Capitalism rewards individuals arbitrarily and is antithetical to evolution

and accept it as soon as the asshat is dead

>Evolution is exposed as a meme every time it is tested objectively.
>My brain is exposed as a meme every time it is tested objectively.
FTFY

Also, since you have a pea sized brain, I think wikipedia should be enough for you
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

Doubt you will be able to understand any of the papers related to the long term e-coli experiment.

>Real capitalism has never even been tried!
I'll bite. Why do you say that? Rather, what would it take for real capitalism to be implemented?
>Fuck fake capitalism we need to abolish welfare and free education
Hmmmm. You've got my almonds activated. Please elaborate more on your idea of ideal capitalism.

Why do you say it's arbitrary?

>makes original argument about evolution
>gets BTFO
>Humans discovered farming more than 12,000 years ago. We've long gone off the path of evolution.
Just kys.

>Why do you say it's arbitrary?
>Humans discovered farming more than 12,000 years ago. We've long gone off the path of evolution. Capitalism tries to replicate a jungle environment in a world where 1 billion people grow crops sufficient to feed 7.2 billion people. Thus, 6.2 billion people receive rewards that are arbitrary in nature.

Lysenkoism is still prevelant thought in the various institutions. All this one human race is an extension of that thought. Though they gave up trying to apply that to basic plant life like turning wheat into rye and other crazy shit.

Because not everyone gets a wholly equal amount while they butt fuck each other in peace and harmony.

Why did you sign your post?

>makes original argument about evolution
Capitalism is antithetical to evolution was my assertion, yes, this is true.
>gets BTFO
Why? Because some faggot said communism is antithetical to evolution without proof?
>>Humans discovered farming more than 12,000 years ago. We've long gone off the path of evolution.
How is this contradictory to me saying capitalism is antithetical to evolution?
>Just kys.
I don't kill myself because retards want me to.

No one cares faggot, kill yourself.

>Capitalism
Human needs are simple. Air, Water, Food, and Shelter.
All of these things are free in America, under capitalism.
Men who want more than the basics, work for it.

Women are attracted to successful men, and they choose to have their babies, thus ensuring the continuation of the species.

>Why did you sign your post?
Kek. This was a good riposte faggot.

>No one cares faggot, kill yourself.
>No one cares about my faggotiness. I should kill myself.
FTFY.

>Human needs are simple. Air, Water, Food, and Shelter.
>All of these things are free in America, under the petrodollar which transfers wealth from other nations to America simply because America bullies Saudi Arabia to sell oil in dollars.
FTFY.
>Women are attracted to successful men
So I take it you're single?

Do not reply to troll threads.
Sage, Report, Move on.

>Do not reply to troll threads.
>Sage, Report, Move on.
Don't forget to sage in the options field.

Also, you don't have any arguments faggot.

>So I take it you're single?
No, I have 5 white children.

I see your point, but a system doesn't have to distribute wealth equally.
A system could be set up to delibrately distribute wealth unequally based on some factor.
The statement capitalism rewards people arbitrarly is itself arbitrarly and vague. You could make any argument to make it true or false depending on your point of view.
Also, when OP is not referring to the antithesis of evolution, I assume it's not referring to biological evolution; survival of the fittest.

So capitalism is fare and we all have an equal chance of becoming rich... Got it.

>So I take it you're single?
>No, I have 5 white children.
Are any of them yours?

>So capitalism is fare and we all have an equal chance of becoming rich... Got it.
No. That's the other extreme. A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve - that does not mean everyone is equally rich - it certainly means some will get more than others. The point here is not communism is better than capitalism. The argument is that Capitalism is not a fair system and it rewards individuals arbitrarily.

communism rewards a small group of elites, genocides the middle class, and leaves the poor in much deeper poverty.

under capitalism, "poverty" is eating steak dinners every night with your EBT card

>it rewards individuals arbitrarily.
But isn't this technically fare since everyone has a chance at getting rewarded. You are essentially arguing that a random lottery is unfair because some people win sometimes.

