well, give me your framing

State Market Socialism with Authoritarian Patriarchal Traditionalist Nationalism

lol, that's pretty extremely specific

do you have an econ degree?

Studying

I've taken 3 years of economics so far tho

Not gonna be my major tho

ah'. I covered enough to press the eject button in college

comp sci major

10+ years in equity trading

most theories never meet reality or even come close

human behavior/nature dominates the dynamics

power games and struggles

Ultimately, so one doesn't go bankrupt they are conservative with spending

if you're liberal with spending, you tend to go broke

at the institutional level, there is the fed that can offset moronic spending with various measures

so, a political stance/discussion tends to be ungrounded here

as it often fails to capture the complex economic realities

I deny that economics is a science

@Maksim econ student gang

@Deleted User Taxes on the top brackets should be raised to 90% and tarrifs should be raised

Make embezzlement punishable by death

Huge funding into public works programs

Reduce unemployment to 0%

Abolish all private banks

Central public bank

Economics is a philosophy not a science

> Economics is a philosophy not a science
golden point

brb, will speak more detail on your comments soon

Taxes are a bad thing

Wat

My ideal government is one that makes more money than it needs

And there would be no taxes

That’s not how that works.

The extra $$ would either be saved or returned to the tax payers as compensation

We would make how it works

The government should a mix for for-profit and public endeavors

Governments are common investment funds for improvement of our condition.

Your plan would be like trying to make a profitable Home Owners Association.

It would just end badly.

I doubt it would

But yes that’s the kind of stuff I want

What would the government profit off of for one?

As much as they can

It would be easy on the local level

Be specific.

Have police do individual security for money

We have those.

They’re called security companies.

Public transits

Have a public one

We already make people pay for public transit. It would be very difficult to get any more out of it than we already do.

The attraction of public transit is that it is *cheap*

And the whole point of a public police force and fire department is that you don’t have to fork over 50 bucks before your burning house gets doused or your wifebeating neighbor gets arrested. @Joe The Communist

You pay in advanced with taxes so you don’t have to worry later. More or less public insurance.

They would fork over the cash after the fire is out

Keep in mind this is the end goal

Who’s going to make them? The private police force that will cost 100 dollars to hire?

It’s simply not sustainable.

The police will do emergency stuff

But no politician will get a free ride with guards

Or rich guy

So basically politicians will only be from a rich upper class instead of a poor lower class.

That’s going to work indefinitely and not cause class warfare.

To get security from police yes

They will have to buy it

The secret service will cost them

Yeah, so basically there won’t be any lower class politicians.

With massive security no

It will be the rich elite. That will only inflame social and economic stratification.

Major politicians having to pay their own security will not cause class warfare

It will because the only major politicians there will be are rich ones.

And the poor don’t like being ignored.

What you are proposing would be a breeding ground for communist and socialist cells.

That’s already the case

The poor would group together in a commune to provide their own security, further splitting them from mainstream government

This is not anywhere near as intense with a public police force.

It’s as simple as bread and circuses. You need to keep the working class happy.

Eliminating public services will not serve that end.

Honestly, how can you not see the result of this would be a splinter-shatter style civil war? @Joe The Communist

People can get their own bread and circuses with the money that won’t be stolen from them

@Joe The Communist That would mean that they would be self-reliant, and further divide them from the central goverment, local, state, national, or otherwise.

Taxes combined for a unified public service creates cohesion between citizens.

That’s what I want

I want self-reliance and division from government

@Joe The Communist That’s a great a plan for a Civil War and extremely low national stability which will create an environment ripe for imperialization from stronger unified nations.

There is more to a national community than taxes and free shit

If there isn’t than that country doesn’t need to exist

Ok the us is stronger than that though

@Deleted User I think he is done with me

@Joe The Communist there is more to a nation than that, but strong central government is a major part of a strong nation.

Self-reliance and factionalism will only weekend any ability to defend against an invader. It’s the difference between 1000 army ants attacking together and one by one.

