the fucking word capitilism is giving me a spelling disorder

true capitalism is a live and well

bruh

that's a small fraction of it

tiny fraction

of the bigger picture

it doesn't make it not capitalism

cool that you worked for small to medium companies that came from nothing

that's like 1% of either capitalism

it's called free enterprise

I never said it wasn't capitalism <:GWcfcThonk:357907199928041473>

then I don't know how you see that as not genuine

because under genuine capitalism those companies would have had no rules to abide to and could potentially have been fucked out of the market through industrial espionage or other means

if this case whatever true might mean seems trivial to the reality that people can start their own productive profit generating systems on their own free will

that's why we had great people like ricardo draft the first ideas of a proper free market

outlining the role of the state as being as little as possible but at minimum the protection of the consumer's rights

which was a completely foreign concept to the previous capitalists

to quote ricardo himself: "Beware of capitalists"

I've never worked for a company that received government subsidies or loans, only loans from people looking to make a profit on said loans

because free market wasn't the same as capitalism back then

who the fuck mentioned subsidies or loans <:GWcfcThonk:357907199928041473>

I don't know how you could know someone who made a million dollar company out of nothing and say "that's not TRUE capitalism"

whatever the true part means must be utterly trivial and pedantic

true = original

the stuff ricardo and other free-marketeers warned about when they said that capitalism is to be feared and that a free-market is much better

you are getting way too hung up on just the core principles of capitalism which noone ever attacked

what I just explained is a free market, the fact that the company had to abide by certain laws or regulations doesn't seem to make the capital generation any less "true"

the point was whether capitalism would starve people

the answer is a resounding yes, only that we had the time to adapt it in ways that would be much better to the people below it

in what sense would it starve people?

there is no reason why we should introduce communism, a system not as developed that would inevitably lead to poverty and famines in the hope that we would one day refine it as much as capitalism

you're saying that no one would come up with the idea of providing high calorie meals at very low costs in a "true capitalist" system?

because I would imagine the opposite

because that's literally what it did for most of its early existence

the only reason why people managed to survive is because they created food themselves

if you're talking about prior to the industrial revolution then I hardly see how that's relevant

yes I am

because that is the time it took for capitalism to develop

and the whole point is

we shouldn't introduce an unrefined communist system

if we already have a capitalist one