to my point. "These are typical player tricks of cherry picking and misinformation!" literally what you have been doing. Even now. "Do you want to tell us that you are the one who understands the 200 years old criticism of economics better than anyone else does not make you ridiculous!" Nope, I'm telling you that you don't understand the 200-year old critic. Nor did he even understand the economics. He instead create a cult of useful idiots who end up creating new feudal rule without realizing it.
    2
  3. +Thefinnishsocialist "How did you oppose the idea of kulak resistance again" I actually did provide citation in this very thread before. This is evidence that you had not read my comments and instead ignored them. just like you refuse to address the following problems. Exploitation in your system. Aka how they exploit janitors. Scams and destruction your system. Your system favoring people who are sociopaths. Economic ineffiency of your system. Your refusal to address why wage labor is exploitation and why you wish to prevent workers from having it even if they wanted. Lack of insensitive to create business and innovation. Lack of interest to invest in any company. Ever increasing governmental power and regulations that you have been suggesting. How you remove corruption. How do you expect corrupted people getting caught on time every time. "Why does the government distort the prices? It almost seems as if it's compelling for it. " Many reasons for it. In fact go and ask venezuela if you want to know why. I can list few since you're not smart enough to figure on your own. 1. Claim to make it cheaper for poor people, hence suppose to have better access to it. 2. Claim that some company is too big to fail, therefore should be supported by government (this is socialist policy) 3. They are lobbied/bribed to to give subsidies which will distort the price from it's real value. 4. Politicians fear that if during their election period economy goes even slightly down, then they will lose next election (this is actually major reason), in fact they take debt to as attempt to make it look like that they had good growth in that year. Obama did this. "Why does the government bail out big businesses and banks? It almost seems as if it's compelling for it." Not a single pure bred capitalist support government bailing out bank or any business. All of them believe that those systems that take stupid risks or are ran badly, should just collapse and let the better ones replace it.
    2
  4. +European Nihilist Child labor is illegal in all modern capitalist countries. However, you fail to take into account that in past when there wasn't so much wealth, if child didn't work. The family would die to starvation. This is why in lot of poor countries even in socialist ones, children actually work. There is this thing called as reality. Also Marx wasn't talking about child labor in that part. As I explained. "Becose i em again Child Labor i em Communist!?" nope. You're commie because of this. ""Communist Think? Do you want to tell us that parents have not sold their children?"" Context was what communists think. Then you proceed to speak in collective "want to tell US". Which already implies that you need to be communists in order to use it if I did address communists. You still have refused to actually say what is the economic model you support. IF you weren't communists. You would've already made it clear what you support.
    2
  5. +TheFinnishsocialist "I did hear you constantly claiming that janitors don't earn anything. This is false. They're tertiary workers and their business is in the hands of the free market" how come it's their business in hands of the free market. But in current capitalist model the workers who produce stuff in company is not in hands of the free market? Can't you really see the inconsistency of your ideology?
    2
  6. +Psychowolf "The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie will fall. " There is no dictatorship. "Democratic entrepreneurship, rather than dictatorial." Both are false. As explained before many times. "It doesn't make a country rich over the long-term" You're empirically wrong. All the richest countries on the planet are capitalist countries. " it steals from the people" It doesn't steal anything. It seems that you don't understand word steal. "nd gives the illusion that the country is rich, where they reside in." Have you even lived in western country? Bitch please I live better life than a kings thousand of years ago. And I'm poor in our scale. "People might have a hard time paying for heating and water in the world's most prosperous country in the world. " Objectively false. "People might have more empty homes than homeless people in the world's most prosperous country in the world." Usually homeless people are homeless due mental issues. I can tell this due personal experience when i used to suffer from depression in the past. Even though I had money to have a house, I neglected it.
    2
  7. +TheFinnishsocialist " This is leading nowhere." Aka you're losing the debate but you refuse to acknowledge it. " I hope you learned something new about socialism though. " how can I learn something new when you're already telling me everything I already knew? "Keep up with the cold war propaganda for the time being you still can" keep up with the soviet propaganda for time being you still can. "The truth will prevail," Which is.. CAPITALISM WORKS BITCHES! :D " but people will stop listening, when they see the contradictions." Oh like you say that janitors won't own means of productions but instead will be treated worse than they treated now?
