english

Discord ID: 308995540782284817


74,129 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev | Page 25/297 | Next

2017-07-09 10:05:15 UTC

Japan's industry today is based off of the Korean War

2017-07-09 10:05:16 UTC

Fact is Chile adopted the free market approach

2017-07-09 10:05:42 UTC

Japan became more wealthy than their neighbours because they dropped the isolationism and adopted the free market

2017-07-09 10:05:45 UTC

simple as that

2017-07-09 10:05:56 UTC

umm, no

2017-07-09 10:06:02 UTC

Japan did not adopt a free market

2017-07-09 10:06:06 UTC

Show me a country that improved greatly without millions suffering that didn't use the free market

2017-07-09 10:06:09 UTC

Yes they did

2017-07-09 10:06:16 UTC

they had intense protectionism

2017-07-09 10:06:25 UTC

like the U.K. like the U.S., like Germany

2017-07-09 10:06:29 UTC

And after that in 1860 they adopted the free market, duh

2017-07-09 10:06:38 UTC

no, in 1860

2017-07-09 10:06:41 UTC

and after

2017-07-09 10:06:53 UTC

they protected Japanese industry so it could compete with other countries

2017-07-09 10:07:06 UTC

which is exactly what Germany did to develop

2017-07-09 10:07:11 UTC

No that came even later still, and that's why they suffered in the 80s

2017-07-09 10:07:18 UTC

before that they had the free market

2017-07-09 10:07:21 UTC

and it's what the U.S. did as well

2017-07-09 10:07:34 UTC

they had tariffs, they had government support of industries

2017-07-09 10:07:43 UTC

Which is a bad idea

2017-07-09 10:07:46 UTC

See India

2017-07-09 10:07:47 UTC

which is a good idea

2017-07-09 10:07:56 UTC

Terrible idea if you know anything about economics

2017-07-09 10:08:00 UTC

also why the fuck are you even here?

2017-07-09 10:08:04 UTC

you're an idiot libertarian

2017-07-09 10:08:07 UTC

hardly left-wing

2017-07-09 10:08:17 UTC

I never claimed to be left wing

2017-07-09 10:08:45 UTC

Ran out of arguments or what?

2017-07-09 10:08:50 UTC

this is literally how economies developed

2017-07-09 10:09:04 UTC

you're just spouting propaganda without knowing any actual history

2017-07-09 10:09:07 UTC

I can throw some links at you too, but I like to use my own words

2017-07-09 10:09:46 UTC

Fact is economies develop faster and better without those government subsidized companies and import taxes and such

2017-07-09 10:10:18 UTC

yeah, you know which countries have enforced free markets and had for ages?

2017-07-09 10:10:21 UTC

African countries

2017-07-09 10:10:25 UTC

sooo developed

2017-07-09 10:10:31 UTC

Africa had their own issues

2017-07-09 10:10:44 UTC

the U.S. supports American agriculture

2017-07-09 10:10:52 UTC

How come free market works in south america, north america, europe and asia then?

2017-07-09 10:10:54 UTC

the E.U. supports French agriculture

2017-07-09 10:10:55 UTC

it doesn't

2017-07-09 10:10:59 UTC

because it isn't practiced

2017-07-09 10:11:11 UTC

Not completely but the freer it is the better it works

2017-07-09 10:11:22 UTC

international capitalism is supported by fucking China

2017-07-09 10:11:25 UTC

Look at the map for economically free countries, always the richest

2017-07-09 10:11:29 UTC

and could not survive without it

2017-07-09 10:11:43 UTC

Socialism cannot survive without an underground capitalistic system

2017-07-09 10:11:45 UTC

fact

2017-07-09 10:13:38 UTC

Talk a big game but absolutely clueless

2017-07-09 10:13:49 UTC

Next time you argue don't start with throwing insults

2017-07-09 12:54:56 UTC

Hello

2017-07-09 19:11:51 UTC

woah woah woah

2017-07-09 19:12:03 UTC

"How come free market works in south america, north america, europe and asia then?"

2017-07-09 19:12:12 UTC

because niggers.