>communism rewards a small group of elites, genocides the middle class, and leaves the poor in much deeper poverty.
>Capitalism rewards a small group of elites, genocides the middle class in the long run, and leaves the hard-working in much deeper poverty since they have to continuously work more and more just to maintain the same standard of living.
FTFY

>under capitalism, "poverty" is eating steak dinners every night with your EBT card
>under capitalism, "poverty" is eating steak dinners every night with your EBT card since other principled and moral individuals put in more effort so that you can leech off of them.
FTFY.

Not surprising that you "it takes a village" folks question paternity. Yes, they are all mine.

>The argument is that Capitalism is not a fair system and it rewards individuals arbitrarily.
How? If you have a good idea you can make money off it. How is it arbitrary?

north korea, cuba, venuzuela, USSR.
vs
USA.

Anyone who honestly supports communism has brain damage. It's been tried a dozen times, and has ended up enslaving the population every time. go live in venuzuela fucktard. the entire country is STARVING

Communism literally denies evolution, (Lysenkoism), so it's obvious you don't know a lot about it. Here's the truth, capitalism is fully compatible with evolution.
>b-but capitalism isn't evolution because w-we know how to f-farm n shiet
Then having any form of agricultural society AT ALL is against evolution, which it obviously isn't.

>it rewards individuals arbitrarily.
>But isn't this technically fare since everyone has a chance at getting rewarded.
You're trolling right? Everyone having the same chance of success is fair. Everyone having a wildly different chance of success is not fair.
>You are essentially arguing that a random lottery is unfair because some people win sometimes.
In a random lottery, everyone has the same chance of winning - roughly equal to 1 by the number of lotteries. In Capitalism, different individuals have different probabilities of success depending on their race, gender, and social standing.

Actually, forget gender. I don't care much about women not having equal opportunities to men since they're more important in preserving a race and are thus more valuable as human incubators than laborers in the workforce.

Having said that, if you eliminated the estate tax, eliminated preferential treatment to individuals based on their social standing, then perhaps capitalism would be fair.

However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.

That's not how it works in nature.

I can sort of agree. As the saying goes, life is not fair. Or maybe it's more like finding meaning in life regardless of the circumstances.
As far as giving people what they deserve that is arbitrary. There is no such standard to measure against. What is true for one person may not be true for another.

>Yes, they are all mine.
>My 5 kids are all mine
But how do you know?

explain how china is communist

Nothing is left to chance, kiddo. That's called gambling. We all have opportunity to be rewarded for hard work, unlike communism, where you only get a little for your effort.

Don't confuse capitalism with having a "job" laboring for the benefit of others, is the root of communism. Never trade your labor for less than it's full value. Working to make your boss rich, is worse than slavery.

>If you have a good idea you can make money off it. How is it arbitrary?
How can you say all good ideas make money in a capitalistic market? Facebook makes tons of money but it also leads to social decay - would you say it's a good idea. Besides, how many good ideas have arisen without the help of external investment? There's always an element of risk involved - and by definition, risk implies luck. So by definition, all individuals who have succeeded in capitalism were lucky - because the risks they took paid off. Now, the question is did all of them work hard to get there with luck? Some yes, but some no. Is Kim Kardashian a hard working individual, in your opinion?

>north korea, cuba, venuzuela, USSR.
>vs
>USA.
Pic is for bait retard, but the point on capitalism still holds. Fucking learn to argue faggot.

why do you ignore the inhumanity of millions slaughtered by your stupid idea?
Threating the lives of everyone doesn't matter because you don't want to get a job?

>Is Kim Kardashian a hard working individual, in your opinion?
She certainly can entertain some people.

