General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

ricardo kowalski
TIKhistory
comments

Comments by "ricardo kowalski" (@ricardokowalski1579) on ""TIK's definitions are wrong!" (about Socialism & Capitalism)" video.

In Venezuela they keep repeating that they are "building socialism"... but they never show the blueprints!! 😁
82
In LatAm we have a joke about an exchange university profesor from some european country (say Germany). He saw that people in LatAm wash their cars on the streets, and the run off makes puddles and damages the pavement. He asked; hey, why do you wash the cars on the street? The LatAm reply was: the street is public, it's for everybody, so we CAN do that. The profesor goes back to Germany and asks his neighbor; Would you wash your car on the street? The german answer was: No. The street is public. It's for everyone to use. We CAN'T do that! same word, "public". Two very different understandings of what it means. respectfully
35
@wasneeplus Calling it "bonkers" does not make it wrong. Nazis were socialists, the fact that they fought other socialists just tells you that they eat their own. There is only ONE definition of socialism, and TIK is 100% right.
18
@wasneeplus TIK's definition is the correct one: state ownership or control of the means of production
14
@Leotv1948 there is no such thing as "state capitalism" If the state is the owner of the capital... well.. THAT IS SOCIALISM SK an Oligarchy and a government controling the means of production? Sorry, that is exactly what socialism means Your argument seems to imply that free markets can somehow exists under a government controlled economy. Here is a hint: they don't and they can't. When they do they are outlawed and called "black market" There is but ONE form of capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit , rather than by the state. STATE capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism by definition is PRIVATE ownership and control. The STATE cannot be a "private owner"
7
Another example of "state control" is state defined, mandated and enforced school curricula. In most countries the state defines what is taught at schools, public or private. It also engages in unfair competition by providing "universal schooling" and repeating ad nauseaum that it is "free" (it is not, it is paid by taxes) In some countries, private schools are outlawed, because state controlled schooling cannot allow competition. If you attempt to home school or teach your own children outside of the state enforced system... you get violence and coercion
6
@Leotv1948 1- it was their plan. And their rethoric. Go talk to them 2- what do you mean "can't get anything in borders or ports"? They traded freely with Rusia, Iran and China. They imported weapons and military equipment. What stopped them from bringing in chinese rigs or service equipment? NOTHING STOPPED THEM. They bought and received chinese rigs, cement pumps and steel pipe. They just can't manage them. There are no sanctions on stupidity, inefficiency and theft.
6
@wasneeplus I am sorry. Isn't the government meant to obey the citizens? What policy does a government have to "enforce" if it is only doing what the citizenship is already doing willingly and voluntarily? Yes, your opinion is as valid as mine. I just don't pass my opinion as arguments. My argument is socialism is government ownership OR control of the means of production. Both Marxists and Nazis controlled the means of production. Both are socialists. Your opinion is that it wasn't "meaningful way"... but that is NOT an argument
6
@Leotv1948 strawman What I have said is that socialism is the government ownership or control of the means of production There is nothing about "free markets" or "pure market capitalusm" in that definition. Keep government out of ownership and control. Ad hominem attack "old men". stop talking about me, talk about the argument. ad hominem attack "mega pseudo intellectual". name calling is not an argument.
6
@Leotv1948 There is no lockdown. As I said, they import weapons and oilfield equipment. Humanitarian aid was stopped at the borders by the venezuelan government, not by the US They weren't fine, oil extraction started declining a decade before the sanctions.
5
@wasneeplus strawman argument. I have not said that ALL GOVERNMENTS must be socialist. You asked about the governments that have existed in modern nation-states. Strawman argument, I have not said that a society has to lack government to avoid socialism. You make up strawmans so that you do not have to face the definition of socialism
5
@Leotv1948 special pleading fallacy. "you haven't read" "4th grade understanding" is enough for "government ownership or control of the means of production" No if, no buts, no exceptions
5
@wasneeplus I don't believe in the possibility of utopia. Neither do I That is why I do not believe the government can deliver utopia That is why I want to take the government's thumb of the scales I rather have the hobbsian "brute, short, violent" life than the totalitarian "long, obedient, safe" life And here is the thing... I don't want to force my choice on you... I just want YOU to not impose YOUR choice on ME
5
@jboss119 there is no reason roads cannot be private, paid by tolls Many roads, railroads, bridges, ferries and canals were and still are private.