2017-07-09 19:12:15 UTC

I can't speak for europe

2017-07-09 19:12:20 UTC

Or really asia

2017-07-09 19:12:40 UTC

but I assure you the Americas haven't reacted well to the international market

2017-07-09 19:12:49 UTC

outside of the states

2017-07-09 19:13:21 UTC

Certain US companies might've done very well due to government backing

2017-07-09 19:13:43 UTC

and historically because the US government has taken measures to allow some level of self-determination for well-off citizens

2017-07-09 19:14:11 UTC

I have too ask two things what do you mean by free-market?

2017-07-09 19:14:16 UTC

where has it helped?

2017-07-09 19:20:15 UTC

Niggers aren't real. Nice try.

2017-07-09 19:21:55 UTC

The approach Chile has made to open up the market, which came even before Thatcher and Reagan

2017-07-09 19:22:09 UTC

There is no reason why Chile is a success now and Brazil isn't

2017-07-09 19:22:20 UTC

Except for the fact that Brazil fell in the trap of socialism

2017-07-09 19:23:02 UTC

as we can see now, mass amounts of corruption from these 'well meaning' socialists.

2017-07-09 19:27:52 UTC

I'm somewhat ignorant of Brazilian politics. To be honest.

2017-07-09 19:28:47 UTC

Chile's economy has been entirely propped up by governments though. Mostly it's own and America.

2017-07-09 19:29:14 UTC

Their strongest industry is metal exports I think.

2017-07-09 19:29:25 UTC

Not at all, the government was tyrannical on all points except economical

2017-07-09 19:29:40 UTC

I didn't say tyrannical

2017-07-09 19:29:45 UTC

There was a specific effort in the late 70's to make it a free market, not completely of course

2017-07-09 19:30:01 UTC

they still had their state corporations but compared to the rest of south america it was

2017-07-09 19:30:29 UTC

Well whatever they've two major industries that are talked about constantly.

2017-07-09 19:30:44 UTC

Transportation and copper.

2017-07-09 19:31:10 UTC

Their copper is managed by the government, and has been though the regime changes.

2017-07-09 19:31:11 UTC

Yes, but so does Venezuela and Brazil, immensely rich countries in theory, poor in reality

2017-07-09 19:31:40 UTC

Their trucking and whatnot has always been mostly private.

2017-07-09 19:32:30 UTC

Utter failure, but logistically despite this the Chilean government has been able to manage to keep people fed under both Allende and Pinochet.

2017-07-09 19:32:36 UTC

Even now

2017-07-09 19:33:05 UTC

I never claimed they were a pure free market, but they did slash out a lot of the nonsense in that time

2017-07-09 19:33:08 UTC

and it shows

2017-07-09 19:34:27 UTC

What point are you trying to make?

2017-07-09 19:35:04 UTC

All I'm saying is that the government intervened heavily to make sure the economy worked in a favorable way.

2017-07-09 19:35:09 UTC

That the free market is better at meeting peoples needs than government

2017-07-09 19:35:21 UTC

how so?

2017-07-09 19:35:21 UTC

Not heavily at all compared to other countries

2017-07-09 19:35:57 UTC

Government propping up businesses that can't stand on their own for example

2017-07-09 19:36:06 UTC

an absolute money pit

2017-07-09 19:36:40 UTC

A government owned company that makes money is no problem but most are not and suffer for it

2017-07-09 19:38:00 UTC

Having a business being government owned doesn't mean much if it still is organized like a capitalist company.

2017-07-09 19:38:45 UTC

I mean for a centralized industry it works great

2017-07-09 19:38:50 UTC

A government business will never be organized like a capitalistic company, simply by the fact that it cannot fail.

2017-07-09 19:38:58 UTC

Like for mining or transportation.

2017-07-09 19:39:08 UTC

Worst(best) case scenario it gets sold

2017-07-09 19:39:31 UTC

What kikeshit are you talking about boy?

2017-07-09 19:39:37 UTC

Good reply

2017-07-09 19:40:03 UTC

Everything is "government owned" in America

2017-07-09 19:40:11 UTC

Not at all

2017-07-09 19:40:29 UTC

If you don't pay your taxes you don't get to keep your stuff.

2017-07-09 19:40:45 UTC

That's something else from actually making the decisions in that business

2017-07-09 19:41:28 UTC

The fact is that no one will make better decision for a company than the man who has a risk to lose it all or win it all

2017-07-09 19:42:07 UTC

are you sure about that?

