Which isn't inherently gibs.

It is

Of course the social safety nets in our country have been exploited and abused. This is intentional by the system

But that doesn't mean they are inherently flawed

Welfare itself isn't a dirty word

Under capitalism, the only way to get rich is by giving people products and services they want. Under socialism, you can be an asshole and the government will still subsidize you

Thats false

You can be a complete leech in capitalism and become rich

How?

What do the infinite number of traders, bankers, and brokers really do for our people?

National Socialism also combines with cultural reforms to promote the value of hard work and contributing to society

Thats why those two are so important together

Of course socialism without the National promotes leeches because they don't care who they are stealing from

Well, I have a 1.3m loan from a bank. I used it to buy a 20 unit apartment complex. I'm providing housing for 20 people, they voluntarily give me money each month, I voluntarily pay the bank interest, and I still make a profit. Everyone wins

But that's not what I asked. I didn't ask what a landlord did

We wouldn't have so many banks and they wouldn't be nearly this large, if not for the federal reserve, which was created by the government

Are you charging a fair price, or exploiting them?

Usury needs to be banned

A fair price is whatever someone is willing to pay

No

The Church considered Usury to be sinful for centuries. It's making money from nothing

And they let Jews become Bankers and here we are. Banning usury was a mistake. But that's another issue

Desperate people are willing to pay more, that doesn't mean it's right to charge someone extra when they're vulnerable and can't say no

They let the Jews exist in their societies as an internal clique. Thats the mistake. Not banning usury lol

What do you mean by desperate? If the rent is too high, they can move to a less nice apartment

Banning usury would have worked if they banned it for everyone, not just Christians

Ok. So now you and the other slum lords get together. And decide this is the minimum price you will charge

Moving isn't always feasible

Also socialism isn't communism. You are allowed property, the right to own your own business, to profit, etc.

Sometimes people have no other option

It's just that you can't directly spread poison to your countrymen or exploit them

I appreciate being called a slum lord. Lol.

Okay, so me and 4 other landlords decide to all raise our rents. So an entrepreneur comes along, sees a demand for affordable housing, buys/builds apartments and charges lower rent. Me and the other "greedy" landlords lose all our tenants and we're out of business

Okay. So now you collude with the local government to block his permit to build

These are things that have actually happened

I agree, government shouldn't have that power

I'm not trolling

I know you're not

Okay so who should decide who builds where

If we remove form government the power to block business and grant monopolies then that problem won't arise

Okay so you and the other local landlords present a higher bid than the entrepeneur can afford on the land to build

If you own land, you should be able to do whatever you want with it, with the exception of any covenants you've entered into. For example, if I buy a home in an explicitly all white/Anglo neighborhood, I can't sell my home to any non whites

All of that is voluntary and doesn't require government force

A capitalist society promotes exploitation and will always end up where we are now.

The problem is that without a strong central force acting for the good of the people, profit will motivate and reign supreme

Why are third worlders imported in mass to our countries for cheap labor? to maximize profit.

Capitalism is slow boil communism, to catch the frog unaware

You don't make a profit without giving people something they want

Why aren't the people of Appalachia provided the services they need? Its not profitable

Because they're white and they provide for themselves

The problem is that there are wants, and there are needs.

They provide for themselves. But they can't build an entire power grid or water system my man

But the people in Appalachia can just move at any time! Maybe to a big city center

"a luxury once enjoyed brclmrd a necessity" internet I'd now a necessity. So is air conditioning. A cell phone, etc

That requires capital in this system. Something these people don't have.

Hadrian, lots of people did this to work in factories, etc

Alot of them were forced by the way

I was actually reading about this the other day.

The business owners who needed labor would collude with local government and other land owners to force out farmers and the like.

So they'd eventually move into cities for work

The rural farmers and peasants pre industrial age were infinitely more wealthy than the factory workers

I agree, government is evil ;)

And now their children pay $80,000 a year to rent a broom closet

Okay so lets remove the government from this situation

The wealthy now hire boys with guns to forcefully move these people

Which should be fought against. And local thugs are a lot easier to fight against than the federal government

Without the safe guards of a central government what prevents the wealthy from monopolizing force

Recreational McNukes

Feudalism lacked alot of these safe guards, and as a result the peasantry were directly under the whims of the local wealthy such as nobles.

"We need some manpower for this war. Get the fuck off your farm and come with us. Or we kill you and seize your assets"

Without a strong central government, who will build the gas chambers?

Jones, the wealthy already monopolize force

If we eliminate the government (or most of its power) then that disappears. If it comes back in some other form then we should fight that, also

I dont understand how it disappears

Factory owners can't force government to take land from farmers

Yes. They just do it themselves

Slum lords can't block building permits

Right, they just buy the land up outright

That happens much less often , and I agree, it shouldn't happen either, but government does it far more

Thats because we live in a neo capitalist society where our governments often adhere to the whims of the wealthy

The greatest goal of the wealthy is to retain capital and prevent us peasants from aquiring it

We have crony capitalism. Government interferes constantly. America was wealthier and there was far less poverty before the welfare state

Jones, you shouldn't think of yourself as a peasant. You should look at how wealthy people acquired their money and do it yourself

9 out of 10 millionaires in America are self made, meaning they didn't inherit it

We had far more pure capitalism a century ago, and it was pretty bad

The owner of the corp I currently work for, aquired his capital and started his business by splicing into the local infastructure of the existing telecom companies. An act like that today would put me away for a very long time

So what he did was not only illegal but unethical

A trend you see often by those with wealth in this system

And purely capitalist systems as a whole

We don't live in a purely capitalist audience

System *

I didn't say we did. I'm saying that this has happened in more pure capitalist socieities as well

In the late 19th century, business owners often would relocate their employees to towns they built paying them in vouchers only valid in these workers towns

Child labor, unsafe working conditions, no protections

As opposed to what

As opposed to these workers having some level of freedom and self determination.

They have the freedom to work there or not to

Or to start their own factory

With what capital

Capital is created

When you're just a few paychecks away from starving, starting your own factory is not even remotely an option