Comments by "Tespri" (@Tespri) on "Do You Actually Understand What 'Socialism' Is?" video.

  1. +Pear CD These people don't realize that more power government has to intervene with your life. The more power it will also have to fuck up things in life. Some policies might be good and smart, but what happens when one day they create bad one? Pretty much everyone agrees that politician in USA are corrupted without any doubt. Yet people are willing to give them more power. That is simply astonishing level of ignorance from them. Best part of capitalism is that bad business will fall. While most retarded part of socialism is, that bad business will never fail (yep, you guys were the reason why banks got bailouts).
    4
  2. Aurora "Countries self-proclaiming as socialist societies " Expect they were socialists societies. You simply want to deny this fact because otherwise you would be forced to admit that socialism doesn't work. 
    2
  3. ***** You mean do the same thing that soviet russia did and then fuck up badly because none of you actually are smart enough to run a country?
    2
  4. slug Face Yeap, labeling and twisting label's meanings is only thing they are capable of doing. That is why they never win in long term. Because even idiots will eventually see through it.
    2
  5. slug Face Ohhh... Ignorance is bliss.
    2
  6. ***** Less government? I didn't know that making bailouts and giving subsidies was "less government" If something government has grown bigger and bigger. " that led to the Wall Street crash right? " First of all government should've let wall street crash instead of giving it bailouts. Socialism has been debunked so long time ago and so many times. Only total retards and young teens who haven't read history, politics and economy still believe in it.
    2
  7. +Starving Wolf Yep, it's empirically proven that socialism doesn't work.
    1
  8. shawn stipe All of them were socialist countries. They were communists by name but structure was socialists.
    1
  9. shawn stipe Nope, again they had communist party in their government but none of the did fit the defination of communism.
    1
  10. +Aurora Anarchism doesn't work. All it need is one crime gang to destroy it.
    1
  11. Aurora "Oh, like the justification for the existence of a government in the first place? " You might want to read some history. Originally people were tribes, formed by family members. Then they grew bigger and started to create governments over time.  Only a naive person would think that anarchy would work. Anarchy is as retarded idea as communism. Both ignore human flaws. "murderous, power-lusting people to form a state to protect us from chaos and mayhem cause by possible dangerous gangs that can steal and murder for lust for power and control. " That murderous and powerlust is far bigger once you get rid of government. Already forgot crime syndicates? "An anarchist society doesnt work like that. " You mean utopic society doesn't work like that. Where all crime magically disappears and people with mentally illness mysteriously get cured. People like psychopaths and sociopaths become kind and loving people all the suddenly. You want to see anarchy? Look at somalia. "There are rules and morals in such a society, " Anarchy by definition means no rules. "but there is no authority to control and dictate the lives of individuals and communities." IF there is no authority, then what enforces those rules? " No force can overcome a well educated" Brute force. I thought mongols teached that pretty well to china. " morally intuned, highly organized unified people." This is why you live in naive world view. You're assuming that people magically become perfect, smart and kind when anarchism comes. Just like communists/socialists think that government will magically become smart and not corrupted when they give all the power to them.
    1
  12. Aurora And I bet you have also ran away too many times ;). Typical anarchists, no guts honesty at all.
    1
  13. Aurora Rofl so you run away from your responsibility to defend your idea. So you decided to use classical conspiracy theorist approach.  "Go and read these and these" And what if I have already watched and read all of those and I still disagree with you? So again, address the arguments or be branded as a coward who lacks intellectual honesty to defend his claims.
    1
  14. Aurora "I argued for my idea with detailed information and consistent logic. " Empirical facts are against you and you haven't so far provided any arguments against my counter arguments. Only been running away and trying to post links instead of addressing issues. "That kind of shows thatnyou are here to debate for the sake of debating, without actually expecting a new conclusion or consideration for you to come from this." Oh the irony... "And lmao, what is the conspiracy theory, where? What the hell are you talking about." What part of word APPROACH you didn't get? You're behaving like conspiracy theorists when confronted with logic and reasoning. They always give links to documentaries or some lunatic speaking on youtube. "his isn't 'running away'. Which again implies that you only want to see a winner and a loser" Rofl if I want to see myself as winner, I wouldn't have taunted you back.
    1
  15. Aurora "The empirical evidence you provide are actually red herrings and straw-man examples." Empirical evidence is not red herring. Do you understand what it's? Empirical evidence means that in practice anarchy has never worked. Strawman? How is it strawman to point out that humans are tribalistic by nature and are more likely to start forming groups which will have charismatic person as a leader. Same person who will take over rest of the group over time. This is human history in nutshell. It started with anarchy and ended up with civilization. " I disregard them as irrelevant to my point, and you ignore that" So it's irrelevant to point out that your plan relies on people being perfect beings? "I know my approach, and putting links up is not a conspiracy theorist tactic, it's just fucking showing information." It's not about showing information if you use it to avoid answering the points. You simply try to shift the burden of proving yourself on those videos. It's evasive tactic. It's same as I would tell you to read book X, instead of answering your claims. You wouldn't read it and I highly doubt you would accept my point as truth if I said that. "The video links is not a conspiracy video or a lunatic" Never said it's, only said that you're using same tactic as them. " If you seriously just watch the video or read part of the other link, I can shut up and have all that speak for itself." Already did. All of your links were full of shit. Now answer my previous points.
