Comments by "Historia, Magistra Vitae" (@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.) on "Jubilee" channel.

  1.  @purplegi0n  : You need to co pe harder than that.
    1
  2. @White Rabbit : I never said everyone is greedy.
    1
  3.  @Hunterchuck  "for their master that owns the means of production that benefits from their labor." Anyone can own the means of production under Capitalism, and become an entrepreneur.
    1
  4. @bizmark : Capitalism won't fall. Also in order to achieve comm unis m you need to through so cial ist system first ... and fas cis m was a form of so ciali sm also.
    1
  5.  @veryfinan5187  : Wrong. That is Marxism.
    1
  6. "Isn't that a core tenet of communism?" It is the core tenet of Marxism, which in theory will lead to Communism (a stateless and classless society).
    1
  7. @Kelsey Themens: Well yes. God can and will heal people. Nothing magical about it.
    1
  8. "and paying them as little as possible/not at all is 100% capitalism." Nobody is forced to sign such a job contract. If the pay is not sufficient, people can find other jobs or even become and entrepreneur.
    1
  9.  @Hunterchuck  Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you do not need to use force and threaten people to buy things and own things ... but you need to to use force and violence to take things away from them, like private property and the means of production.
    1
  10.  @masterdeetectiv9520  "A hard core capita list is just some rich guy" Wrong. Hard co re ca pitali st is any and every privat e busin ess own er, or any ord inary citiz en who wants to sell things.
    1
  11. @Grace Askew: Because they have their 2nd amendment and the guns are not the problem.
    1
  12.  @mile_381  "like anarcho-capitalism" Nothing oxymoronic about it.
    1
  13.  @thelorecouncil1708  "Cuba lacking medical and food resources couldn't be a byproduct of the embargo by the giant country near them?" It is not.
    1
  14. "Socialism: means of production owned by the workers. Private property restricted and or abolished " That is actually the definition of Marxism. Socialism is an economic system where the collective (such as workers, guilds, the government etc.) either directly own or control the buildings and tools that make goods and services like farms and factories. This can be achieved through decentralized and direct worker-ownership, or through centralized state-ownership or control of the means of production.
    1
  15. It was more like a mixed economy vs socialism ... and there is no such thing as "state capitalism", which is an oxymoron.
    1
  16.  @magnusmunk2071  "So No ‘state capitalism’ is not oxymoronic. " Wrong. Capitalism is an economic system which works just fine without the involvement of a centralized government / entity. In fact, that is the only way it can work.
    1
  17.  @magnusmunk2071  "There can be ‘No mixed’ economy - its just capitalism with different levels of regulation" It is called mixed because it is not capitalism, due to the involvement of the State in the economy.
    1
  18.  @magnusmunk2071  "The point is, it is still capitalism." Wrong. It is a called a mixed economy for a reason. It is not what capitalism is about.
    1
  19.  @magnusmunk2071  "Where has capitalism ever existed without a state?" Capitalism hasn't existed anywhere yet, specifically because governments won't let the market to be free.
    1
  20.  @magnusmunk2071  "And in theory, what would capital owners do if there was no police or military to protect their property?" Hire security, just like they are doing now.
    1
  21.  @magnusmunk2071  "Also do you distinguish between 'state' and 'government'?" Here in Europe, they are used interchangeably.
    1
  22.  @magnusmunk2071  "So the biggest company would have the most firepower and then also a monopoly on violence ie. become a state?" That is not how monopoly works. You cannot have a monopoly under free market and the only way to be a "biggest company" in the first place would be if the consumers want it that way. I doubt they do.
    1
  23.  @magnusmunk2071  "What would prevent that company from using it's private military to assert dominance and just forcibly take over other companies?" Other people with guns.
    1
  24. @Cutiepie6789 : Poverty is usually because of your own poor choices.
    1
  25.  @ivanstoqnov3441  : You can pick any capitalist country and compared it to any actual socialist country... you will find more poor and poverty in those socialist countries for sure.
    1
  26. "who absolutely refuse to believe that the US is a capitalist society " It isn't. America has a mixed economy, just like we Europeans do ... which you already said.
    1
  27. "but it’s pretty clear that the sphere of influence on US state is operatively and inherently capitalist. " No. What you are referring to, is called Corporatocracy and the problem is the government, not Capitalism.
