Comments by "Legal Fiction Natural Fact" (@legalfictionnaturalfact3969) on "Jake Tran" channel.

  1. there's a shit ton of overlap in these power orgs
    5
  2.  EpyonX  kid, you have no fucking clue how the economy works. socialism is theft. stealing is wrong. if there were no govt, then govt couldn't back these huge corporations to make them monopolies. when you look at the usa, for example, you are NOT LOOKING AT CAPITALISM. that shit is largely socialist. that's WHY IT SUCKS. yw.
    4
  3. socialism IS for the rich. by definition.
    4
  4.  @harmanjotsingh4230  NOPE. you tried to highlight the difference btwn socialism and communism. they are the same. AS I SAID: communism was invented as a term to disparage separatist communes. really, it's the same damn thing as socialism.
    3
  5.  @harmanjotsingh4230  if my definition is "exactly what" yours is.. why tf are you arguing with me? chill out your shit.
    3
  6. playing both sides is not a good look. yeah, dude announced that's what he's doing. doesn't make it better. and when the tables turn... well, everyone who's shown his face in support of this treason will be hanging from the trees like christmas ornaments. :)
    3
  7.  @lilfamous09  majority share holder = advance publications. so yeah. utse.
    3
  8.  @jonomoth2581  damn, you're dense and think you're really onto something. corporations DON'T BECOME LARGE WITHOUT GOVT INTERVENTION. and you honestly think a govt, the sociopaths who want to rule, would cut you a fair deal and "sell back"? lmfao. everything you describe HAS BEEN DONE and is STILL BEING TRIED and does it work? oh yeah, it works alright, to the benefit of the ruling class. don't bother defining things in your comments; the dictionary already did that. in no way is stealing income and redistributing it moral. in no way is it moral to prescribe how another individual must live or what she is required to own. there's a reason business owners are almost never socialist. you love the slave life, so just keep doing that and negotiating with your terrorist owners. the rest of us are moving on.
    3
  9.  @jonomoth2581  right, i mentioned its lack of morality. that was me. lol
    3
  10.  @jonomoth2581  WRONG. dude, you sound like little kid who thinks he is "explaining" to adults how power rangers is the BeSt. lol. it's govt backing that enables monopolies, not private ownership of a thing by those who created said thing. look up "barrier to entry". and those who make regulations don't follow those regulations. they are in place so that the average individual CANNOT start a business to compete with the big ones. so no one can stop buying food and shit from them. voila, govt create monopolies. socialism inherent.
    3
  11.  @jonomoth2581  you JUST looked that up and you've been here arguing your side? lol. get educated BEFORE sharing your thoughts.
    3
  12.  @3869426384  "The community" did not build or trade for the thing? then they do not own the thing. to pretend otherwise is theft. and not everyone wants to co own every flipping company they do a little work for. ever done freelance work? no? exactly. because socialists who go to work for themselves go 180 and become proponents of free market.
    3
  13. @Reallife Shenanigans YES, this is what SOCIALISTS do not understand.
    2
  14.  @milovarquiel  the capitalism for profits is taxed as well, so that is socialist too.
    2
  15.  @kimdongwon9782  look it the fuck up and stop with the time-waster troll bit.
    2
  16.  @harmanjotsingh4230  socialism and communism are the same thing, look up the dictionary definitions and read between the lines. the phrase communism was coined to slam the commune-separatist movement, as folks were already wary of socialist principles. all pro socialism talk is propaganda, full stop. it creates "public" (code for state) property and you CANNOT get that without STEALING it from individual creators.
    2
  17.  @harmanjotsingh4230  uh... yes. lmao! socialists brains do not work. seriously, it's all the stockholm syndrome of their slavery. XD
    2
  18. well, you can't be figuratively proud, so... look up literally in the dictionary
    2
  19.  @spacetoast7783  robinhood
    2
  20. False dichotomy. The choice isn't the top or the bottom. You can be in the middle. The sweet spot. Having too much is just a waste of effort. It's an addiction. They can't stop themselves. They are like crackheads.
    2
  21. Nah, being needlessly wealthy is indeed depressing. They are addicted to the first high of getting some dough. And they can never reach that high again. They are addicts. Addicts are miserable. Facts.
    2
  22. and their indentured servitude and that of their children
    2
  23. "the scammers post on social media to sway public opinion and thereby control the stock market". yes, there is a LOT of this on reddit. but then, reddit is a military operation, so no surprise there. do not play the stock market. it is a casino and the house ALWAYS wins.
    2
  24.  @ghostphoto  bernie. lmfao.
    2
  25.  @ghostphoto  REEEEEE. lol
    2
  26.  @jonomoth2581  tldr: yeah, you do support socialism. that's what you just described.
    2
  27.  @jonomoth2581  barrier to entry is like when the titanic was sinking and they locked the poor on the lower decks so the wealthy could get a chance first. those who make the rules/barriers do not abide by them.
    2
  28.  @jonomoth2581  you cannot prevent mergers. but without govt backing of select companies, mergers would remain very small in size.
    2
  29. ​ @jonomoth2581  you're misunderstanding me. i said YOU CANNOT prevent mergers. for example, if a person dies and their partner takes over the biz. or if someone wants to go work on a long term project and needs a knowledgeable neighbor to provide their shared similar service to the people the first guy is leaving behind for a while. in anarchy, there is no large scale mergers and acquisitions industry. it simply doesn't survive because there is not enough govt backing of any one company to allow them to grow large via impunity or to muscle proprietors into selling when they don't want to.
    2
  30. ​ @jonomoth2581  you are incorrect. i spoke of barrier to entry in the context of artificiality.. the ones placed by law and degree requirements and non-free-market based prohibitively high costs of materials and nepotism etc etc. the NATURAL barriers to entry would be very low in anarchy, and start up costs would be comprised almost entirely of sweat equity. no point in asking me what i think and then just saying "nuh uh". and no, there are no huge corps or subsequent huge mergers in anarchy. more like symbiotic modules interconnected. much more flexible and fluid. no big monsters stomping around transformering themselves into even larger monstrosity by acquisition. it looks so different that you will not grasp it by thinking in the terms of your current slavery and serfitude. did you know the cia pulls strings in order to buy usa businesses and drive them into the ground because they report to the vatican and the roman empire is still quite sore about the reformation? yeah.
    2
  31. it's dog worship bullshit
    2