    1
  16. Aurora "Empirical evidence... Somalia is a stateless society but not necessarily an anarchist society." Anarchy is when there is no society nor state. Read definition of anarchism. "Civilized anarchist societies were prevalent throughout all time, especially before empires. " name even one. "The thousand-year Celt society was a great successful example of anarchist practices." Celts had kings. "Which then I ask, do you think an anarchist society is a better or best society than now, but it just won't work?" No again, even a small criminal gang can destroy people who live in anarchism. "I think the more accurate description of human behavior would be communal, not necessarily tribal. " No humans are tribal. That is why people naturally seek for leaders. That is why people don't consider everyone as same group. "Social-centric creatures as seen in other wildlife, are inherently more efficient by means of cooperation rather than competition. " Does not mean that they don't have a leader. Alpha male example. "Rulership also holds similar tenants to competition." Only if someone wants to take them over.
    1
  17. +RiverboatJoe That's funny because modern america is mixture of socialism and capitalism.
    1
  18. Vigilant Libertarian You're talking with anarchists. Yet it's hilarious that he calls your point of view as simplistic. As if anarchy is based on anything complicated :D
    1
  19. Aurora Aawww still trying to avoid  burden of proof. I have alreayd read that book. And again didn't prove jack shit. Now what will you do?
    1
  20. Vigilant Libertarian WEll I were agreeing with you that it's not complicated at all. Anarchy is one of the most simplistic idea ever proposed. Not only this it isn't working at all. Anarchism only works as temporary state before new government is established.
    1
  21. Vigilant Libertarian It's lack of farsight, they can't think the consequences what will happen after the said changes. Needless to say, these people would be poor strategy game players. And in sometimes lack of knowledge of course, but in case of anarchy knowledge doesn't really play that big of a role.
    1
  22. John Hart "Except the UK, Australia, Canada. and Europe have all the things Sanders is talking about and it works well there" And all of them have issues with economy, and have to take loan in order to maintain those things. "But America spends 10 times the money on their military which means there is no tax money left for an affluent middle class like other western countries have." America is also big country with lot of enemies and it has to keep updating it's equipment all the time in order to make sure that it won't get destroyed.
    1
  23. Aurora "Wow, so you support the American Empire fucking up the people of the world for that past 50 years against invisible and self-employed enemies." It's far for something to be called as empire. Past 50 years against invisible? Did you already forgot soviets? They were real threat, and they did conquest half of the europe, never giving those lands back until soviet union did collapse.
    1
  24. Aurora They did. It was called as roman empire after all...
    1
  25. Erik Le Blanc They didn't lie about socialism. Do you even understand what socialism is?
    1
  26. Erik Le Blanc Then what makes you think that those regimes did lie to people about socialism? Socialism after all is about government having more power. Means of production etc.. By all standards those countries were socialistic. Socialism simply can't work. It's idea which demands that human beings are perfect in order to work. For same reason anarchism can't work either. Both are retarded ideas that think only how things could go in the best case of scenario. But both ignore the worst case of scenario.
    1
  27. Aurora You still in denial? You still think that articles will prove it for you. You can't even defend your own positition on your own.
    1
  28. Erik Le Blanc "No. It's the people BEING the governing body, not the government having control over the people. " This is where concept of DEMOCRACY comes in.  heard about it?  "No ruler, no overclass, no state that demands your obedience." No state? You go against dictionary definition. No state would be anarchy. "Just the people, owning the means of production in unity. " I think you're trying to describe communism in here, not socialism. "That's why they lied about being socialist. Because socialism is power to the workers." You don't need to lie about socialism because even with the defination you give to socialism. IT would still be ridiculously stupid form of a country. Which again relies on people being perfect. " If you want to avoid that the people resent you, tell them they are free. " You clearly don't understand what freedom means.
    1
  29. Erik Le Blanc " It seems you are talking about the steriotype of socialist you think of. A very negative one might I add. But that's straw man again because you can't attack someone for a stereotype you create about them.  " It's not stereotype to present dictionary definition. Also capitalists don't claim that capitalism is perfect. Unlike anarchists and socialists/communists. "How you sound:" Comment was not mean for you, but for that anarchist who lives in denial. "Absolutely, but there are different kind of democracy. Direct democracy is one, that some socialists advocate. Where the people are directly involved in making the decisions, unlike indirect democracy (what we have now) where the people only elect a politician that makes the decisions. " Not efficient and fails the moment someone invades. You can't hold secrets in this sort of government, which leads to the fact that your enemy reads your moves like an open book. People should have direct vote on certain issues, like breaking the government if it's not pleasing them. "Democratic control is also an important one in socialism. Where the workers elect the management of their workplace and are involved in making decisions by the company. " Nothing stops you making company that works like that in the current system. If you think it works well then go ahead and show example. "Anyways, what I meant was that there is no state authority telling the people what to do, like in fascism for example." Aka no laws. " I disagree and find that to be a more suitable argument for capitalism. If however it's the former, when you imply that a socialist has a wrong definition of socialist you are only attempting at a straw man fallacy. " Again dictionary disagrees with you. Second socialism can't work. Good evidence of that is every socialistic country that has been on this planet.  "Unlike you, my understanding of freedom isn't some pretentious theoretical concept that you muse about having. It has to be felt, if it doesn't feel like freedom then you aren't truly free. " no you don't understand. You're anarchists by default. You don't believe in laws. Because freedom for you means freedom to do literally anything without consequences.  Nothing in current system forces you to work. STOP WORKING. Literally nothing forces you to work. You're free not to work. In current system you're not simply free to stump on other people's freedom and lives. But hey keep on your anarchist delusion. 
