Vaush was that tiny dog that, when someone slams a door in the next county, starts barking and won't shut the fuck up for the next two weeks.

You can think on your opponent's clock. You can make a stupid move quickly to save time. You can choose where and when to spend your time. But nobody gets any more time than anyone else.

Indeed.

You guys watch the office ?

i don't

Damn

@SuperHeroDeluxe
>people have been tricked into thinking every distribution of wealth is socialist, nope
Redistribution of wealth is an essential part of the definition of socialism.

There are two fundamental ideas of socialism.
1) Redistribution of wealth
2) Collectivization of the means of production
Without either of those ideas, it can't possibly be socialist

"Redistribution of wealth" is a rather broad term and could mean any form of taxes.

Technically you could also collectivize property and that could perhaps be considered socialist as well (if it is done involuntarily), but since it is possible to surrender property *voluntarily* to the public, property going into public ownership is not neccessarily socialist, it can just be trade (capitalism) or a donation (neither capitalism nor socialism).

only if the taxes are used to provide goods to people

food stamps are redistribution

roads are not

No, redistribution of wealth is any form of redistribution, even when it happens upwards

depends on who you ask.

If the poor are taxed and all the spoils go to the rich, that's also socialist.

well yeah

that's what such systems always end up being

just look at any socialist nation <:transdank:462401354745249792>

I mean, if the poor are being taxed, the ones doing the taxation always *somehow* happen to be rich elite.

the rich elite are the ones doing the taxation everywhere in the first place aren't they?

Yes, the poor don't do taxation because they lack the means to do so

That's why capitalism actually *gasp* favors the poor

I have always thought that free markets (aka capitalism) is good for the poor.

They indeed are, in fact socialism hurts the poor the most

but people don't like it because "the rich have so much more!"
an arguement that I don't understand in the slightest.
(with out assumeing the worst in the person makeing the arguement)

Yeah it's a psychological effect that's been researched for a while, but with no definitive conclusion. There seems to be a trend that people at the bottom are more content with being poorer, but more equal, rather than richer, but less equal.

It's not an entirely proven concept though

well it's easy to get someone to agree to free stuff for them.

Yeah I mean to someone who doesn't know how wealth is created, or who needs to survive from day to day, "free stuff" surely sounds very good

One thing that desperately needs changing in the common perception is that wealth is a zero sum game

It's absolute not zero sum, and we can prove it by seeing how much wealthier capitalist-leaning nations have become over time.

that would be nice, but I don't think that would change most peoples thoughts on takeing more form a class they will never be in.

In fact all nations all over the world have become wealthier over time.

And that includes the people ate the bonttom

funny enough, it is basic math that says wealth grows.
we mine more form the ground every day, we find more use for the 'waste' every day.

Yep, efficiency has gone up a lot

speaking of, people need to chill with worrying about land fills.

right now i work hauling stuff into a land fill, they get something like 100 loads a day, most being full sized trucks.
you can't see the landfill unless you are above the tree line and even then, it would just look like a hill.

there is also next to no litter on the road leading up to it, it is all cought by the fence around the hill.

Unfortunately I've only ever learned one perspective about landfills, so idk how relevant they are atm