still lying and denying that you said it

And you're going to post that cropped screen again, American?

Textbook burger.

citation needed lmap. like im gone read all your bs back. no one reads what you say you know

Coked.

Lastly, asserting that resource limitations cannot be dealt with is not a proof that they cannot be dealt with.

You clearly said it, no explation. no variable. even the "have enough resources" is a fallacy as resources are finite. and you are still talking

Resources are not *eternally fixed*.

your back peddal said you are free as a communist if there are enoufgh resources

now you say that there arent

so you arent free "to do what ever you want"

No, I clearly said that it's about expanding the pool of resources.

but resources are finite dummy

And I never argued about 'being free to do whatever one wants'.

It is about *becoming* like that...

you forget this as you are to bussy ranting

*This* is what you fail to grasp.

Yes, they are, but they are not *fixed*.

You literally said it

you are now lying about what you said

In fact, potentially, we could tend towards an infinity.

by magic?

brb

'Magic', he says, when I already mentioned things like geothermal engineering, mining and so on.

You've proved again that you aren't bothering to read what I'm saying.

```
You harped up some time ago and said that resources cannot be expanded. Why not? What do you think recycling, mining, geothermal and the entire 'primary sector' even is? Where do they get much of what they produce? It is certainly not that which we have already used up.
We are surrounded by resources, and we are forever becoming more efficient in using those resources. If not, capitalism would be long dead. Without a way of constantly revolutionising the means of production, which means using more resources to a greater degree of efficiency to perform that revolutionising, it cannot continue to be profitable. No new value is introduced.
There needs to be new value otherwise there would be less and less value in economies over time due to things going missing and breaking down.
So there is room to expand our resources, meaning that there is less of an excuse to politically fight over what exists in economies.```

**We face a potential infinity of resources, *not an actual infinity which is accessible to us here and now*.**

***But the limitation of what we have now is not what we will forever have.***

If we have no more resources to accumulate, then capitalism will die along with us. Things will wear out.

If we have a constant level of resources, then commodity production will become meaningless as we could still make technologies using what we have which would allow us to forget markets altogether and use a resource distribution system. Capitalism would still die.

But we do not have a constant level of resources, and there is no reason to suspect that we cannot keep growing that pool of resources.

You say 'resources are finite', and I agree, but potentially-speaking this is not the case. There is no reason to suspect that we cannot keep expanding the pool.

So the problem of stepping on each other's toes to fight for resources is not something that will go away all at once. I never said that they will.

Seriously, I have never once suggested that there is a final and absolute state of freedom!

Lol changing subject to resources possibly being infinite

Yes, because *that*'s what I've been saying the whole time.

I did not say that they would not be finite at any given time.

I also did not say that building freedom could occur all at once.

lol no you werent

Quote me, then!

you said that communismy is doing what ever you want,, you backpeddaled later with "if there are enough resources" no it is "create a bigger pool of resources"