    1
  30. Klas Wullt Yeah, I always found it weird why anarchists and socialists say that you can't be free unless you can't punch people around without consequences. Or that you need to actually do work in order to gain food. With their reasoning lions aren't free because they have to hunt (work) in order to gain their meal. I'm starting to think that only people who live in countries which are heavily socialized understand that it isn't utopian dream. :D
    1
  31. Erik Le Blanc I'm using dictionary definition of socialism. You're simply twisting it's meaning into something else that already has a label. "A socialist dictator is an oxymoron. " No it's not. You're confusing democratic socialists into socialists. I repeat, socialism is only economic system not governing. "Of course not. Well you make it pretty clear, as I skim through the rest and spot insults here and there" Typical leftists... Lacks skin to handle insults.
    1
  32. Klas Wullt Dictionaries are consensus about definition of words. Definition mentioned there is what people commonly think socialism means.
    1
  33. Aurora Socialism has always been about government controlling business. Communism is where everything is commonly owned. Aka no private ownership. Not even in marx's book he describes them as any different than commonly understood definition. You're like muslims trying to tell that islam is religion of peace simply because you define peace as converting everyone into muslims with sword. "So, propaganda in Western countries has everything to do with dictionary definitions" Socialism was made in western countries. 
    1
  34. Aurora Another long ass reply with 0 insight in it. Can you stick to the point or are you really that much full of shit that you feel like speaking non-sense and irrelevant stuff? "So you're literally lying in the face of the founders of socialist philosophy when asserting that socialism is something else " Prove it. " You don't just go to the first scientist or biologist that established that the lizard is now categorized as a reptile." That is literally what you're trying to do. "Socialism is technically a stateless, classless, non-hierarchical ideology. " False. That is called anarchism, not socialism. Communism is the word that is closest to describe the thing that you view as socialism. Where everything is owned by everyone. Only difference between socialism and communism is private ownership. "What you define socialism as is actually the definition of the modern liberal. " Liberalism has literally nothing to do with socialism. Socialism is economical idea. Liberalism isn't. If something liberalism in it's core is actually against socialism. Since liberalism is advocate of individual's freedoms where socialism is about destroying those freedoms.
    1
  35. Aurora "Where the fuck does it mention the state or any form of government?" Literally in the book marx made and by every fucking dictionary. Also a strawman. I didn't say that it's form of government. READ THE FUCKING QUOTE YOU PROVIDED ABOUT ME. I said that it's economic system. " Although state socialism is a thing" You're twisting meaning of the words again. Socialism is about state controlling means and productions. " it is not the only form and original form of socialism, which is explicitly stateless, classless and egalitarian by definition, obviously." Please not even single dictionary or wikipage agrees with you. "Or just keep telling me the lizard is a mammal..." literally what you have been doing. "To be more specific, I advocate libertarian socialism" Those two ideas aren't even comparable. What the fuck? Socialism literally goes against the fundamental believes of libertarians. That is like you would be saying that you're atheist who believes in god. " Can there be any meaning worth salvaging in a label that has been claimed by Kautsky and Lenin, by Mao and Brezhnev, by Gandhi and Hitler, by Ed Broadbent and Karl Marx? Does the term connote anything more than “just” or “good” to its proponents, “bureaucratic” or “bad” to its enemies?" So basically you avoid using the term like it should simply because it has bad rap with history of this planet. without considering that it's not the term that is fucked up, but the idea itself.
    1
  36. slug Face He won't ever admit it. He will always blame it on the guy on lead without realizing that it was the ideology itself that did lead to it. He wants to give more power to corrupted and imperfect people. He fails to understand the inherent reason why socialism will never work.
    1
  37. Aurora What the fuck have you been smoking. You just gave definition of socialism not capitalism.  Capitalism is all about private ownership and privately doing trade and business.
    1
  38. Aurora " Are you going to search 'original definition of socialism'? " I WAS using exactly the same definition AS MARX WHO FUCKING INVENTED IT. You bloody idiot.
    1
  39. Aurora Again I cannot provide links because of dishonest people like you who like to flag my comments if I provide link. And marx did invent it. Read up his fucking book.
    1
  40. Aurora You don't need to flag.. Again because dishonest dicks as you, YOUTUBE WILL remove the automatically. Google it up if you don't believe me, that happens to a lot of people. However I have literally provided you about 5 definitions of socialism and all of them were from different dictionary sites. Literally no site agrees with your non-sense view.
    1
  41. Aurora Originally I was talking about government not sate. However the general idea is the same. 1."any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" 2."a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state" 3."a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done" -merriam-webester(dot)/dictionary/socialism. Literally all definitions from other dictionaries have the same as I have said. In fact you won't find dictionary disagreeing with my definition.  "So, what do you think about a socio-economic system in which the workers and community own and control the means of production?" Most retarded idea ever as already empirically proven thanks to soviet russia and china under mao.
    1
  42. Aurora Do what?
    1
  43. Aurora Only one who is intentionally ignoring things in here is you. You ignore the guy who coined socialism (marx) and you ignore every fucking dictionary on this planet.
    1
  44. Aurora There haven't been a single communist country yet. Communist party has ruled them that is for sure, but no actual communism has ever been implemented. Also I don't give a shit are they ideals of marx, they still were creations of marx.