5
@Leotv1948 tell you what. If you can get that video taken down for "misinformation" I will say you are right. But YT allows it. And what is YOUR source? These fact remains. There is no blockade. Venezuela has imported weapons and oilfield equipment. Oil extraction was in decline before the sanctions. Can you get the video I presented taken down? As "misinformation"?
4
@wasneeplus Imagine a government that DOES NOT put forward socialist policies. There is no need for population to resist such a government. Thus a government that does not try to control the economy and the means of production is the non-socialist government. Your opinion on what is meaningful is just your *opinion*. You are free to assign value and judgement, but not to use it as an argument. A non-socialist government would have a defense minister and a foreign service minister. Not much else at the federal level.
4
@alexgray2482 the "difficulty" of "going about it" is the price to compare against the market. You should know that the great depression and the great recession were not prevented by regulation, but CAUSED by it
4
@Leotv1948 so you finally settled on insults and name calling The facts remain: Venezuela has imported weapons and oilfield equipment from Rusia and China. If the oil extraction is in "chaos" is not because of any sanctions
3
You asked the question, you are the one that accessed an "alternate reality" and came back saying that "we will never know" In THIS reality we know what they did, and there is no reason to speculate it would have change had they won. What they did is put yes men as front men to do their bidding. They controlled the means of production. That is what would have continued Can't help but notice you sidestep the "public works" issue. And the separation of government from nation/country.
3
@wasneeplus again strawman I am not saying that the government must obey the citizens as a collective. Every citizen, and all citizens, must be obeyed by the government. Any compromise must be struck between the citizens themselves, one with another. No government intervention required. Strawman argument. Not every application of power is socialism, as I have said, the government can apply military power beyond the frontiers to whatever end the citizens allow. That governments excert violent power over the economy is not proof that the government has the right or mandate to do so.
3
@Leotv1948 "you haven't read" again, fallacy stop talking about me. what is the argument? Why are you taking me seriously? seriously enough to keep attempting to personalize the discussion Socialism is the government ownership or control of the means of production. Marxists did it. Nazis did it. decades of LatAm "neo liberal" countries did it. All socialist.
3
@alexgray2482 companies agree to arbitrage. PRIVATE arbitrage. Outside "legal" government courts. It happens everyday. There is no need for enforcement, because you accept the outcome voluntarily. And it is cheaper, faster and more reliable than government courts Let people sort it out themselves.
3
@alexgray2482 You already agreed to the arbitrage. This isn't a court that is imposed on you, that you then say you did not recognize. You agreed to it willingly. You and me agreed to it when we make a contract. It is no different than establishing the "legal venue" in a contract...just PRIVATE. not GOVERNMET. criminal matters would be an insurance service. A private insurance service would be highly motivated to solve the case and transfer the cost of the insurance. If you refuse the arbitrage you agreed to, again it's an insurance issue. All other of your commitments will be called: loans, employment, banking. Nobody will deal with you. And the consequence would be so terrible you dare not risk it. And here is the important thing...no government would step in to save you, to say you are a victim, to use someone else's money to paper up your broken word, to defend your humanity or your "rights" after denying the rights of others. Government won't even step in to give you free food, medical and shelter for life for being a criminal.... no such safety net. F# around and Find out.
3
@wasneeplus where have I said I want society to be an utopian "free of crime"? What I want is the right to defend MYSELF What I want is to take away the monopoly of violence from the government... because we DO NOT live un an utopia where the government can, want or will save me Will you, please, stop strawman-ing? Stick to what I written, not what YOU want to believe.