    2
  8. +TheFinnishSocialist "t's more about denial. "Socialism is this", "No it's not", "Yes it is", "No it's not"." How do you know, that it's not you who is in denial? "You didn't know the concepts of social ownership. Now you do" I did, but I also happen to know that socialist tend to use different definitions and in some cases they even switch definitions among themselves. "You didn't know all the sectors based on ownership. Now you barely know" Nope... Again. Public is government government owned. Private is everything outside of government expect charity organizations (non-profit), and this is the case only in some countries which separe them. Lot of countries put them ino same. "You didn't know that socialism isn't linked to authoritarianism. " But it's. You cannot enforce it without authority. "You didn't know that Leninism isn't a societal model. " Just like you thought it's about peaceful revolution. Which btw you still haven't explained how you're going to seize means of productions when you're thrown into jail for not letting your employer inside of the building. OR how you seize it after he kicks you out from the company. "Janitors own the means of production. How'd they get treated worse than now? " Majority owns. Which in this case is the producers. Why would they want to give janitor good wage? That wage is away from their own profit. Whatever you say to this... You will lose. Because the moment you said that only those who produce with their hands will earn profit. You admitted that you didn't actually change anything, but turned into mob rule of bullies.
    2
  9. +European nihilist "Child Labor is Illegal in all modern capitalist countrys? Spook! Over 9000!" You claim to be european yet you didn't know this. Not only you didn't realize that child labor became pointless when the society's wealth increased enough. The poor commie... Doesn't understand the nature. He thinks that we live in world of infinite resources where nature treats us with care...
    2
  10. +Yamamoto Shinjuku You might want to see my last reply. TheFinnishSocialist finally ended up admitting that wage labor is no exploitation, therefore capitalism is not evil or bad. Not only that. I forced him to admit that he doesn't even know what socialism is according to the very sources she claims to be best source to describe something. It's pretty much case closed now.
    2
  11. +TheFinnishSocialist This is hilarious. You already dug hole so deep that I can't do anything else than laugh while writing this. "Public ownership is a form of social ownership, correct." WHOLE collective, owning everything. That can only be done through state or monopoly. "Yes...? What's new to this? Community as a whole owns the means of production. " But doesn't own the land, capital etc.. in your system. Therefore not socialist. "Wage labor gives a possibility for exploitation, it's not exploitation itself. In capitalism, where you chiefly have a private sector, which is run by the profit motive, your primary motive is to exploit." So what makes you think that other people in factory doesn't have primary motive to exploit? Too easy, too easy. You lost this long time ago. "In socialism, where you chiefly have a voluntary sector, " By definition, the moment voluntary sector makes any sort of profit. It stops being voluntary. Aka the producers, aka burger flippers, aren't allowed to get anything from the product they sell. "which is not run by the profit motive, your primary motive isn't to exploit. " Expect it's run by profit motive. There is no reason to create company if you don't seek to gain something from it to yourself. "You cannot earn by having wage labor in socialism" Yes you can. By having someone who manages the labor. Or someone who organizes the product line. Someone who invents, designs etc... You mus be special kind of idiot for not realizing the benefit of people who aren't flipping the burgers. "What on earth are you talking about?" Talking about you exploiting people without realizing it. OR simply being too dishonest to admit it. "Again, what are you talking about?"! Source demolishes your definition of socialism.
    2
  12. +Psychowolf. I provided definition. From source which you both approve of. It was literally everything against what you both told. Government is the collective. It's the way how collective controls and owns. You're literally too stupid to understand something that every famous socialist philosopher states. Aka engels marx, and lenin. STATE, GOVERNMENT takes means of productions in name of the collective. It repesents them. IT's THE COLLECTIVE.