The government does not bring national unity

The lack of a strong government would barely harm our national identity

@Joe The Communist : sorry, what do you mean done w/ you? had to step away.. sorry

I said I think he was done debating

ah', no not really

Yea....

my framing centers on human intention in that when someone has bad intention/unfair intention, everything else is obfuscation

most -isms/-ists can be brought back to that first principle and their nature's revealed

Okay

most things that go awry in terms of fairness is due to initial/ongoing bad/unfair intentions

nothing wrong with capitalism but ultimately that's not what we have for instance

nothing wrong with a free-market economy and equity markets but that's not what we have

So, i try not to get to caught up in the shell game economic/political/philosophical obfuscation

why do we have insane deficits? Because the bonehead govt decided to unfairly and negatively spend more than what it brings in year over year

simple fix to that

Unrelated fact: it is cold af in Michigan

but no one takes it .. yet will speak for decades about complex econ theory

why do the rich have more than the poor to an extent that its breaking society?

because markets aren't fair/regulated

and are anything but free-markets

or capitalistic

when people start getting real/truthful, then things will change

until then its all just smoke and mirrors

Social security.. smoke and mirrors

so they create 401ks

401ks smoke and mirrors so you get IRA

IRA smoke and mirrors so you get roth IRA

Human beings are fools for the infinite shell games they play when they're ultimately the ones that pay the price behind the shell games

not sure what to debate here

@Joe The Communist It absolutely harms it. What point is there in serving a nation that doesn’t serve you?

This is why revolutions happen dude.

does anyone want to private voice chat

You serve your nation to protect your home and way of life

When people were fighting on the beaches of D-day do you think they were fighting in the name of welfare and social security?

No

They were fighting for the American way of life and democracy

The year is 2011. It's a warm summer night. The windows are open and a breeze rolling through the curtains. You're leaning forward towards the screen, palms a little sweaty, working the controller with speed and precision. Your younger mind, free of the troubles that come later in life, is fully focused on the game, and able to think fast. Your eyes dart around the screen and the headset clasps around your head, keeping you locked in. A smile on your face as you play. This was the happiest and most content you'd ever been in your life, and you'll never forget it.

hey guys

@Joe The Communist And the american way of life is exactly what it is, not some fucked up corporatist dystopia.

@🅱oomer Ted Cruz wow faggot

@Deleted User Yes hello I'm in the last semester for my entrepreneurship and business administration degree. Over the program i have studied economics as well, I think from my experience it's perfectly reasonable that some people are richer than other and it's a natural part of human history. There are some people born who have lesser qualities and some who have better. Some people also want to improve themselves. If you want to start your rant about you living in dystopia, it's getting boring as everyone here says the same.

As on the point of governmental deficits these are created due to ability to pay them off later or. It's basically a loan that a government has just like a normal person with the requirement to pay it off. If it's a good investment it works and everyone wins. If it's a bad one then people who bought the governmental bonds are in the red. No complex economic system here.

@Boulderman Bruh

do you want to voice chat

<:redpill:591451582122557451> people would rather hear pretty lies because it society afloat in it own pool of bullshit quote frank cervi book uncle nick

real greaser

modern greasers

slightly Hollywood greaser

very Hollywood greasers

https://youtu.be/CmIKR458M0A

You're not gonna believe this

I found someone who doesn't believe being gay exists

sex

@A Russian Bad Actor Gay people don't exist

gay people are secretly Jews

Being gay contradicts being human and thus it cancels out and you become nothing

Ok, that's gay

@Ater Votum : I have no horse in the race regarding the the topic of status quo socio-economics, deficit spending, wealth inequality, etc. I'm well off due to my own hard work and many of the things I talked about from the conversation was from the standpoint of providing a broader perspective. There was no rant provided and it's unlikely a person can argue against what I established. Another person tried on a different server and failed after about 2 hours. Beyond college (and I do to maintain a degree including grad school), is the real world, real world economics, and dynamics. While college gives you a great deal of perspective about this, you won't grasp the full scope until a number of years testing/putting it into practice after school. Even then, you will have a narrow lensing of the big picture regarding sociology/economics/socio-economics. If you care beyond your own enrichment to gain a broader perspective, you're going to have to consider a range of things inline with what I stated. If not, you'll simply be : http://www.investorwords.com/8436/talking_my_book.html

While this self-affirming viewpoint might seem "correct". It is anything but that and quite biased

So yeah, different people are born into different conditions and through their own self effort attain different achievement. I have no qualms with that and made no mention of it. What I defined was the overarching economic system (game/rules) and dynamics that are quite slanted beyond that. A person is welcome to argue about the details in this framing. The knowledge you gain in doing so is not going to make you rich but it will give you a broader perspective of the world. No reason to try to marginalize broader perspectives beyond your own as a : Rant. What I instead find to be a rant is when a person 'talks their book' whether knowingly or unknowingly.