>We all have opportunity to be rewarded for hard work
So if you were born in a Ghetto black community with constant drive bys and shootouts, you would be in the same position you are today? Luck played no part in you being where you are?

i did. With actual evidence of what happens when your stupid idea is put into practice. Everyone in the middle class is slaughtered, and a new ruling class rules over the burnt remains of the nation.
then the country suffers for decades as they have no work ethic.

>MY magic idea of communism hasn't been tried yet

>In a random lottery, everyone has the same chance of winning - roughly equal to 1 by the number of lotteries. In Capitalism, different individuals have different probabilities of success depending on their race, gender, and social standing.
So it isn't arbitrarily then.

>Having said that, if you eliminated the estate tax, eliminated preferential treatment to individuals based on their social standing, then perhaps capitalism would be fair.
But what if the parents of the kids wanted to spend their lives to make their kid's lives better? Milton Friedman goes into how this concept creates a stable society based on family values rather then a society where every spends all their money on wasteful bullshit before they die.

>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.
Do you know what part of modern capitalism is forming these monopolies? It's funny how they only started showing up once the government started regulating the market.

>Democratic communism.

I prefer democratic absolute monarchy.

>why do you ignore the inhumanity of millions slaughtered by your stupid idea?
The fact that you have nothing but to go against communism shows to me that you have no argument against capitalism being an arbitrary system.

>>Is Kim Kardashian a hard working individual, in your opinion?
>She certainly can entertain some people.
I don't know if you're trolling right now. So if Olga works hard, opens a shop, and is not willing to whore herself out, pose nude, and release a sex tape, and she wants to be chaste and honorable, she should be awarded less than Kim Kardashian? Really? I mean there are limits to trolling.

>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others.

so not arbitrarily

niggers are a terrible example because they expose the myth of "equality". they're not, and do not deserve an equal opportunity

Every system ran by humans is to some degree arbitrary as far as I can tell.

Communism is even more arbitrary than capitalism since the redistribution happens along a made up criteria of equality

>i did. With actual evidence of what happens when your stupid idea is put into practice.
I say pic is for bait, and you go back to communism? So you don't have any arguments against capitalism being an arbitrary system, do you? Didn't think so brainlet.
>MY magic idea of communism hasn't been tried yet
Weak attempt to troll faggot. Learn to be more subtle when you troll next time.

>Communism literally denies evolution
I have to disagree with you there.
Communism leads to misery and suffering.
Humans have a tendency to comiserate, thus communism results in a lot of inbreeding sad lonely people.
Inbreeding results in mutations, and not all of them bad, a small percentage of mutations are actually beneficial to humanity. Not X-men, but improvement, and or evolution.

>So if you were born in a Ghetto black community with constant drive bys and shootouts, you would be in the same position you are today?
If this is detrimental to black communities then why do they do this to themselves, unlike even the poorest white communities.

The west has stopped encouraging evolution, but it's because we have added more communism to our system. For evolution I'd provide only for my family. In our current system I provide gibs for every illiterate who keeps breeding, competing with myself.

Your morals are arbitrary.
Do you want people to see your point of view based on what you think is right?

Internalized racism

>blah blah blah I have brain damage
you sat behind your marvel of human engineering, where we made the laws of physics bend to our will and give us instant global communication, while you have an array of hundreds of spices and foods to choose from at insanely low prices.
where a few hundred years ago you'd have to eat the same shit every day with no spices and die of dysentary at age 17.

i don't have to argue for capitalism, because anyone whose not a snotty 13 year old can see how great it is.

it's not arbitrary, because the ONLY way to implement communism is through slaughter. there's no way to grow it naturally, because it is built on corecion.

Capitalism is built on cooperation, where people can willingly agree to trade or disagree.

Stalin was traitor to communism, only Tito knew the real way of communism. Stalinist filth will be sent to Goli Otok on vacation

I'm not trolling. Entertainers have more value than people who operate shops. Anybody can make a shop, not everybody can be a good entertainer. As a Catholic I think there should be some sort of control over what is promoted in the media,so obviously porn should be banned.