    2
  13. +TheFinnishSocialist Okay one more time psycho. "Primary/Secondary workers = own what they gather/produce/manufacture. There can be no wage labor from these people." Okay, yes proceed. "Tertiary workers = don't use means of production, hence are different in this sense. There can be wage labor from these people." Exploitation as I explained before. "Wage labor = selling one's labor power to an employer" Exploitation and slavery according to you. "Wage labor in capitalism = "I hope I can hire 100 workers so I can earn 100,000$ without working!"" Misconception, which you fail to understand due you being too stupid. You see... These people work. In fact they work harder than any burger flipper on the planet. You have this uncle scrooge view of business owner. Without realizing how stressful and how many risks it entails and how much talent it takes to organize and manage to business. Especially to come up with good business plan and idea. According to you.. People with these skills... Skills of imagination, to read people to motive people... Are useless to you. "Wage labor in socialism = "I hope we can hire 100 workers so we can get more work done!"" How is that different from spartan slaving 100 people to get more work done? Again... Capitalist hires more people to get more work done. Not to exploit. You see... The owner can actually refuse not to have any workers and still possess all the means of production. So then he is not exploiting anyone... But then again... THEN HE IS ONLY ONE EARNING SOMETHING IN THE COUNTRY. To make this simpler for you... Since were living in time where we can product robots.... It's theoretically possible to replace all of your burger flippers with robots. Therefore your system will never work. People who you wish to give dictatorship, are the very people who can be replaced by machines.That's how little value they actually have for production. "Collective ownership = All people within a nation/region owning the means of production collectively." The World's greatest dictionary according to you. Said that socialism is about collective ownership. Aka... Your system in socialism... doesn't exists. Since iot's not collective ownership... It's simply cooperate ownership. "Common ownership = All people within a nation/region owning." not according to dictionary. In fact... According to it... Word common ownership doesn't even exists. So we have only collective ownership. Which is described AS WHOLE and as something that as one collective owns literally everything. How can this thing be achieved? Only through government. Unless you're delusional fool like yourself.
    2
  14. +chead leach Should also mention that because of artificial prices the farmers and merchants were selling with loss, unless they sold in black markets.
    2
  15. +ironic meme "Most if not all socialists are opposed to these institutions." You mean anarchists and other idiots? "public education, medicare, medicaid, social security are all at the most social democratic, basically every functioning nation has these. " Yeah like north-korea... Also they are not social democratic. socialists don't even know meaning of the words they use... Funny part is... They don't even know that usually they belong to the very class that will be killed under socialism. You have college education? You will be shot or forced to hard labor. You belong to middle-class? You will be shot. Your family belongs to middle-class? You will be shot as well. That is why soviet agents called you people as useful idiots. Because you really have no clue of the system that you're advocating.
    2
  16. +Theo Byström Because Sweden is free market capitalist country.
    2
  17. +Some Random Persoson. No, in socialism government controls all means of productions and distribution of good. Communism is suppose to be classless and stateless society where all private property is abolished, aka everything is public. Controlled by governmental body. Remember, state is not same as government. Both are highly dangerous ideologies and wants to slave everyone who isn't part of their political class. IF socialist or communist revolution would happen. It would be both of you who were to get bullets in their heads. This is why soviets called you guys as useful idiots.
    2
  18. +Some Random Person You do realize that soviets were allied with nazies in ww2? They had secret alliance and the moment those documents concerning it were found out, the soviet union started to collapse since all satellite states knew now that soviet occupation was illegal. Facist economy is not that much different from socialists. Facism wants to control the industry instead of owning it. both are same collectivist non-sense. Both use force on others.
    2
  19. +ᚫᛞᚱᛁᚫᚾ ᛚᚢᛏᚺᛖᚱ "t socialism would be a system where the whole population, even the unemployed, reaps all the labor value that the workers sow, like a welfare state." Which leads to the point that people who lack good genes, will spread their genes around. Ending up you having population too large to sustain the consumption. Not to mention those who don't work are more likely to succeed in finding a mate to have children with, since they have more time in their hands. Meaning that according to natural selection. You end up having population made out of people who are too lazy to work. To passive. After couple generations the effect of your system will show. More and more people relying on welfare state, creating too much of a burden to the society. What do you think will happen then? There is no peaceful solution. Especially since major voting block is made out of these people. "Capitalism: "Survival of the fittest individuals" Socialism: "Survival of the fittest collectives" (Note: plural)" Not really. Capitalism ensures individuals right, but individuals form collective groups in order to work together. Capitalism is both fittest of individuals and collective. While socialism weakens the rights of the individual and the qualities of them. "There's still job interviews and qualification tests and all that. " And you think that mob rule is capable of judging all of that? " However, when you are appointed by a collective" You think that mob rule is capable to judge that? We had already seen that people like to vote incompetent people in politics. " then you can start working there and your salary will be your labor value," What is the value of labor? Question that socialist and left wing in general has been unable to answer to. The system you propose is not based on meritocracy but who is the most popular person among the group. "You are all dependent of the success of that collective company and if you wish your salaries to increase, you need to work harder, innovate, compete" Salary increase is too minimal for anyone to bother innovate or compete. Do you have any idea how much more company which has 1000 workers under them have to sell a product in order to make significant increase in salary? Do some math... You will quickly find out that 10 people working in a firm that pays everyone equal amount which is 2500 a month. Will be 300 000 in a year. That is just a ten people. And 2500 is already fairly high salary. Then add there other costs and taxes... "You will have meetings where you discuss and vote for an optimal strategy, commitments, innovations etc." Ever wonder why there haven't been a single army in history of mankind that has been successfully ran with democratic voting style? Do you have any idea how much time, effort and knowledge you need to create strategies and innovations in the first place? No one in your company would have time to do this, and there wouldn't be any personal gain to spend extra hours to studying all of this while rest are acting lazy. Mob rule doesn't work. We only use democracy for government in order to prevent tyrannical dictators from appearing, not because it's efficient system. Same doesn't apply in companies since company run by person like that, will go bankrupt in no time.
