/jp/ - 2D/Random

spam

(((They))) also tell you that gorillions were killed in the Soviet era despite population growth and increase in living conditions, life expectancy and other indicators. It really makes you think doesn't it

spam

even the fucking CCP admitted the great chinese famine was caused by mao's complete retardation and was man made yet whatmin will still defend shit like peasants melting their farming tools to increase iron production and then promptly starving or killing sparrows causing an ecological disaster

also most multi-million death tolls are corroborated by mainland chinese authors/universities i guess they're part of the evil western propaganda machine too, you fucking dumb fuck

check this out

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutter_oil

You get to be a neet thanks to our capitalist utopia whatmin but if we were under a communist regime what do you think your job would be

>>639076
Mao acknowledging there is localized food shortages != 45 gorillion famine.

They had videos and cameras, we have plenty videos and images, yet we have virtually no images of starving people.

Of course I'm sure somewhere some people starved in China, but the western narrative of what happened is as real as me editing a picture of Eugenia Cooney into the Dust Bowl and claiming FDR/capitalism killed gorillions of Americans.

If you ask Chinese people today about it, people who literally lived through that time period even, they won't know what the fuck you're talking about. Ironically westerners response to this would be "omg so brainwashed"…

>>639085
I get to be a NEET because I'm essentially an aristocrat/noble, without the status and pussy.

>>639078
Number 15, Burger King foot lettuce…

spam

>>639088
No, you would be harvesting potatoes at gunpoint until your fingers bleed

>>639092
Did you know they literally gave people free land?

I'm serious, imagine the government taking farm land owned by some rich parasite like Bill Gates, and giving it to you, FOR FREE.

That is literally what happened. It was called "land reform". Oh no government, please don't give me FREE real estate, or live in a commune with tons of pussy to fuck and pals to chum around with! Noooooooooooo

never mind the hundreds of millions communism killed directly or indirectly

THE GORILLIONS

is that your whole argument? people died I am an incomparable homo?

>>639177
50 cents has been withdrawn from your account.

>>639178
100 million people have been killed and you justified it because Elon has too much money and ironic Twitter guy who also justifies 100 million people being killed made a meme about Elon being bad. You don't care about poor people, you just hate rich people. You are basically a flat earther except on top of being in denial, you have morally corrupt reasons for being in denial

How about you read the open society and its enemies

>>639194
I justify it because all passive income schemes are actually theft.

Money is a zero-sum game, it's like you're trapped in a cage fighting over cake, and if you take more cake, it means other people have less cake.

The only exception is when The Fed bakes more cake and dumps it in the cage.

Zero-sum, if you make money, someone else lost money. So all these people making money by not working, are actually taking it from other people.

>read the open society and its enemies
Pfft bwahaha

>>639196
Your model doesn't even work on a basic level and you should understand it by having seen attempts at its implementation. It will lose to the superior capitalism every time, though I can draw exceptions for things that should be public anyway like railroad systems, and I have no idea why the elon in your limp wristed ironic twitter guy meme has any say in what California as a whole does.
Money in itself does absolutely nothing. Capitalism is not a zero-sum game, and everyone serious understands this. If you have two guys and one bakes bread, gives it to another guy in exchange for IOU notes, and then the other guy grows carrots and gives them to the other guy for the notes, you have baked bread and carrots added to the economy with both getting what they want. If you call this being at the expense of one another, then this would is like saying 'you can't get something for nothing' which is true for absolutely any system, and the real question you should be asking of an economy is not whether it can get something from nothing, but whether it is more efficient such that over time more of these goods and services are produced to meet needs. Capitalism will beat communism at that every single time because in communism, what amounts to a single company pretends it can effectively manage this better than tens of millions of companies can, and then a sociopath kills all the limp wristed ironic guys and uses the system to make himself the effective owner of everything. And by communism I mean socialism because communism is impossible.

The government comes into the picture by forcing you to pay tax, which gives money a backing to its value and controls for inflation. Everyone is forced to pay tax so has no choice but to own some currency to pay it, which means everyone wants money, which gives it a backing to its value that makes it more than a meme built of belief like teencoin. The government could just print more than money, but they need to keep inflation under control.

"Passive income" is what enables much of this efficiency. If you need to grow your company which will contribute to the overall value (in goods and services) produced over time but you don't have enough upfront money to do it, you can sell some of your future money in the form of shares. Then the person who bought it can sell it later as the value of your business grows, earning them money for 'doing nothing'. However, that person ran the risk of your company failing, and their profit is a compensation for that risk. Anyone who buys the share down the line is contributing to the value of that share, since if the share could not be sold, it would not be able to generate profit from the guy who bore the risk, and likewise everyone who buys it risks the company going under, and foregoes being able to purchase goods or services with that money in the short term, and also exposes it to base rate loss from inflation.

Limiting income to whatever your retarded communist mind would consider not passive means the economy has to behave at retard stone level and can never hope to compete with an actual economy.

>>639306
There's a saying;

"It's easier to imagine the end of the world, than the end of capitalism".

Your post is an example. Like your example of businesses needing money from investors/creditors, because that's how our current system works. You literally can't even imagine any radically different alternative system.

You ironically list flaws in your own system, as reasons why no other system could work.

Imagine going up to pre-colonial Native American tribes, and telling them their way of life can't work because they never invented fiat currency and debt, and raised the age of consent to 18 or else you would create cages to put people in. They'd think you're PREDICTABLE. Because you are, you are North Korea tier brainwashed in a mass psychosis.

i thought north korea was supposed to be good

spam

North Korea was never good, it's all propaganda

do
you
really
expect
me
to
read
all
that
shit
by
you

>>639478
+100 social credit bing chilling