>arbitrarily
I dont think you know what that word means. Capitalism rewards you for working. I guess to a commie the concept of work is arbitrary

Let's slaughter all the Jews and than we can talk economics.

>Capitalism rewards you for working.
*Exploits

> A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
How is this fair at all? Sounds like you are trying to force unnatural standards on us.

So internalized racism is blacks killing other blacks?

Not an argument. I work I get money. I call it a reward and so do the majority of humans alive. How is it arbitrary if I literally have to put in labor to extract value?

Yes

this desu

Capitalism rewards merit and competence.

Only worthless, lazy fucks want to be rewarded for doing nothing.

Create value or fuck off and die.

yeah even niggers hate niggers

>In a random lottery, everyone has the same chance of winning - roughly equal to 1 by the number of lotteries. In Capitalism, different individuals have different probabilities of success depending on their race, gender, and social standing.
>So it isn't arbitrarily then.
Oooh hooo. Good one user, but since you're retarded, let me point out why you're assertion falls short. In the same post you just cited, here's what I said at the end
>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.

Yes, if everyone had the same chance to succeed, forever and ever, it wouldn't be arbitrary. However, those who win at the start, keep on winning in capitalism and that makes the system arbitrary - you don't know who wins at the start and the effects cannot be reversed.

But nice try at a strawman. Top kek.

>But what if the parents of the kids wanted to spend their lives to make their kid's lives better?
Yeah, I made a mistake here. I meant to say make the estate tax a 100%, and not eliminate it. But coming to your point, yeah, that's fine. I'm fine with parents spending money on kids education to improve their chance of success. That doesn't make the system outright unfair. What makes it unfair is inheritence and continued support and opportunities from parents.

we need to remove all trade restrictions and deregulate all industries. no minimum wages, no licences. this can be achieved while maintaining personal responsibility.

So when and how are you going to insert "blame whitey" into this?

>I call it a reward
Call it what you want, you still aren't getting what your labour is worth

Love it when faggots who never lived in a socialist country shit-talk communism.Keep it up, child.

Another edgy kid thinking that real communism hasn't been tried. There were 39 communist countries, and guess what: we have only 5 now.
Are they rich and prosperous? No.

>Do you know what part of modern capitalism is forming these monopolies? It's funny how they only started showing up once the government started regulating the market.
That's not true user. In fact, the reason why monopolies form is because competition cannot arise as quickly as it's cannibalized by large companies.

>>Democratic communism.
>I prefer democratic absolute monarchy.
With a capitalist system? That's still fucked up.

You're right but the answer is fascism not communism.

>Are they rich and prosperous? No
They were worse before

Yes I am. Because individually my labor is worthless. It takes a manager to put my work together, and his worth is the sum of our labor. If I don't like this I can become my own boss.

Now explain how
>A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
Makes sense because this is another retarded assertion which you will no doubt not be able to support.

>Capitalism rewards individuals arbitrarily and is antithetical to evolution
Are you retarded

This. The entire economy is a fucking racket. If we brought RICO charges the entire country would shutdown.

>so not arbitrarily
Do you have a short attention span, or is this your pathetic attempt at trolling? Why don't you read the full post you faggot. Since you're an ADHD faggot, here let me complete the green text for you so that you can claim your bullshit question again
>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.

100% estate tax just means a new class of trust fund babies (who control the communist state) get to benefit when anyone dies.
it doesn't eliminate the class structure. This corruption is well documented in countries that tried communism.
Some people will always be better than others. That's how evolution works. survival of the fittest.

>Arbitrarily

Life is essentially arbitrary. What works for one person will possibly not work for another. The fairest solution is randomness that can be effected based on actions of those within the system.

If it's such a good system why did it collapse?