    1
  28.  @theshakhrayist7649  "Capitalism without the state si called cartelism." No. It is called Anarcho-Capitalism.
    1
  29.  @theshakhrayist7649  : To healthy free market capitalism.
    1
  30. @MF Sevin: How is it a b usine ss when it's fun ded by the gov ern ment and ta x pay ers? There is a word for a c apita list m ilit ary: mer cena ries.
    1
  31.  @mr.alandude3938  : Incorrect. The U S mili tary gets the funds from the federal budget. That is not ca pitali sm, hun.
    1
  32.  @abeIincoIn  : Only m ar xi sm cares about the wo rkers own ing the mea ns of produ ction, not s ociali sm as a wh ole. If the m ilita ry would be fun ded by pri vate busin ess es, then it wo uld be ca pita list ... and there is a word for a cap itali st m ilita ry; m erc ena ri es.
    1
  33.  @johanedfors3899  Incorrect. Value comes from the sold product, not from what the workers generate. The workers can do whatever and much they like but as long as their product is not getting sold and bought by anyone... their value is zero. The only way to make profit is to provide a product that other people deem valuable. Has nothing to do with exploitation whatsoever.
    1
  34.  @johanedfors3899  : Well then, those workers should create their own business and employ themselves... problem solved then?
    1
  35.  @johanedfors3899  : Again, it cannot be exploitative when you agree to something. Then nobody is exploiting anyone due to a mutual agreement.
    1
  36. @SLiM M: Well not really.
    1
  37. Gloria belongs to a padded room since she in a danger to herself.
    1
  38. +noot noot: You are wrong. First off, it doesn't exactly say like that ... secondly, it wouldn't matter anyways, since Jesus himself affirmed the covenanted union of one man and one woman as the only normative expression of human sexuality. The entire biblical narrative presupposes that sex is supposed to take place between a man and a woman in the context of marriage (Gen. 2:23-24)
    1
  39. @soleil louise: In theory, yes ... in practice, nope. Universal healthcare is not economically sustainable.
    1
  40.  @thanos8638  Nope. There is no forced labor in capitalism so no exploitation either. You cannot exactly be exploited if you willingly agree to a labor contract.
    1
  41.  @johanedfors3899  : Incorrect. Value comes from the sold product, not from what the workers generate. The workers can do whatever and much they like but as long as their product is not getting sold and bought by anyone... their value is zero. The only way to make profit is to provide a product that other people deem valuable. Has nothing to do with exploitation whatsoever.
    1
  42. That is the only system that works, hun.
    1
  43.  @realSiRGRiFT  : The embargo doesn't affect medical stuff.
    1
  44.  @realSiRGRiFT  : Nope, not at all. Medical stuff are exempt.
    1
  45.  @saichanik  : Wrong. Both medicine and food have been off the Embargo since the year 2000 at the very least. Even Wiki states this. " In 2000, Clinton authorized the sale of food and humanitarian products to Cuba." "Since 2000, the embargo has explicitly excluded the acquisition of food and medicines." "Since the Trade Sanction Reform and Export Enhancement Act was enacted in 2000, the trade of food and medicine goods is excluded from the embargo."
    1
  46.  @Maksie0  : There is no such exploitation in Capitalism, and there are no classes in the first place. Nobody is forcing those workers to work in the first place, and they could become entrepreneurs if they feel that they are being "exploited".
    1
  47.  @Maksie0  "Those workers are forced to work because the alternative is homelessness, starvation, medical debt, etc." It is not the fault of the system that people lack survival and agricultural skills. Again, nobody is pointing a gun at workers and forcing them to work. That's not how Capitalism works. Those workers will go and sign a job contract willingly or not at all. It's their choice and their choice alone, even to the detriment of their well being.
    1
  48.  @Maksie0  "And we can't all be entrepreneurs, because those entrepreneurs all need workers to exploit." Excuses, excuses, excuses. Again, there is no such exploitation, and nobody is forcing you to hire workers as an entrepreneur in the first place. Not to mention, worker co-ops exist.
    1
  49.  @johncaze757  : I mean that since under capitalism anyone can be an entrepreneur, words such as "proletarian" and "bourgeoisie" have no meaning.
    1
  50. @Ann Handler : Socialism is the opposite of capitalism ... corporate socialism was called fascism.
    1