    2
  20. + Δονάλδιος You know how makes policies? People in charge. Aka it's literally fault of the policies and the people who made them. As stated, socialism and central planning doesn't work.
    2
  21. +Tim horn 70% of that private sector is heavily regulated, highly taxed and are forced to use prices that government tells them to use. Which is why wealthy venezuelas left the country, and no one wants to make private business because it's not profitable at all. Cry about oil prices... It doesn't change anything. Since no other country that has oil, did go into same state as Venezuela because of the price drop. Do you know why the price drop hit Venezuela so hard? BECAUSE OF THE SOCIALIST POLICIES THAT DID CRIPPLE THEIR PRIVATE SECTORS.
    2
  22.  @fiascus4273  I have read it. It was disgusting and only psychopaths like marx.
    2
  23. +John cornwell Money is not limited resources. Also money keeps constantly circulating. It's you people who confuse wealth into money. One being rich is not away from someone. You can be rich without anyone being poor.
    2
  24. +Stormy5430 They were socialists. IT was in their name and they even stated that they are against capitalism. That link spam proves nothing to contradict me. Their economic model leaned more to the left than right. That is why they placed heavy regulations, confiscated property etc... Also you do realize that price control is not capitalist policy? That literally proves my point that they were socialist. Venezuela did exact same thing.
    2
  25. +Stormy5430 Do you understand difference between controlling and owning? Yes they sold some firms. Yes they privatized some sectors (not all). But same they they were heavily controlling them. Go and read up about how they did control them. All the regulations and the times they stole their assets. "Did you think the black panthers had actual black panthers in their group?" They weren't saying that they are actual panthers. However nazies did say that they were socialists. And they did say that they were enemies of capitalism and believed that private sector should be under control of the government in order to avoid exploitation. The fact that you brought up the price control actually proves me right in here. Nazies were socialists. Their type of socialism was national socialism. They were left wing. Hitler himself was centrist. Look it up. His political axis was in middle.
    2
  26. +John Cornwell "So then how does socialism if money isn't a finite resource? " Money is simply tool of trade. No matter how much money you have, it actually have no affect on the resources you have access to. For example if everyone in USA would be given billion dollar bill. That would cause inflation and drop the value of currency. Supply and demand is a thing. What really matter is the resources not the money. In fact in soviet union engineers were highly paid. But they did literally nothing with that money, since there was no food to buy. Money doesn't feed you. "If everyone is getting paid, whether by private business or government what is the difference?" Difference is that if it's government paying you. Then you're submitting your independency away. This is very likely to create dictatorship. not only that, but working under government, makes mental state where work is a bother and customer is simply more extra work for you to earn nothing. While under capitalism, you're free to create your own business. OR find business which you would prefer to work in with. You're independent. And more customers means more money to you. While avoiding forming dictatorship since not every aspect of your life is not controlled by government. Government jobs are inefficient and highly corrupted. While private jobs are seeking to be efficient as possible and corruption has little effect. so... difference is huge.