2017-07-09 19:42:09 UTC

Government backed businesses never fail and for it it makes bad decisions

2017-07-09 19:42:14 UTC

Absolutely

2017-07-09 19:42:33 UTC

Why would a government worker who uses other peoples money make better decisions?

2017-07-09 19:42:57 UTC

I don't expect either to be particularly great.

2017-07-09 19:43:12 UTC

Doesn't have to be great, just better

2017-07-09 19:43:28 UTC

In everything there are winners and losers, but you have to make it so you can win or lose to make it work at all

2017-07-09 19:43:42 UTC

Try making a casino in which you always leave without winning or losing

2017-07-09 19:44:38 UTC

That's neat rhetoric, but the problem is that neither the government or the dindu business man are actually held responsible to the workers.

2017-07-09 19:44:55 UTC

I can pretend the government is democratic

2017-07-09 19:45:11 UTC

The businessman is absolutely more hurt by the loss than a government worker

2017-07-09 19:46:34 UTC

I don't care. I'm selfish and I want an economy with organized labor and democracy in the workplace.

2017-07-09 19:46:53 UTC

Well you can get it in venezuela and cuba

2017-07-09 19:47:02 UTC

I can get it here too.

2017-07-09 19:47:12 UTC

Good luck, I don't think you can

2017-07-09 19:47:22 UTC

Unless you go work for the post office, which are notoriously slow

2017-07-09 19:47:53 UTC

๐Ÿค”

2017-07-09 19:49:13 UTC

One of my roommates worked for the post office

2017-07-09 19:49:58 UTC

She was like 64 or something and they wouldn't let her retire because she hadn't worked for them consecutively long enough

2017-07-09 19:50:20 UTC

And she worked 6 days a week for 10-12 hours a day.

2017-07-09 19:50:50 UTC

I'd work slow with those hours too lol

2017-07-09 19:50:56 UTC

fuck me that's bad

2017-07-09 19:51:25 UTC

Yeah their postmaster was ancient apparently

2017-07-09 19:51:32 UTC

Like 70 or something

2017-07-09 19:51:50 UTC

Some ridiculous age where people shouldn't be working anymore

2017-07-09 19:52:19 UTC

I think a lot of small town post offices end up like that

2017-07-09 19:52:34 UTC

Though the pay isn't too bad

2017-07-09 19:52:52 UTC

eh, a lot of stagnation if you get one of those jobs

2017-07-09 19:53:06 UTC

pay is good for when you're young, then you stay and become comfortable

2017-07-09 19:53:16 UTC

And the people who took a risk will pass you by mostly

2017-07-09 19:53:37 UTC

Seen it many times in government organizations, i've worked for some

2017-07-09 21:54:50 UTC

hi

2017-07-09 22:32:49 UTC

other people's money?

2017-07-09 22:33:15 UTC

the whole system of property exists because of the state protecting property rights

2017-07-09 22:33:36 UTC

which allow the capitalist to steal the labour of the worker and to give back only a fraction of it, in the form of the wages

2017-07-09 22:33:44 UTC

the one who uses other people's money is the capitalist

2017-07-09 22:59:03 UTC

^

2017-07-09 23:08:25 UTC

The capitalist does it with your permission, the state does it by the threat of a gun

2017-07-09 23:12:24 UTC

And if you make it easier for a worker to start his own business you give him the chance to be his own boss

2017-07-09 23:13:02 UTC

Business grants are great tbh, even though financial management classes are just better

2017-07-09 23:13:18 UTC

the capitalist does not do it with your permission, you are coerced by the economic system

2017-07-09 23:13:33 UTC

How so?

2017-07-09 23:13:43 UTC

you're not able to live a good life without working for a company, you have no ability to meaningfully negotiate wages

2017-07-09 23:13:50 UTC

coerced because it is simply better

2017-07-09 23:14:00 UTC

you're always at fear of being fired, etc. etc.

2017-07-09 23:14:06 UTC

You do if you have the skills

2017-07-09 23:14:08 UTC

@Deleted User That's not true at all

2017-07-09 23:14:28 UTC

Unemployment is at 4,5%, job creation is hitting new highs, wage growth is boosting

2017-07-09 23:14:31 UTC

Who would fire a good employee?