    1
  45. Aurora Not at all, your point. You claimed that socialism haven't been implemented. Again you still don't understand the meanings. Also communism has been used but not in a country. Some of the early american settlers had communities which worked like communism. They all died to starvation due the nature of human beings if they live in communism.
    1
  46. Aurora Capitalism has nothing to do with monetary system or hierarchy. It's literally only about private ownership and freedom to conduct business. You clearly don't understand capitalism, because it's actually fairly recent concept. "which is what anarchists oppose." And anarchists are known to be mentally retarded.
    1
  47. Aurora Do you even understand what money is? Money has existed before capitalism, and capitalism has nothing to do with money. Money is a tool. It's simply used to make trading simpler and more convenient. It's one of the reason why advanced societies were able to be created. You won't find advanced society which had no concept of money. Without money capitalists would simply trade goods with other products instead of using money with it. Literally nothing would change expect things would be more inconvenient literally for everyone. "You would only say such a thing when you knowingly realize the negative side of capitalism" I never said that it's perfect. Just like democracy is not perfect, it's still the best we have. "Search a work from any economist or go ask one" I have and all agree with me, just like marx agrees with me about what socialism is. "capitalism is all about capital, about money." literally nothing about money.  " It's a means of trade." nope, it's about freedom to trade. " And a company is regulated and controlled hierarchically" Not necessarily. You can make company which has no hierarchy. Capitalism gives you chance to lead company in the way you fit. It's just that people who invest their money to create own company, would rather want to get something out of it than instead of doing charity with their livelyhood. "it's fucking obvious. Dumbest comment that ever came out of your mouth." says guy who believes that anarchism would work on any level.
    1
  48. Aurora There is no such thing as capitalist class. That is pure propaganda spread out by socialist. Literally anyone can become a business man and create his own business in capitalism. That is why it was better than any other economic system before it. It gave freedom of people from lower classes to finally create their own destiny. Class system haven't existed for long time in west. Last time it did exists was during feudalism.
    1
  49. Aurora "Haha, every single person in the world can create a business?" Everyone in capitalistic system, yes. " Those who are inherently impoverished are much less likely to do so, or cannot at all." That is why they can either work hard to gain enough wealth to build their own business, or find investors or group of people to create company together. Before capitalism this was literally impossible for a peasant. "Damn, you are so lost. All I read are lies, denial, misinformation, and stereotypical and cliche terminology, and capitalist jargon. " Says guy who doesn't even understand capitalism nor socialism. Typical anarchists... Only people who don't read history become anarchists. "and then twist and deny it." I haven't denied anything, I have said long time ago that capitalism isn't perfect. IT's simply best that we have created so far. I rather choose freedom over tyranny which you prefer. ". An economist and I definitely know more about capitalism than you. " literally most famous economists disagree with you, including nobel winning ones. "I'm done rambling to you." Because that is all you can do, ramble but not to create actual sound argument.
    1
  50. ***** Orwell socialists? What!? Orwell was one of the biggest critics of socialism. Ever read animal farm? It was banned in socialistic countries. Many ideas and suggestions made by socialist such as you are suggestions that Orwell wrote shit about long time ago.
    1
  51. M. Woller "Animal farm is not about socialism. Since the pigs control the farm, it's capitalism. " Expect capitalistic people didn't do revolution. It was banned in soviets for reason. PIGS was merely symbol for the new ruling class. Aka politicians. "If few control the economy = capitalism. If all control the economy = socialism. It's that easy." All already control economy in capitalism Capitalism is about freedom of individual to do business. While in socialism only politicians do it.
    1
  52. M. Woller "Didn't do revolution? Are you kidding me? Capitalistic people slaughter whole countries since thousands of years. " People having warfare doesn't mean that they are having revolution or killing in name of capitalism. With your reasoning if there is vegan in a war, then veganism causes wars. "Yeah, the SU WAS state capitalism. Even Lenin said that. They never took the step to become socialistic." Socialism is state monopoly. By definition , same definition that marx used. "From the beginning the SU was attacke from the west, even US soldiers fought against it " What? SU didn't even exists in 1919. Back then there was still civil war in russia going on. "Are you really that fucking dumb? You control the economy? You control nothing. " Expect I control everything I make. You see if I now create business, I control it. It's about individual's freedoms. I'm not suppose to control company that someone else made. " You think by not buying something, that you got control over it? They give a fuck if you do that. " You do realize that in capitalism if no one buys your product you will end up in bankruptcy? "Socialism is freedom. " Since when forcing people was freedom? " You can really do what you want, " No you can't. You can't create own business in socialism. "Believe what you want. What you believe now just makes you a good horse on that animal farm you live on..." Keep on living under the lie that pigs made for you.