>Capitalism rewards individuals arbitrarily and is antithetical to evolution
It rewards them based on their ability. People who have useful skills that are in high demand and intelligence will succeed under a capitalist system.
Big companies become increasingly inefficient and inevitably will become unprofitable to run and simply collapse. That is, unless the government bails it out, at which point you dont even have a free market.
This^

Do you think massive amounts of government regulation that companies need their own lawyers to do helps the small businesses who can't easily afford lawyers or the big businesses that have teams of lawyers?

I'm starting understand why Pinochet tossed you commies out of helicopters. Your stupidity is incurable and the only solution is to execute you all before you ruin another country.

I kill Jews and steal their shekels. I feel well paid for my labor.

>arbitrarily
make a statement to back this otherwise your argument is not actually an argument.

Also, why would Communism not be the same thing as turning an entire country into a single monopoly?

>capitalism is literally controlling what mother nature does

l m f a o

Just ask for a specific, exact and quantifiable definition of "fair" and what is "deserved" by each. This is where commie central planning collapses, every time.

>Because individually my labor is worthless.
>Being this cucked

>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.

so not arbitrarily

>niggers are a terrible example because they expose the myth of "equality". they're not, and do not deserve an equal opportunity
I can't argue with people who think some people deserve to succeed more than others.

Right, becaue remembering the days when you had to wait hours in line to get rolls of toilet paper is shit-talk.

>So if you were born in a Ghetto black community with constant drive bys and shootouts,

I wasn't born in the ghetto, but I was bused to a High school that was 65% black. I know what CNN tells you on tv, but thats a bunch of bullshit. My classmates and I started a business together. We went our separate ways, but keep in touch, and they are successful to this day. The color of your skin, and your environment doesn't hold you back.

try running a business all by yourself. have you even had a job before?
Central planning is the idea that one guy with all the power won't be greedy. And the idea that 1 guy knows how to allocate wealth better than millions of people making dozens of market decisions a day.

Also, to clarify why rewarding people based on their intelligence and ability is good:
People of higher merit will be disproportionately more productive than people of lower merit. Not only they are able to acquire the biggest amount of wealth in a capitalist system, they will also use that wealth efficiently, leading to greater economic productivity.

...

>Every system ran by humans is to some degree arbitrary as far as I can tell.
That's true.
>Communism is even more arbitrary than capitalism since the redistribution happens along a made up criteria of equality
Pic is for bait, but your assertion is as wrong as it can come. Centrally planned economies, when done right, are actually fair. However, I don't think communism can be implemented politically. It has to come from a genetic evolution in mankind - the desire to care for your fellow human beings - and when everyone's genetically predisposed to doing that, communism will be the natural form of governance - you won't need to implement it politically.

LMAO

These are not arguments. My individual labor is worthless, if I disagree I can be my own boss. Which will then enable me to earn MORE, because a boss is worth more.

Now explain
>A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
Please.

>I can't argue with people who think some people deserve to succeed more than others.
That's not the same thing as "people aren't created equal". People aren't created equal, that's a natural reality that all biological evidence shows. This doesn't mean that we think that niggers don't deserve their own success. I'd be happy if they were successful. I love to see self made black people who are winning at life. If all niggers were like this then I'd have zero problem with them at all.

>Capitalism rewards individuals
True, everything else in your sentence is literally the opposite of reality.

>Rewards
Pic related

SAGE faggot LARP thread

>some people deserve to succeed more than others
This is an undeniable fact of life. I dont see you trolling the savanna to make sure the king lion shares will all the scrawny hungry ones. Don't they deserve to succeed as well?

oh i know, comrade

>If this is detrimental to black communities then why do they do this to themselves, unlike even the poorest white communities.
Genetic user. Whites genetically kept only those black slaves who were emotional, short-term thinkers, because they're easy to control. For the black community to be normal, either they have to genocide all other tribes in order to gain a top position from where they can start breeding individuals who think in the long term - or they have to be given crutches to do so - which will never work. So they're forever fucked in the U.S.

>For evolution I'd provide only for my family.
So all the roads, power, gas, and water you use, you got them yourself? And those dang commies are taking away all your hard work?