2017-07-09 23:14:42 UTC

You're always in risk of losing them to another company if anything

2017-07-09 23:14:50 UTC

unemployment % does not count people who have dropped out of the workforce

2017-07-09 23:14:56 UTC

It does

2017-07-09 23:15:01 UTC

no it does not

2017-07-09 23:15:17 UTC

There is payroll employment change in either way, so your argument is null

2017-07-09 23:15:20 UTC

that's literally how unemployment % is calculated and has always been

2017-07-09 23:15:47 UTC

that also does not include underemployment, wage growth not actually growing (it hasn't for the last, what? 40-50 years?)

2017-07-09 23:15:55 UTC

@Deleted User There is the U-6 which counts anyone who is unemployed, those seeking and not seeking job.

2017-07-09 23:16:12 UTC

It is at 8%, which is fairly low for the broad scope of the measure

2017-07-09 23:17:07 UTC

wages have not grown with either inflation or with productivity

2017-07-09 23:17:19 UTC

because the ability to negotiate wages lies solely in the hands of the employer

2017-07-09 23:17:21 UTC

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/308995540782284817/333748494638645249/united-states-wage-growth.png

2017-07-09 23:17:31 UTC

as an individual worker, you have no actual power

2017-07-09 23:17:40 UTC

Wage Growth in the United States averaged 6.26 percent from 1960 until 2017

2017-07-09 23:19:31 UTC

You can literally get more power by becoming a better worker

2017-07-09 23:19:42 UTC

fuck work

2017-07-09 23:19:46 UTC

Some people won't do well, that's a given

2017-07-09 23:20:04 UTC

yeah, you want to know something?

2017-07-09 23:20:12 UTC

But in trying to make their work guaranteed you lower productivity, increase cost

2017-07-09 23:20:14 UTC

there was more social mobility in the fucking medieval ages than today

2017-07-09 23:20:20 UTC

want to get more power as a worker?

2017-07-09 23:20:21 UTC

you don't

2017-07-09 23:20:26 UTC

want to get richer? you won't

2017-07-09 23:20:32 UTC

How was the mobility in the socialist countries?

2017-07-09 23:20:32 UTC

as a whole, it's impossible

2017-07-09 23:20:44 UTC

there wasn't mobility because that wasn't the god damn fucking point

2017-07-09 23:20:51 UTC

What system do you propose that is better than capitalism in terms of mobility

2017-07-09 23:20:54 UTC

it was to get rid of classes, you incipient moron

2017-07-09 23:21:00 UTC

So no one moves up?\

2017-07-09 23:21:05 UTC

every other system, basically

2017-07-09 23:21:08 UTC

Do you understand humans at all?

2017-07-09 23:21:10 UTC

capitalism has very little mobility

2017-07-09 23:21:19 UTC

what the fuck is up?

2017-07-09 23:21:22 UTC

more so than in any alternative

2017-07-09 23:21:37 UTC

People want to compete and want the prospect of being able to have it better

2017-07-09 23:21:42 UTC

The inflation average of US has been 3.81% since 1960, while wage growth remained at 6.26%. Therefore, real wages increased by roughly 2.50% yearly. Calling it as stagnant, as well as the increasing payroll jobs (no negative balance since 2009 crisis) as bad is just straight ignorance. @Deleted User

2017-07-09 23:21:43 UTC

That's how humans are

2017-07-09 23:22:33 UTC

Again, show me a system that promotes hard work better than capitalism

2017-07-09 23:23:53 UTC

In fact, it's worth noting that economic liberalism as a whole promoted prosperity on places like US (until 1913), Brazil (until the end of the Empire), Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Macau and others.

2017-07-09 23:24:13 UTC

for sure, I like Chile as an example

2017-07-09 23:24:28 UTC

Much better economy than other south american countries

2017-07-09 23:24:39 UTC

and why would they do better than a Brazil who has vast resources

2017-07-09 23:24:49 UTC

Chile isn't a prime example of liberalism (widespread cronyism on AFPs) but yes indeed

2017-07-09 23:25:02 UTC

It was under the pinochet rule

2017-07-09 23:25:15 UTC

I live in Brazil and I'll assure you that the lack of economic liberalism failed us

2017-07-09 23:25:18 UTC

Milton Friedman was involved in that economy

2017-07-09 23:25:29 UTC

Brazil has had liberal governments supported by the U.S. before

2017-07-09 23:25:38 UTC

the liberal government today is corrupt as fuck

2017-07-09 23:25:46 UTC

Wrong.