    1
  53. M. Woller "Not at all. If a vegan started the war because of veganism, then..." Nope you can't start war because of veganism because there is nothing in veganism that even talks about war. The reason would be somewhere else. And here comes my point. Not a single war was caused in name of"CAPITALISM". Reason has always been in somewhere else. "Complete utter bullshit. The exact opposite of what Marx said. The whole point of socialism is to give the power of the capital to the WHOLE society. That's why it is SOCIALism. Even the word is telling it." And who represents whole society? THE GOVERNMENT. Fucking idiot.. And What the fuck makes you think it wouldn't be monopoly? You think there would be different companies when "everyone" owns the fucking same company? "Exactly and western armies wanted to help the "right side" to win it." You ignored my point. Soviet union didn't exists, and no russians didn't get help. "You don't. And on your own you would create near to nothing." On what ground I cannot control my own company if I create it? Second, Capitalism is about co-operation through consent of all parties. IF I get business idea and put my capital on it to create business. Then I created a company. Then I hire people to help me to build it. Money which goes from my pocket goes all the way through. On what ground you deserve to own my company if you haven't putted a single dime on it? "If you create a big company then out with your own hands then you really got the right to say: that's mine! I did it! " So basically you say that guy has no right to claim that he has spended all the money and created the idea to create a company, has no right to say that it's his? You're a sick twisted fuck. "Well of course no one has to give a fuck about that, since without the protection and laws of a state there is no property and even murder means nothing, " How the fuck you ended up in total anarchism now`? "means everyone can just kill you and take everything. " Not really. You see actions have consequences. If I would live in lawless state, then those people who would try to murder me would know that I can kill them as well. This is why lawless states never actually exists. BEcause people know that co-operation is more beneficial than backstabbing in long run. Murdering others you would only increase your chance of getting murdered. Laws don't exists to prevent murder, they exists to enforce what will happen to those who do so. "But of course you want that protection, You want everything society gives you, just give nothing back..." I'm not anarchy capitalist. Fucking idiot.. "As if this happens, when you got the monopol on something people need to survive and capitalism is just that: " Another example of your stupidity. Only way you can have monopole without state interfering. IS by producing better products with good price, and keep customers more happy than any other rival would do that. And that itself is not bad. And if the company fails to produce good products while pleasing customers in both pr and quality. Then new arrival will crush that company so it no longer is monopoly. Got it now? The reason why monopoly is so feared, is because if state has monopoly. Then there is no way to compete against it. Hence state owned monopoly has no reason to improve it's products because it doesn't need to fear competition. Monopoles are actually rare in free economies. Also you totally dodged my point about bankrupcy. "That's the core of it. The accumulation of capital in the hand of fewer and fewer people. THAT is capitalism. " Bloody idiot... Still thinking that economy is zero sum game. I bet you think that we still live in gold standard. "It's not. Because of this capitalism is against freedom and socialism is freedom. " How the fuck capitalism which gives freedom for individual to try and create business, is against freedom? But socialism which takes individual's freedom to create business is freedom. You're basically saying that murdering someone is same as giving birth. "Your whole upper class is ruling your ass by brutal force. " There is no such thing as classes in western world. Bloody idiots don't even understand what class meant. You did born into class, in west there isn't any class to be born into. "Sure you can. The thing you can do not is creating a business to rule over others by controlling the thing they need. " Business owners don't rule over others, they simply rule over their business. They don't control the things you need. "The dictator got the most freedom of all people in the world, because he took it away from others." Actually the opposite. SEems like you haven't studied history at all. Dictators rarely can do whatever they want. for example you can no longer just go to random bar. BEcause you fear that you would be killed on the spot. As dictator you are usually forced to live in life of solitude, and even people who hang around you might seek ways to kill you to get your power. Which actually has been the case every fucking time in human history, To put it in other way. Which one you thought had mode freedom. Daughter of a merchant or daughter of a queen? In medieval period. Queen's daughter sure lives life of better quality but daughter of merchant is free to do pretty much anything she wants. "What you want is just the same as giving a murder the right to kill people, because denying him to do that IS definitely cutting his freedom by a very large margin. " Oh the irony... Says socialists... It's not like socialists have caused most death and destruction than any other idea on this planet.
    1
  54. Cam raiD Moral? Perhaps, however does it work? No definitely not.
    1
  55. Cam raiD "Does the internet work? It's pushed further into anarchic territory than ever before." Internet is not a state.
    1
  56. Tim Snyder No I haven't, but in reality it works like that. In socialist countries rich have always stayed rich while poor don't have any chance
    1
  57. Ode Ode eh no? Capitalism is build on the assumption that humans are greedy.  While socialism is on utopic idea that government is always perfect. Greediness doesn't mean that company will mistreats it's workers. There is lot of profit in acting like a decent human being. 
    1
  58. Ode Ode "now tell me if that is a good thing." Ugh.... You clearly missed the point. I said that greed is not necessarily bad thing. Not that it's good thing.  Let's say that you have a choice. Save a guy's life or get 5 dollars.  Which one you would pick as a greedy person? "now either we have different opinion or we dont speak on the same ground" No, problem is that you don't think far enough.
    1
  59. Ode Ode "please tell me if that is a good thing," AGAIN Go fuck yourself. You're doing strawman attack. As I said I NEVER SAID THAT IT'S A GOOD THING. I only said that it isn't necessarily a bad thing. Are you one of those idiots who think that everything is either good or bad? "please tell me if that is a good thing, and for your question, if you are greed, you take the $5 (based on the meaning). " Ok, in that case I'm sorry to tell you. But you made a wrong choice.  Greedy person who is smart would actually save the another one. There are a lot of benefits you can get by saving someone. I'll list few for you since you're not capable thinker. 1. Usually saved person thinks that they are in debt to you. They are very likely to help you in almost anything you ask. Value of this help can easily be over 5 dollars. 2. They have habit to offer drinks to you in bars, this itself easily goes over 5 dollars benefit. 3. They are more trustworthy. In fact there are studies that most successful criminals are the ones who create trust connections like this, than ones who abandon their mate. As a person who have saved life, I have seen first hand that you will get benefits even without asking them. So it's all about the brain. Greediness doesn't mean being stupid. Sometimes there is more profit in acting honorable and like a decent human being. Google is good example how very successful brand that have years treated it's workers with golden gloves. Which is one of the reason they became so popular. They got the best workers under them by treating workers the best.