    2
  27. +Terry Tater "Please stop pretending you understand economics." Says socialists who thinks that if everyone were billionaires then everyone would live life of luxury. You don't even know what money is. "You just said that money doesn't matter because of inflation and capitalism is better cause you make more money. " Capitalism isn't better because of you make "more money". Capitalism is better because it's more efficient in gathering and using resources, while giving less room for corruption. Money exists in almost every economic model on the planet. Expect in North-Korea or some tribe made out of 10 people in jungle. "But you're a moron if you think private jobs are better than government jobs." So I'm moron for stating empirical fact? "Nobody actually wants socialism." You do realize that you're advocating socialism when you claim that government does job better than private sector? Talk about being a moron... "you just pointed out that means of production are more important than profit lol" You don't make any sense in here. How bad is your reading comprehension? Do you even understand what profit is? Producing something at lost is not beneficial to anyone. You're basically a locus farm which consumes instead of produces until you run out of things to consume. That is what it means to not to do profit. "What's the point of profit if money doesn't matter?" Profit doesn't mean that you gain money from transaction. As I said, money is merely tool for trade and you idiot don't even understand on why and how money was created in the first place. Let's put it this way. If it take me to use 1 iron ore to create a pickaxe. Then I'm doing profit if I'm able to trade that pickaxe for two iron ores. This is how profit would work without money. Law of supply and demand. Something that socialist like you never understand.
    2
  28. +Stormy5430 Calls someone as idiot, yet is incapable of addressing any of his points... What does that make you in that case? "He doesn't even know how money was created." Creation of money was never relevant to any of the topic we discussed. Also I do know how money is created. However unlike you... I know how it's value is determined. "It was created because you can pay taxes with it. " Objectively and historically false. Money was created as tool for trade. It's far more convenient to trade currency than to create resources. I'm not really surprised that socialist doesn't understand basics of economics like this... So let me explain this to you. If you were a watermelon farmer. You raise watermelons and eat some of them. Now every now and then you have surpluss of watermelons, which you don't eat. Instead of saving it (since it goes bad over time), you look for someone else who might want to have a water melon. You see a chicken farmer. Now you would like to have some piece of chicken. So you come up with a plan. You offer X amounts of watermelon for the chicken. This is what we call as trade. However, what if the chicken farmer doesn't want watermelon? But wants to have a pig instead? Well you don't own a pig, therefore you can't trade you with chicken farmer. Now you're either have to give up, or find pig farmer who is willing to trade watermelons to a pig. By now you should be able to see how complicated this process goes if people keep trading on basis of product they have. What could ever make this trading thing simpler and far more convinient for everyone? Currency. Since chicken farmer, pig farmer and watermelon farmer. All agree that they use this currency to trade around resources they have. This way, watermelon farmer can buy chicken with money, and chicken farmer can choose what to buy with that currency. Watermelon or chicken. It makes transaction simpler. This is why money exists in all high civilizations. Because it was money, which enabled these cultures to develop into cities and large towns. It allowed people to do business in far more complicated level than it could be done with simply resource trade. Now what is the value of money and how it's determined? Supply and demand. The more money there is in the system, the less value it has. Which means every product in your society will cost more. So just printing million dollars bills and giving them every citizen once a month. Doesn't change anything expect cause hyperinflation. This will reduce value of your money. Lot of third world countries have done this and their currency is almost worth to nothing. Even their poorest person is millionaire, but they cannot buy anything with that one million they own. Because it has no value. Venezuelans thought that way to solve their problem of government spending, was to print more money and spend it. But they were just like you... And couldn't understand that their currency lost all of it's value. Currency is based on trust.
    2
  29. +European nihilist Nazies were socialist. This is historical fact. Simply because some socialist didn't agree with their view of socialism. Doesn't remove that fact. Just like communists killed other communists whom they didn't agree with. "Do you know what was the Reason why Hitler come to Power?" People's disatisfaction how world treated them, and how centralized government German had back in that time (thanks to the democratic socialist who were in power for years). Hitler himself stated clearly that he hated capitalism. In fact he believed that capitalism was international jew's trick to destroy germany. Even in his private talks he admitted that he got inspiration from marx and thought that marx and lenin were wrong over how communism would be achieved. He thought that his socialism was superior to theirs. Aka, instead of government owning means of production, they would control it.
    2
  30. +European Nihilist You have been defending socialist for days for now. And it's well known that socialist are incapable of being honest so I have very good reason that you're socialist pretending to not to be.
    2
  31. +Terry Tater " You're not even making real arguments. " So having argument that socialism doesn't work because it centralizes too much power, hence is easy to be turned into dictatorship... Isn't a real argument? "We're talking about economics" Yes a subject which you don't understand. "we're not talking about abandoning democracy." But you advocate system that eventually will abandon it. "A person who runs a government industry is not supposed to make profit. " And how are you going to stop it? "When they do, it's called corruption. " Socialist countries are known to be most corrupted on the planet. " In the private world, that money lost to corruption is simply called profit. " Wait... So you're making argument that profit is corruption? Oh boy... You don't even know what corruption is do you? "And if you don't understand debt based currency" I do understand debt based currency. One takes loan, in which return bank prints more money to give that loan to the person. This creates inflation. However what you don't understand is the value of currency. You think that simply having million dollars is a good thing, even if piece of bread would costs two millions. You are literally incapable of fathoming the concept of how value of money is determined. Debt based currency was never the argument. "The average American dies in debt for 67K." I repeat.. What this has to do with anything?