3
@wasneeplus (((Again, the only reason you'd wanna do that is if you want everyone to be able to commit \/olence. That would be the logical result of your suggestion.))) What I want is the right to defend myself. You are attempting to equate self-defense with wanton agression against others. Please stop making strawman arguments
3
@wasneeplus No i do not have that right “You can’t use a gun for self-protection in Canada. It’s not a right that you have,” says Trudeau. And that is in Canada. In LatAm you will fare even worse.
3
@wasneeplus why I would pay myself for the BEST PRIVATE hospital I can afford Your false dichotomy is useless. The choice is not between dying and a government hospital... unless the government has FORCED to be the single provider.
3
@alexgray2482 "a state monopoly"... is still a monopoly So as all socialist claim.. .there is "good monopolies" and "bad monopolies"? And the "good monopolies" are the ones YOU approve of?
3
@alexgray2482 anecdotal is not an argument I know plenty of places where rail and water are government owned and they are disasters try again
3
@alexgray2482 "the system" that is upheld by governments? "the system" that has protections and barriers to entry codified in laws and regulations? "the system" that supports FIAT currency with guns? How much of the system is government?
3
@lindsayheyes925 there is no such thing as "public ownership". There is no tension between a non-existing "public ownership" and ownership, which can only be PRIVATE. Much less tension against freedom, that includes ownership, again by definition private in all instances.
2
@Laskuna keep voting for leftists politicians until they have enough power to destroy the markets. Then you will understand that it is very simple: you cannot have snakes in your bed because they will kill you.
2
@Laskuna agreed. 👍
2
@alexgray2482 (((is their some kind of metaphysical force that prevents companies from conspiring with each other?))) Yes... it is called competition. Like I have said. Any resources devouted to conspiring would result in exposure to a cheaper/better competitor UNLESS the government to cover or protect you from the in-efficiency. With tariffs, captive markets or barriers to entry As for companies getting together to share information. I have no problem with that. Corporations have agreed on standards, joint projects, and information sharing for decades. The laser disc format wars, the usb consorsium, the individual credit scores... you have a problem with any of these? (((Hint: corporations are only interested in giving the customer "a better product at a better price" IF IT INCREASES THEIR PROFITS ))) And what is the problem with this? As I said... collusion is not a way to increase profits, because it opens the door to a competitor that devotes ALL it's resources to the customer.
2
@wasneeplus nope. I have been very clear. It is weapons and guns I am talking about weapons, guns, armoured cars, bodyguards, private armed security
2
@alexgray2482 Why should they be "government owned"? If they are "inevitable"... they would happen without the need of government What is preventing the "unnatural" accumulation of profits by the central banks?
2
@alexgray2482 is the CCP neoliberal? Who writes the laws? The government or the entrepeneurs?
2
@alexgray2482 "some amount of government is necessary"... I disagree I have no "necessary" amount of thieves, murderers or liars.
2
@alexgray2482 what does "reducing crime" have to do with disarming law abiding citizens?
2
@azerty8866 1- slavery existed in rome, and Egypt long before capitalism. It was capitalism in England that started the anti-slavery patrols. 2- the chopped off hands were King Leopold of Belgium. By definition a king is the government. Government control of the means of production is what chops hands off. 3- the most polluted rivers and cities in the world are in China. Plus they have terrible air quality. Meanwhile capitalism has improved environmental metrics for decades.
2
@mikemcmike6427 It’s a trend of the Nazis seeing the right as their allies: Sooooo... the Ribbentrop pact was with a "right wing" ally?
2
@mikemcmike6427 "Out of convenience"? "Temporary"? So convictions and values are only "cast in stone" when it suits you? What if the conservative party connection you mention is also "out of convenience"?