@Maksim gays or whatever you want to say

He doesn't mean it like "they're not people so gay people is wrong"

He means he literally does not beliefs it is possible for same sex attraction and a lack of opposite sex attraction

He also doesn't believe in being bisexual or straight tho

He didn't explain what he does think

He just denied that anyone has a sexuality

He also said that emotions don't exist and

You know what

Screenshots

He refuses to let me use the phrase have sex in a gay context because it doesn't produce kids

These are out of order I'm just showing them because wow

This is a person who holds beliefs

Those last few are in order

"I'm agnostic on the existence of emotions"

If I were you I would end the conversation right there lmfao.

How the fuck can you be agnostic on the existence of emotions

Emotions EXIST and we have infallible proof.

play.hellominers.com

1.14

is there anyone good websites for statistics??

The only statistics that I can remember is that 13% is also 50%

ok

Along with 2% is also 40%

ok

no but actually

?

@Maksim Yo can I drop my new portal server invite in here

@Deleted User no

Want to partner then?

DM

This chat was awesome before I got banned 4 times

yo anybody on

https://youtu.be/cR2XilcGYOo If you don't remember vibing to this at the age of ten or eleven you're not a real OG

@Deleted User That really you?

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

@𝕯𝖎𝖆𝖒𝖔𝖓𝖉 𝕯𝖚𝖈𝖐 <#666334953176432645>

it fucking exists for a reason

@Deleted User Great so you just argue for shit that you don't believe in and fail at that and then boast when you win against some 12 year old retard on a discord server. The thing is in a discourse you have to provide good logical arguments, yours have been lacking though. I've before when i was younger considered the lack of stability of free market as something bad though through logical chains and anyone failing to educate me how they might not be real has led me to find and stay with the opinion that a free market is the way to go.

Also i find issue with that you are trying to tell me that i was talking my own boom while when your arguments proved to be at fault you have turned to arguments against me in the server for not accepting your narrow view. Your lack of skill to talk has led to the fact that your proposed ideas have not been taken into account not some kind of blindness of the others. If I didn't consider the things you preached then i wouldn't be able to compose an argument to them so this whole letter by you seems to have little to no meaning.

Is this a copypasta

@Maksim It is I

destroyer of black

The correct term is basketball-american @Deleted User

traditionalism is gay

Why try to stop change?

Because that "change" is hurhful, immoral and retarded

What exactly are you trying to conserve?

Which change?

Traditional Family is the most important conservation

I don't think Tradition is inherently bad.

We are sick of homosexuals, porn, and general degeneracy ruining marriages

Sexual Promiscuity

Nuclear family is popular because it works.

No, religion is the most important thing to conserve

Well it ties in with religion

Religion in todays day and age is dying

It doesn't tie in, it completely stems from religion

religion encompasses all of the important things progressives want to eradicate.

Religion seems harmful

LOL

How is it harmful?

To discover the truth is harmful

@moira Come <#587029563863990282>

I wouldn't say it all stems from religon.
I'd say Traditions stem from necessity.

There is no inherent necessity for traditions

what are you talking about

necessity in itself must be connected to something which by its very nature, demands certain things we deem to be traditions - this is religion

we are the sum of our history and values and many of those values have come from religion

Nuclear family is highly effective, it's cooperative.
Marriage has a lot to do with structured inheritance.

*Traditional Family*

We aren't talking just marriage, it is the Traditional family that needs to be upheld

If divorces are at 50% that isn't being done

I didn't say it wasn't under attack, I was saying that nuclear family is born out of necessity.

@Deleted User So what do you suggest? To force people to stay together?

You can ensure that people stay together without force

How

encouraging religion will ensure people arent degenerates and are willing to committ to marriage, and will avoid actions that would've destroyed their marriage if they took those actions etc

Believe me, at first, everyone is willing to commit to marriage. But there are many cases in which the wife is abused by the husband, or the opposite. Then you cannot expect people to torture themselves and be abused for the rest of their lifespan, lol.

A husband and wife may lose thier interest in one another, but never their child, it's what'll hold it together.

@Koninos No, but you do understand why people are getting divorces right?

She wouldnt be abused by her husband if her husband was religious

I do.

People are getting divorces not because men and women are beating eachother more

not because there is more domestic abuse

but because of sexualization

and "marriage doesn't matter"