    2
  32. +Stormy5430 "I really dont care. you ignore and dismiss facts and history.... you are an idiot. cant be any simpler..." You're literally mirroring yourself on me. You dismiss economical and historical facts and data. All of the point out that socialism is bad system to advocate for. There isn't a single socialist country that has been doing well when given time. You cannot even argue why socialism is better than capitalism. BEcause you don't understand either of those systems. You just throw buzzwords without comprehending them.
    2
  33. +European Nihilist No Austria is not socialist country. It's a social market economy, also known as Rhine capitalism. It's socioeconomic model combining a free market capitalist economic system alongside social policies which establish both fair competition within the market and a welfare state. That is not socialism. Collective doesn't own or have control over means of production. "Answear the Question!" First of all... It wasn't even a question. Second of all. IT HAS LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING I HAVE SAID. I'm not here arguing about debt that exists in USA. That is not relevant. "Where i defending Socialism?Show me! Show us!" Even now. And now in the other thread as well. How about you come clean and say what economic model you support. "That is all you actually lost every Argument point! " Americans creating currency out of debt has nothing to do with the topic. I never made any argument over america, or debt currency. I simply stated that you people don't understand what is value of currency and how it can change when the supply of money is increased.
    2
  34. +European Nihilist. It's not socialist country. Google austria. Check out it's economic system. It's not socialistic. Get rekt idiot.
    2
  35. +TheFinnishSocialist Expect in capitalism you don't use other people's money. You use your own and create more of it. There is a difference. Socialism is thievery. It's like swarm of locusts.
    2
  36. +Xavier Rodriguez False... Communism has existed. In fact you can find people who are intellectually more honest, who go out and start to live in communes. Soviets were communists. They however failed to reach to the communist utopia.
    2
  37. +TheFinnishSocialist Lying? The threads below is my evidence about your true self. "Socialism is capitalism without dictatorial entrepreneurship and where the baseline is that you own what you produce." Again, like hundreds of times already. No it's not. Capitalism is about your freedom to create whatever sort of business you want and decide how it should be ran. You can create co-operative. You can create one which you own yourself. You can do whatever you want with it. Since it's your resources you used to create it. It's about people's freedom to choose. While socialism is the opposite of it. It limits of what you can and cannot do. It destroys creativity and motivation of the people. It persecutes the talented and ensures that they will never bother to do anything. People aren't allowed to choose anymore and they are forced to live under tyrannical mob rule. Only bully or naive idiot would think that mob rule ends up well. But as proven earlier. You are just violent person who wants to kill everyone who you disagree with. Which is why you still refuse to address honestly on how you would peacefully seize the means of production without using force. The moment you lock doors to the company, is the moment when cops come and throw you out. Ownership doesn't simply change because you yell that it's yours now.
    2
  38. +TheFinnishSocialist "As long as there's someone to dictate with an opportunity to exploit the workers" And majority of workers can't exploit the minority? By giving them less wages or worse jobs? "Socialism was built upon to the idea to stop the exploitation of the workers." It's built on misunderstanding over economics. "I must note here beforehand that by collective ownership I mean neither private or public. This usually confuses many people." Depends purely what you define as collective. If you had even ever read communists manifesto you would know that it applies to WHOLE POPULATION. Irelia " Isnt your country already a social democracy" No it's not. It's free market capitalist country which has a welfare program. Only means of distribution that government owns (as far as I remember) is alko. And that is only because they want to control the amount of alcohol we consume. In nutshell, Socialism fails because it's the very opposite of meritocracy.
    2
  39. +gulagwithhumanface Taiwan is not even bad xD. However I would rather go to Hong Kong, Singapore or new Zealand which actually has the freest market in the entire world. No idea where you pulled off that Taiwan is freest market in the entire world. Taiwan is only 11th freest.