    1
  60. Raymond Ogden "countries to do business with run by social democracies?" None of the nordic countries is social democracies. The fact that you think so means that you don't even understand what social democrat means. It's literally socialism but through means of democracy instead of violent revolution. Most of those nordic countries were long capitalistic, and recently have made some socialistic programs. Not only this some of them have large economic freedom for the companies. No country is democratic socialist unless all of the means and production is handled by government. "Also polled as having the happiest populations on Earth." I really, REALLY doubt that poll, as someone who lives in one of those countries. "Maybe it has something to do with the individual's freedom to not be exploited by business?" bullshit, or perhaps to do with low population? I personally feel very irritated when there is a lot of crowd Living in china would be impossible for me. Also exploited by business? You think it's exploiting when both party is having consent? There is no consent when government does it.
    1
  61. Raymond Ogden "  Before you accuse me of not knowing what social democracy means, you should probably check this out..." I'm using dictionary and wikipedia definition not some propaganda youtube video. Not only this I use my understanding what democracy and socialism is. The definition of socialism is exactly the same that it's creator marx used. Your bullshit propaganda video from david's show won't change that fact. And yes he posts a lot of propaganda. "The terms have really gotten all jumbled up over the years." I'm using literally the original definition, not some mindless regressive left defination. ""Democratic Socialism" isn't a thing anymore. Originally it was a term for achieving Marxist Socialism through democratic means. This meant getting the votes of workers to nationalize industries and get social reforms to transition out of capitalism and private ownership and into the kind of Socialism you are talking about. " Did you even read my comment? I did already say that as the definition. IT's still socialism. It's still government controlling means and production. It's simply done via voting. The harm will still be exactly the same as in socialists countries. Heck one could argue that it will be even worse due major population not even understanding economics, and them always placing self interest over what is overall good. "What Bernie Sanders is advocating is Social Democracy, which is a mixed economy where government acts as a mediator (not a ruler) between the consumer, the worker and the business owner." That is not social democracy. This is simply leftists attempt to twist meanings of the words, like they always have. For example according to people like you, woman can't be sexists toward a man, because it's no longer about gender but about power. Also USA is already what you have described. It's already where government is mixing up with business owners and workers. That is actually the problem why you guys have messed up so badly. That is literally the reason why your politicians can be bribed by corporations to make laws to get unfair advantage over their rivals. " Capitalism is promoted, not opposed." You don't understand what capitalism is if you think that it's promoted by system like that. " This hybrid system is social democracy, the kind practiced by Nordic countries and places like Canada" And it has been failing terribly the moment it has been taken on use. Literally all of nordic countries are suffering economically. Sweden and Finland especially. Now for sweden will become 3th world country in near future according to estimates. We have large unemployment rate, which will be even higher when taking into account that those who can't get job, will simply go back to school due wanting to do something instead of nothing. This will stress government's economy even more.  The "dream" that bernie is spouting is simply outright lie. For fuck sake I live in a country that you are dreaming off. "Why doubt the Happiness poll when you can examine the data and the methodologies yourself? I can never take criticism from people seriously who've never actually looked at the data... " Then you should link the data instead of try say that I should examine data which source you haven't provided. Also All I need to say for criticism is following... Suicide rates are all time high in these countries. And mexico also have good happiness rate regardless people wanting to fucking run away from there, regardless the poverty and crime gangs messing up stuff. "And to pretend that the kind of "consent" arrived at by workers and employers under naked capitalism represents anything close to fairness is absurd." No? Employer has no responsibility to hire workers. He will only hire if he thinks he needs one. And after that they will negotiate about salary. Literally nothing forces the worker to work on salary that he doesn't like. He can always decline and look for another job, or better, create one on his own. "The employer holds most of the cards and carries several aces up his sleeve." Supply and demand. If there are more jobs than workers, then workers have more room to negotiate for salary. You're telling me that employer should be forced to pay more than he can or that the worker is really worth. " If he could, he'd replace you with a robot or an immigrant, or he'd move production someplace where the worker holds less power than you." And why shouldn't he be allowed that? Work is not a charity place. It's one individual (or collective group) way to make their living. Just like you who want to work in a firm to gain living. These people simply took bigger risk than you and will have bigger rewards than you if they succeed. And you want to fuck their freedoms for sake of "fairness" by being unfair? " Or he'll hire a lobbiest to rig the laws in his favor. " Only possible in the country that bernie dreams of. "When you say that that there is no consent when the government makes decisions, you choose to ignore the fact that when corruption is low, which it famously is in social democracies, " False, the corruption is high in these and I have seen it first hand. It simply has different form, in fact couple decades go it was LEGAL to bribe government official. Not anymore though, but now instead of bribery they give positions and stocks of the company that wants to get certain benefits from the government. Not only this, you ignore nature of corruption which history has proven. The longer any institution exists, the more corrupt it will become over time. This ís empirical fact. Finland is fairly new country in case you didn't know.
    1
  62. Ode Ode empty? Really? I literally did address all the non-sense you made.
    1
  63. Ode Ode So basically you dismiss everything said simply because you weren't able to respond back to them. As I said greediness doesn't automatically mean that they will do idiotic decisions.