2
they "were" wildly accepted But the left cannot accept them anymore Class warfare failed. Capitalism blew socialism in regards of productivity and life quality https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ?t=197 So the left has had to re-brand itself for "feelings", pronouns, feminicide, abortion... create as many and as polarizing divisions as possible. A 50/50 split population can be ruled by a few votes at the ballots. So "who counts the votes" becomes the deciding factor.. and very few votes are needed to tip the scale.
1
@alphana7055 strawman argument Having your kids outside the statist forced indoctrination system is not "isolating" them from society. If I send my kids to a private posh school. there is no isolation. If I create my own cooperative school with other like minded people, there is no isolation Ad hominem You are implying that I am some sort of pervert or mental patient That is all you've got?
1
@Leotv1948 You forget all the chavista rethoric about self-suffiency (endogeno they called it). One of the flag projects was "el pozo venezolano", by which they would locally produce all the required technologies, equipment and materials. They created a branch of PDVSA called PDVSA-Servicios to kick out the foreign service companies "because they are not needed". They claimed that sanctions would not harm the industry. And yet they failed. I will also point out that they bragged about technological partnerships with Russia, Iran and North Korea, and that they had "all the technology required". If there is chaos, it is not due to sanctions, it is due to the poor planning of these projects.
1
@bludfyre the root of socialism economic failure is the destruction of incentives to the individual. If I come up with a better mousetrap, I gain nothing from it. So creativity and entrepeneurship disappear. That is why iPhones are invented and designed by free people in USA, and built by slaves in China. You DO KNOW which one is the "socialist one" between China and USA
1
@Leotv1948 The US has left socialist Venezuela fail. Sanctions are a response to drug trafficking, giving venezuelan passports to terrorists from the middle east, money laundering and cooperation with the FARC
1
@Leotv1948 yes there are videos of humanitarian aid being stopped... BY THE VENEZUELAN GOVERMENT https://youtu.be/gKQaGzELROQ name calling does not change the fact that weapons and oilfield equipment from china and russia did enter Venezuela. Where is your so called "blockade"?
1
@wasneeplus " nor did they act on any such beliefs" Yes they did. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8?t=8204 The "difference" is that MARXIST state took away from "burgeois" to give the workers (class warfare) NAZI state took away from jews and foreigners to give to the germans (race warfare) In both cases, it is state control of the means of production. https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8?t=8903
1
@bludfyre The proof that the government cannot fund innovation is that the iPhone was not created in North Korea. You still believe that a government "can do a better job"... but the evidence is against your faith
1
@tharrrrrrr that is not relevant. The issue here is IF the government-state controls property, companies or corporations. If the government state has a "five year plan", set wages, orders production runs and goals... that is socialism And the Nazis did all that.
1
@bludfyre Government funds created many things, but none of them are products. GPS is nothing without google maps or Garmin. DARPAnet was useless until netscape made the internet useful Microprocessors were expensive, single purpose, low yield production was acceptable for military contracts... until Zylog and Motorola solved the instruction set and yield problems. The few government R&D that is not a total writeoff cannot be used to justify the wasteful spending of government. You are cherrypicking the successful ones post facto. How many supersonic SST did Boeing produce? 😁 How are those pharma grants doing in gain of function research? What was the ROI on rail guns? Or hovercrafts? Or the supersonic sea plane? Remember the nuclear jet engines? It is not a myth. Government can spend, but it cannot deliver value for money. Only private entrepeneurs unlock value. Sometimes it is found in the trash heap of government wasteful spending.
1
@wasneeplus "no large scale nationalisation" Again, they suspended private property rights. All "property" was conditional to be used in favour of the party objectives. Remember that the definition is "state ownership OR control". If the state can take private property and give it to selected front men...it is in control. hence socialism.
1
@wasneeplus Yes I do think the US became a socialist economy during the war. And the first thing they did after the war was over was to dismantle the war controls. I do not discuss their "main issues" or mind read their "motivations". Even if you call the economy "window dressing"...the fact was that all property was subject to be taken, a front obedient man put in charge, and it WAS state-government controlled. Hence socialism. You want to draw distinctions in the motivations, or justifications, imaginations or machinations? Fine. But the facts remain stubborn: socialism is the state-government ownership or control of the means of production. Marxists and Nazis BOTH controlled the means of production. Hence both equally socialist.
