I did okay, because I took opportunities presented to me, and didn't expect people to hand me things for nothing.

forcing businesses to raise wages is exactly what large corporations want to happen because its easy for them to foot the bill of a wage rate hike.

@LC we would have fought for you too

thats why larger corporations back the laws all the time.

I don't want you "fighting for me"

That's unfortunate

I don't want government running my fucking life.

I'll keep my freedom to make my own choices, and do business with who I want, thanks.

and I don't want "daddy government" stepping in between who I want to give my MONEY to

Not everyone has that freedom

Oh okay

Yes. EVERYONE has that freedom. If you have two arms and two legs, you have that freedom.

@LC how do you feel about reddits treatment of t_d?

irrelevant to the conversation

Answer the question

Unless you live in communism, then if you don’t work you get a bullet to the back of the head

Communism is having no government

<:obamaprism:647952829125885962>

You're thinking of USSR authoritarian state socialism

what

lmaooooooooooooo and who enforces not having a government

Friedrick Hayek made the case very simply:

Socialism and freedom are NOT compatible.
There is absolutely no difference between the taking away of economic liberty and the taking away of political liberty.
If the government controls the means of production - your ability to live, earn, and feed yourself, they have control over you, and thus will control the political climate. Whoever you vote at that point won't matter.

If you are essentially a tyranny because you have direct control over the people, you can't be voted out.

As they said in the Soviet Union, "We pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us"

Lol ok

Define socialism @LC

Government control over the means of production

> Friedrick Hayek made the case very simply:
>
> Socialism and freedom are NOT compatible.
> There is absolutely no difference between the taking away of economic liberty and the taking away of political liberty.
> If the government controls the means of production - your ability to live, earn, and feed yourself, they have control over you, and thus will control the political climate. Whoever you vote at that point won't matter.
>
> If you are essentially a tyranny because you have direct control over the people, you can't be voted out.
>
> As they said in the Soviet Union, "We pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us"
@LC beautifully said

Nope

tfw your family lived in the DDR

That's one kind of socialism, but not all kinds of socialism

Wrong

I know you tards like to call it "social ownership," but "social" is government.

It requires no more government than any other law

Democratic Socialism is communism. Change my mind

social ownership doesnt mean you get to own or have a say in how anything works. its just verbal sleight of hand.

FALSE

Man it’s strange watching this debate. Been a long time since I’ve actually been privy to a leftist debating in real time

Stop pretending you with your elementary level definition of socialism know more about what constitutes my own ideology than I do

anyone watching the live stream of Trump meeting the bankers?

e l e m e n t a r eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Socialism ABSOLUTELY requires dramatic expansion of government power, and subsequently a reduction in YOUR civil rights, SPECIFICALLY the ownership of private property.

You can argue that socialism always results is government control, but socialism itself is not necessarily government control