    1
  64. Ode Ode No you didn't respond. I don't see you making any other comment than. "long but empty." You literally ignored everything I said before just to state that.
    1
  65. Ode Ode " now at this one point, sir, do you agree or not?" No, for obvious fucking reason. Because there are also companies where workers aren't mistreated, and these companies actually tend to be more successful than others. HEnce we can conclude that it's not about is someone greedy but is someone smart. Since generally treating people well will give you better results than being total fucking dick. HENCE, It's not greediness the cause of workers being mistreated, BUT STUPIDITY.
    1
  66. Ode Ode "ou said its not greediness but stupidity? shall we go to mr.webster again? " I don't give a shit about webster. WE ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT WHY SOME BUSINESS MISTREAT THEIR WORKERS. And that is because of the fucking stupidity not because of greediness. You made claim that this happens because greediness. While I said that there is MORE PROFIT BY BEING GOOD BOSS. WHICH ACTUALLY HAS BEEN PROVEN EMPIRICALLY. You are playing with words in here. Also nowhere you find definition that says stupidity is greed.
    1
  67. Ode Ode " its not different frequency after all, you have problem with honesty sir." No you have problem with honesty and I can see through your sophistry. I literally gave you reason why your webster is irrelevant. BECAUSE TOPIC WASN'T WHAT IS DEFINITION OF GREED. But that WILL THAT LEAD INTO TREATING WORKERS BADLY. That is why your webster thing is dishonest because it literally doesn't answer the fucking question.
    1
  68. Ode Ode Yeah you sir are dishonest. Not only that you have proven that you're not a smart guy. The moment you said that as greedy person you would choose 5 dollars instead of saving a life. IT proved that you cannot even think the benefits that will come from saving life. Benefits which easily is worth more than 5 dollars.  So please don't lose your empathy ever, because you would literally be like those idiotic bosses then.
    1
  69. Raymond Ogden "So is your understanding of the word Dictionary. A dictionary is not a compendium of immutable rules governing how words are used." Actually it's. Especially if all of them have consensus on this. Even the guy who created the world socialism has same view as current dictionaries. You're simply trying to redefine socialism due it's bad stigma, but it won't change anything. Because it's not the name or label that makes it horrific and destructive, but the idea itself. Reason why you're doing this is so that you could say "look these countries are socialistic and nothing bad has happened" even though by definition they aren't socialistic. Hence you're causing confusion and try to recruit less intelligent and informed people to your cause. Which funny because that is something that socialism has loved to do since it was created. It always was loved by less educated people, and from educated people who were authoritarians by their nature. Also you wrote huge wall of text. IT seems that you're going to use TL;DR: fallacy in here. Also known as shotgun fallacy. Trying to swamp me with bullshit text that is irrelevant to my arguments. You made over 600 lines of text to my 100 lines comment as response. That speaks loudly about your true intentions. You're not here for truth, you're here for sophism. Hence I'm not going to read that huge essay and wait until you actually provide all of the points in more compressed manner. Instead of trying to use dishonest argument tactics. And yes that which you are using now is well known underhanded tactic. Every experience debater knows this. you're literally arguing like william lane craig.
    1
  70. Raymond Ogden 665 lines, while reading through it, it was full of irrelevant non-sense. I'm not getting paid for this so I don't see why the fuck anyone in their sane mind would want to address every irrelevant non-sense you made in those 665 lines. IT would literally take couple hours and would make twice as many lines, which would force me to divide it into two comments due youtube having comment limit. You sir are a sophists, you don't give a shit what is true, all you care is about appearance of your argument instead of how well it holds "The only reason my post is 666 lines long is that it includes the entirety of both our conversations prior to that." go fuck yourself my comment was about 150 lines, you don't make 665 lines out of that if you would be sensible person.
    1
  71. Raymond Ogden "Dude, some people are capable of producing and comprehending long thoughts. Others are not." anyone can write a fucking essay, it's different to write long essay to make debate into attrition warfare, instead of simply provide points in much smaller fashion. This is well known debating tactics, you're not fooling anyone. There is literally 0 rationalisation you can make to defend that 665 lines is reasonable size of a reply to a comment which had only 150 lines, where most were simply your own words being copied and pasted to point out what I'm addressing. I read your comment and it was full of non.sense and I really don't want to bother to address them all. Because then I would be forced to fucking write twice as much as you did. Also I haven't made a single ad hominem attack on you. Calling you as dishonest scum isn't attempt to discredit your argument. Especially since I ASKED YOU TO WRITE SMALLER REPLY WITH CORE POINTS INTACTED.
    1
  72. Raymond Ogden 1. All sources state that socialism was coined by marxists. Hence we assume that it's his definition that is the real one for the word. 2. Why do you think people kill themselves? 3. Not really valid. I don't remember them asking me how happy I felt. And I live in Finland. 4. So you're saying that capitalism is unethical but socialism is ethical? xD... Yeah sure, forcing people with force is "ethical" according to your view. 5. I never said that sanders tries that. Aka strawman from your part. However unlike you, I'm able to think in to further future and I'm capable to see what will happen when government have even more power and someone who you hate holds all of it. 6. Again scandinavian countries aren't socialists. Soviet russia, china vietnam and north korea all were socialist countries and most corrupt ones on this planet. In socialism the talented won't get hired, instead people who are friends of politicians in power will. Which will create kind of feudalistic system. This is why every socialistic state has always ended up into dictatorship. "You raise compellingly complex issues and then insist that I keep my responses short and simple." Says guy who made 3.5 word page long essay about quotes of founding fathers which have literally nothing to do with this topic. " OMG, thinking is so overwhelming!" Since when reading and writing response to every non-sense claim someone made, was thinking? "Better complain about length and accuse my opponent of trickery instead of dealing with the box I opened." I don't accuse you of trickery, I accuse you of dishonesty.