1
@wasneeplus We do know what the nazis would have done with private ownership had they won. They would STILL CONTROL IT . Of course there is no trouble if only "yes men" have property and do your bidding. "deemed necessary" by WHOM? I for one reject eminent domain and public works as well. If it HAS to be bought, then it MUST be bought in a voluntary transaction. Between individuals. Let them sort out the price. The fact that governments advance socialist policies, and that they are contained and prevented from polluting the economy... that is why nobody would mistake the Dutch for a socialist economy. The Dutch economy is not socialist because the people oppose the tyranny of government every day. Not for lack of trying. To answer your question clearly: there has never been a government that isn't socialist. If the economy and the country are not infected by government socialist action, it's because citizens resists and reject it. You will agree that the government IS NOT the economy. Neither is the government the same as the country. Because that fusion and confusion between leader-party-government-country is the hallmark of socialism (ein fuhrer, ein volk)
1
@wasneeplus the two citizens hash it out. one pays the other enough until they yield. They go to private arbitrage Thunderdome. pistols at twelve paces I don't care as long as the government stays out of it Calling all the governments socialists is the first step in calling out all the taxes, fiat money, currency debasing, government controlled corporativism
1
@wasneeplus people do murder each other everyday It matters not if I am ok with it, or not The issue is that you believe the government can prevent it ( it can't) The issue is that you want me to be helpless so that the government has the monopoly of violence. please stop strawman-ing me. Go watch the cathy newman interview. "so you're okay" is strawman at it's best. Don't tell me what you believe I think. "doesn't understand economics" special pleading. Try again as for "organizing society". I don't want to organize society. But I also don't want you or anyone else to do it.
1
@wasneeplus so... how is it going for you? Does your government keep the people that want to harm you "in check"? You have no fear of criminals? Here is the poison you sell: I want to self defend. You attempt to equate self defense with extremism, willfull harm of others. Self defense is not a crime... except for those that want to slaughter helpless sheep. Strawman... i never said violence will be used to solve disagreements. What I said is i don't know and I don't care how two people agree to solve their differences... what I said is ONLY leave the government out of it And yes, for someone that defends government totalitarism...that "is a crime"
1
@alexgray2482 the government is a mafia protection racket poor people can't afford the government protection, that is why they pay no taxes AND GUESS WHAT? the poor areas that pay lower or no taxes are the high crime areas! So you are accusing my plan of what YOUR plan already is doing? Subdidized high crime areas would disappear under my system. People would leave those places. As I said, the investigation would be made by private insurance. It would be swift, ruthless and effective. As for the gangs. Let them roam free. And let them freely reap the retribution that the community will give them. Gangs don't exist in a vacuum. Without government protecting their life and "human rights" .... gangs would be erased by citizens, almost overnight. Fuenteovejuna. look it up.
1
@alexgray2482 This is interesting # What would happen if an insurer, a corporation and an arbitrator conspired to bring down a smaller competitor to the corporation. # Conspired... with WHO? You see, companies can only conspire WITH THE GOVERNMENT. Only Governments can give and protect monopolies. "All monopolies have been established with government help" https://youtu.be/lWZu0HcsjG4 Any company using resources on "bringing down" a competitor is not using these resources to give the customer a better product at a better price. If such company does not fail... it is ONLY because of government protection (airline regulations, shipping flag requirements, farming subsidies, internet and EV tax breaks, government charters, banks and exchanges government protected monopolies)
1
@alexgray2482 people don't rise against government because the government insists on taking weapons away from them That is why the US is different That is why LatAm is so miserable Only criminals (gangs and government) have weapons in LatAm The difference between a citizen and a slave is a weapon.