    2
  40. +Luwer Wenn None of those are capitalist countries. Last time I remember Haiti prevented people from Using GMO. That is opposite of capitalism. They activate prevented private sector from using all important tech changes. Not only that, but all of those countries which you listed, are low in economic freedom scale. Aka not capitalist.
    2
  41. +Luwe Wenn None of them have free market capitalism applied. I doubt you even know those systems... Tip for you... They don't have free market. In fact they have highly suppressed markets. Another useful idiot destroyed.
    2
  42. Only in USA people aren't asked for ID when voting
    2
  43. expecting handouts is different from giving them. Also they are free to choose how to use their wealth, if they wish to use it to benefit their offspring so what? It's their own decision, not governments.
    2
  44. That is what happens when you mix socialism with capitalism.
    1
  45. +AtheistDaddy "Overlooking the fact of early America's slave-owning and child labor abusing past that had to be amended away via civil unrest, violence, political actions and civil war sure makes this "history" sound swell. Don't use those freeways you ideologues! " In same time period literally whole world had slaves and child labor. This negates your whole argument that slave ownership and child labor was the thing which made america rich. "Without the State there is no economy. " capitalism isn't against state. It's against state interference with business world.
    1
  46. Shift will happen. The domination will happen in cycles like in politics. Each generation has their own preference. New one always rebels against the previous one.
    1
  47. ***** So did you change your mind? If not then I don't consider myself as victor. You can hate USA all you want, but at least hate it for real reasons, instead of made up ones. Because your initial bias against USA, you will accept any non-sense claim against it. Try to be bit more skeptic, and again I'm not defending USA.
    1
  48. Dan Mac Irrelevant to the point.
    1
  49. Dan Mac "From the perspective of an individual lumber producer it is cheaper to cut down the trees and move on to the next bit of forest than to replant it as that producer will be dead by the time they run out of forest to cut." Being cheaper doesn't make it more profitable in long term. In longer term you gain more by planting.  Just like with planting grain. You gain more if you don't plant for next season, but in long term you end up losing. They are investing to the future. "In the West, where most of our trees have already been cut down we've instituted reforestation" That's funny because in west we have more lumber than in most parts of the world.  ", in those places where populations are still rising the forests continue to decline just like they did here and in Europe." Ironically in those places there isn't even forests. " Even the poster of this video recognizes that we continue to deforest land for our use;" IT doesn't mean that planting new trees wouldn't be good idea business wise. How does your comment counter anything in here? Can't be intellectually honest? "  it's never the other way around, " Forest killing us for it's own use? In case you didn't know mankind was near extinction in the past.  "supply continues to drop- how do you think this works out...?" Learn basics of business instead of crap told to you by someone.
    1
  50. Dan Mac "Do you think that North American lumber producers would replant land if they never had to re-use that land? " yes, because that's what they have been doing for long time. "do you think they would put out the expense for that when it has no benefit to them in their lifetime or in their children's? " It doesn't take that long, trees can live for long time, that doesn't mean that you cannot cut them before they are 1000 year old. " That wouldn't be a profit to them in the long or the short term." That is because you fail to understand basics of biology and economics. Which is typical for a hippie such as yourself. I bet you're against GMO too am I right? "If foresters naturally reforested lands as opposed to selling them for farms and homestead then North America's lumber industry would be several times the size that it already is." Probably, but same time you wouldn't be living now. In case you haven't realized lumber is pretty vital for humans. "-if South America and Southeast Asia follow the same course we did then most of the world's forests will disappear before we even start to react. " Rainforest is bit more complicated than a forest in northern parts of the planet.  You simply cannot replant it. "There are fewer trees overall each year than in the previous year, who is investing in the future...?" Companies " I'm not against growing trees just don't see how that's some cure-all for the world's environmental woes. " No one said it's cure-all ,but it's cure for not having trees. "You're missing the point, how many trees you would like to replant is irrelevant if the land available for planting trees decreases each year." Evidences stacks against you as shown in this video. "Farm land does not turn into forest, " That is why were focusing on making farming more efficient instead of taking more farmland. GMO has helped a lot in this, we need less acre than with traditional methods. " homes aren't turned into forest, " Why should they? Most human populations are concentrated far from forests anyway. Luckily we have skyscrapers and all the benefits that cities provide so that we don't need to live next to a forest. " there is always less and less forest- " more and more in western world.  " you can't argue that forestation is the cure for humanity's environmental" Again strawman, I have never argued that it's cure all to all issues. Simply stated that it's cure for lack of forests. 
    1