    1
  73. Raymond Ogden Expect they aren't workers. Everyone who started from scratch used to be a worker. You only gave me example of 6 people deciding to create their own company and be their own boss. Their workers aren't deciding for them.  Also literally nothing to do with my comment. You didn't address a single counter argument made by me. " So is this corporation socialist or capitalist? " Capitalist. Government isn't interfering with their company. Nothing in capitalism says that you can't share your company with other people or that you can't form one together with friends. You seem to misunderstand co-op for socialism. You clearly don't understand that the very base of capitalism is CO-op. After all you can't do business without other people. "Mondragon the workers decide what to do with the profits, rather than a small board of directors. Which seems more democratic to you?" What the fuck democracy has to do with this?
    1
  74. Raymond Ogden What the fuck someone's company in spain has  to do with following points... 1.All sources state that socialism was coined by marxists. Hence we assume that it's his definition that is the real one for the word. 2.Why do you think people kill themselves? 3.Not really valid. I don't remember them asking me how happy I felt. And I live in Finland. 4.So you're saying that capitalism is unethical but socialism is ethical? xD... Yeah sure, forcing people with force is "ethical" according to your view. 5. I never said that sanders tries that. Aka strawman from your part. However unlike you, I'm able to think in to further future and I'm capable to see what will happen when government have even more power and someone who you hate holds all of it. 6.Again scandinavian countries aren't socialists. Soviet russia, china vietnam and north korea all were socialist countries and most corrupt ones on this planet. In socialism the talented won't get hired, instead people who are friends of politicians in power will. Which will create kind of feudalistic system. This is why every socialistic state has always ended up into dictatorship. Your talk about spain didn't address any of these issues. So I guess I were right. you're just sophists. You don't care what is true or false, you simply care about spreading out your propaganda, by any means necessarily.
    1
  75. S M "Here's a dose of truth for you: forget the stigma associated with corrupt socialism, and focus on the facts. " It's not a stigma, it's a fact. Corrupted people love socialism because it gives them more power. "corrupt capitalism is just as bad. " And how is that? How is it bad that individual has freedom to make his own business and have private property worse than government owning everything. Which means that corrupted politicians will own everything. At least in capitalism those individuals can rise against corrupted regime due having financial backup. "This is socialism vs capitalism. Simple." Rofl nope... This just proves that you don't understand either of those concepts.
    1
  76. S M There is no such thing as uncorrupted socialism. Psychopaths and narcissists desire for power. And there is lot of power in government. Hence they become politicians. Which means corrupted people will almost always sit in the government. Every socialistic revolution stands as my evidence. This is why socialism never works. Because all the power and wealth is in one place. "A good example is a worker owned business. " That is not socialism. "Since the workers all own the company, it is in their collective best interests to choose the right workers among themselves for the right jobs in the business." Same time they all also lack the necessary education to understand how to run the company. As seen with factories in soviet union. Being a boss in company is actually specialized workfield. You need to have knowledge and talent to fit for it.  Hence all of those workers will vote according to their ignorance and selfintrest. Due them being ignorant they fail to see what is best for their interest. As we have seen in practice in democracy. People rarely do educated votes.They only think in short term. The difference in capitalism and communism is however, competition. In capitalism company that is not runned the best way, it will lose in competition and be gone. However in communism, that will never happen. Company that fails to provide profit will still run and drain resources from the society. "Corrupt capitalism just leads to slavery and oppression, through factions, cartels and monopolies. " You just described socialism. Socialism is monopoly, cartel and faction of government. Not only that it forces people to work instead of asking their consensus.  While in capitalism the worker and job provider both negotiate a deal. Worker decides how much he wants for his salary for that job by negotiating that with job provider. While job provider tries to negotiate that he get's most worth out of the worker.
    1
  77. S M " You described capitalism, not socialism. " Capitalism has nothing to do with voting. It's sad that you're literally too stupid to see it. "Socialism is when the people sit together and discuss who is the most qualified for each role, because no particular role 'pays' more than another." Rofl never happened in socialist countries. All they do is to give good positions to their friends or political allies. Soviet russia stands as my evidence. Again you still fail to realize that normal worker can't done management as well as trained expert. ". In capitalism (eg. a job interview) the potential worker lies and exaggerates his skills to get the job so he gets payed more." Only if the person who hires them is total idiot and can't see through that.  " No, in socialism everyone works together collectively so there are no competitors and thus no monopolies, cartels etc" Nope, socialism is where government holds all the power. It's where government hires people to jobs and forces them to do that. History and marx stands by my side at this. Including every fucking dictionary book in this planet. " Cartels can only exist when there is competition" Nope. " no monopolies, " Already forgot that it's nothing more than monopoly due the fact that government is literally the corporation there? "Lastly, how is a worker owned business not socialistic business. " Because in capitalism even worker can create business. Which is something that will never happen in communism since it's government that creates. "re you sure you're not making the mistake of equating socialism with communism?" I'm pretty sure that you don't understand what neither of those means. Communism is simply last step of socialism. Communism is when even private ownership will disappear. Which means that your computer that you own now, will belong to the government.
    1