1
@alexgray2482 The banks, employers insurance ALREADY act like a cartel. And the do so because the government gives them that privilege To set up a bank you need a government license. To set up an insurance company? government license... these are protections, barriers to entry See what I mean when I say that a conspiracy must include the government? (((but I was mentally unwell and you falsely induced me into signing the contract that took away my right?))) Well, go ask all the seniors that get scammed by hedge funds and Tele-marketers... and then those same hedge funds are protected by the government when they allege that the seniors are "sophisticated investors" and "knew all the risks" Why you keep accusing MY PLAN of what YOUR REALITY is already doing?
1
@wasneeplus (((No, right now you live in a normal society where the government usually tries to look out for everybody's interests, as it should be.))) Would you fly on an airline that " usually tries " to make safe landings? How about a hospital that " usually tries " to amputate the sick limb? Is that normal for you? Fine.. not for me. I do not want to fly "goverment airlines"
1
@alexgray2482 there are no "natural" monopolies. All monopolies are un-natural, created and enforced by government coercion Banks existed long before regulation. What needs barriers to entry is the FIAT money ponzi scheme
1
@alexgray2482 If what you say is true. Please explain how IBM lost the PC market. Why Nokia lost the cellphone market. Why the "real McCoy" oiler was lost. All these companies were run by angels inmune to "collusion"? Did they not desire "profit"?
1
@alexgray2482 Pray do tell, have the federal trade commission or the European commision attempted to dismantle the monopoly of money by central banks? Don't think so... so it is no that they are against "collusion" or "monopolies... just the ones that do not OBEY their designs
1
@alexgray2482 "communist party" is your problem You blame private companies for the things government companies do
1
@alexgray2482 by definition, if the government is making regulations, it is not a "neo liberal" laissez faire free market system You are angry at the collusion between government and corporations (socialism)... please stop pretending government intervention is the fault of free market
1
@alexgray2482 Strawman argument: I have never advocated for ankle tags Why are you discussing what I have NOT said? The liars, thieves and murderers are all in government, not among the population
1
@mikemcmike6427 "Or the fact every single left wing party leader was either forced to flee Germany or killed." The left kills and eats their own Just because Stalin purged everybody else does not make him a "right winger'
1
@mikemcmike6427 Oh as allies and friends and brought them into their party. Hahahaha keep going clown boy. I’m owning you here call me daddy By your own admission, they made deals with anyone if it suited their interest. If it was "convenient". So even IF they treated the "conservatives" as "friends"..IT WAS ONLY FOR CONVENIENCE I’m owning you here call me daddy Having a conversation with an leftist is like playing chess with a pigeon. They knock down the pieces, shit the board, and then strut around claiming they won!
1
@makhnothecossack4948 "State capitalism" CANNOT exist If it's "capitalism", it's PRIVATE ownership If it's "state" it's not private Please stop repeating leftist sound bites, stop making up words. Stop changing the meaning of words. Stop pretending "it wasn't real socialism"
1
@makhnothecossack4948 "...isn't the definition of socialism..." Please stop making up definitions of socialism. Please stop saying "it wasn't real socialism" The definition of socialism is the GOVERNMENT CONTROL of the means of production.
1
@MadManRob thank you for your kind comment. 😁👍
1
@JohnBickner So? The "chavistas" have claimed for years that they had alternate markets. They also claimed the path to grow was "endogeno" , similar to north korea's "huche" ideals. from 2004, much before the sanctions, Chavez was loudmouthing about not "one drop of oil" to the USA 10 de marzo, 2004 - 00h00 “Si Bush trata de desestabilizarnos, no tendrá ni una gota más de petróleo”, afirmó el presidente venezolano Hugo Chávez al diario francés Le Figaro, en entrevista efectuada en Caracas y publicada ayer en ese periódico.
1
@JohnBickner roads can be charities. Or can be paid by subscription. I do not buy the "monopoly" argument. One: governments are already charging "monopoly" prices to enter London or Paris, so it has already happened. TWO, in this age of remote presence and internet, nobody has to go or be anywhere anymore.
1