2017-07-09 23:25:48 UTC

It's a socialist government

2017-07-09 23:25:57 UTC

Temer isn't even allowed to run for office!

2017-07-09 23:26:01 UTC

Military government was keynesian and developmentalist

2017-07-09 23:26:20 UTC

It was a government owned company that had the corruption that overthrew that lady, forgot her name

2017-07-09 23:26:21 UTC

And Temer just assumed following the succession line. Anyone literate in politics knows that.

2017-07-09 23:26:29 UTC

Rousseff

2017-07-09 23:26:40 UTC

he got in through a coup and most of his cabinet is also under corruption charges

2017-07-09 23:26:55 UTC

He didn't coup anyone.

2017-07-09 23:27:02 UTC

oh, I get how you are now

2017-07-09 23:27:22 UTC

In fact, he was democratically elected because once Rousseff was elected, he was displayed as VP on the election board

2017-07-09 23:27:25 UTC

one of those dumb Brazilians who blame Rousseff for everything because they're fucking idiots who look at rich media

2017-07-09 23:27:29 UTC

Wrong.

2017-07-09 23:27:32 UTC

Still waiting for the dodged question: Again, show me a system that promotes hard work better than capitalism

2017-07-09 23:27:41 UTC

In fact, I'm one of the few guys who read more than MSM

2017-07-09 23:27:56 UTC

Temer has single-digit approval ratings

2017-07-09 23:28:05 UTC

So did Dilma.

2017-07-09 23:28:05 UTC

no one elected him to be president

2017-07-09 23:28:13 UTC

at least she was voted in

2017-07-09 23:28:22 UTC

she was actually less corrupt than most of the other politicians

2017-07-09 23:28:27 UTC

He was placed as VP by Dilma herself, and he was displayed on election board.

2017-07-09 23:28:29 UTC

She wasn't.

2017-07-09 23:28:34 UTC

which was a mistake by her

2017-07-09 23:28:52 UTC

''she should have been more corrupt'' lmao

2017-07-09 23:28:52 UTC

never trust a liberal

2017-07-09 23:28:59 UTC

She placed Lula da Silva as one of her ministers to block him from prison

2017-07-09 23:29:18 UTC

(he was our president from 2002 to 2010 and a pretty corrupt one btw)

2017-07-09 23:29:57 UTC

By knowing of his charges and placing him as a minister to intervene on Justice affairs, that's just plain corruption

2017-07-09 23:30:08 UTC

Or at least a case worthy of impeachment by power abuse

2017-07-09 23:31:20 UTC

In either way, since we started to talk about Temer, let's talk about his merits too: inflation fell from 9.5% in Rousseff's end to 3% now (and falling quickly)

2017-07-09 23:31:36 UTC

I don't think he's coming back soon lmao

2017-07-09 23:31:58 UTC

Jobless rates is finally falling and GDP growth showed an outstanding performance on Q1

2017-07-09 23:32:11 UTC

@Arash#4421

2017-07-09 23:32:36 UTC

lmao he left?

2017-07-09 23:32:43 UTC

He's done it before with me

2017-07-09 23:32:47 UTC

I love this discord

2017-07-09 23:33:15 UTC

still no answer to that question, dang

2017-07-09 23:36:37 UTC

Whats NKVD btw?

2017-07-09 23:38:59 UTC

Internal police force of Stalin USSR

2017-07-09 23:39:18 UTC

@Timo))) "show me a system that promotes hard work better than capitalism"?

2017-07-09 23:40:05 UTC

I wanna try and say tribal society, since if you create double as much you have double as much

2017-07-09 23:41:02 UTC

A tribal society is not possible anymore and vastly inferior in other aspects

2017-07-09 23:41:06 UTC

tfw after battling against the local tribe you die of common cold at the advanced age of 22 :anprim:

2017-07-09 23:41:07 UTC

correct

2017-07-09 23:41:36 UTC

ehm let's try, market socialism aka coops

2017-07-09 23:41:44 UTC

So I guess the claim is now that capitalism promotes more hard work than any other viable system

2017-07-09 23:41:48 UTC

Coops can exist on a capitalist society, really

2017-07-09 23:41:52 UTC

since you have a part of the profits

2017-07-09 23:42:12 UTC

I don't think those companies do too well

74,129 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev | Page 25/297 | Next