Man, there's a limit to where retardedness can be amusing. God bless your heart.

so who is going to plan the central economy? how are you going to keep them from being more successful than others?
They have control of all the resources, why won't the give it mostly to themselves?

>Whites genetically kept only those black slaves who were emotional, short-term thinkers, because they're easy to control. For the black community to be normal, either they have to genocide all other tribes in order to gain a top position from where they can start breeding individuals who think in the long term - or they have to be given crutches to do so - which will never work. So they're forever fucked in the U.S.
So black people are fucked in the USA because of genetics but you want to take money from productive people and give it to them to waste anyways?

> inherit millions. business contacts, etc.
> hire people to run your business
> merit and competence
Fuck off with your cut-rate fairy tales.

...

>So all the roads, power, gas, and water you use, you got them yourself? And those dang commies are taking away all your hard work?
Is there a demand for these things? If there is then there will be a supply because people can make money off selling them. If their isn't a demand then why are we forced to pay for them.

>blah blah blah I have brain damage
No need to project.
>you sat behind your marvel of human engineering, where we made the laws of physics bend to our will and give us instant global communication, while you have an array of hundreds of spices and foods to choose from at insanely low prices.
Thread is about capitalism being arbitrary, and you continue to rail against communism. Ok, I'll bite. All these innovations you've mentioned, did humans survive before them? Or are the innovations you mention absolutely necessary for human survival? If they're not necessary, then it makes no difference if I have a phone or not. As long as I have food to eat and a basic shelter to live in, everything else on top is an evolutionary luxury that cripples me and my progeny in the long run.
>it's not arbitrary, because the ONLY way to implement communism is through slaughter.
Ok, never mind. I'm tired of your trolling. It's not subtle and extremely boring.

...

I have actually written quite a bit on how capitalism is inherently dysgenic. I wonder if I should publish the writings?

How about you stop hiding behind a meme flag and show yourself? I bet you are a mutt or worse, an Oльгинeц.

Quit dodging my questions please

grow up and get a job before talking about "rewards" retard

>I can't argue with people who think some people deserve to succeed more than others.
Doesn't that go for you as well? Communism doesn't really reward people who stray from the template. You can't really have diversity, when everyone is forced to think, act and do the same things as everyone else.
Doesn't this stagnation of the mind also lead to an evolutionary stasis? In the worst case scenario it might lead to devolution (biologically), and in the best case to devolution (politically).

>I'm not trolling. Entertainers have more value than people who operate shops
And why is that? What evolutionary purpose do entertainers serve? Does Kim Kardashian's sex tape fill my stomach? Does it keep me warm at night? Then why do we give it so much importance?

Low level evolutionary addictions user. Modern capitalism is built around exploiting the evolutionary trait of humans - curiosity, desire to be famous to gather more resources, willingness to work hard - for profit.
>Anybody can make a shop,
Can you? How many people do you know who run successful shops?
>As a Catholic I think there should be some sort of control over what is promoted in the media,so obviously porn should be banned.
Why? Because you're a Catholic? You're thinking is so basic that it's amusing.

...

if you spent 10 minutes of life 500 years ago, you'd come crawling back on your hands and knees begging for your old life back. if you want to live in poverty so bad, Venuzuela and Cuba would let you in.
I'm not trolling. No one wants communism, so your only way to get it is by killing. Why not start your own little communist group and watch it grow in popularity? You can't because you need other people's money to operate your stupid scheme.

>everything else on top is an evolutionary luxury that cripples me and my progeny in the long run.
So you want hunter-gather society to come back and somehow this is communism?

>> A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
>How is this fair at all?
Hehehe. How weak is your troll?
>Sounds like you are trying to force unnatural standards on us.
In nature, wolves hunt pigs. Not the other way around. In capitalism, once pigs control the market, only pigs keep controlling the market irrespective of whether wolves keep breeding better wolves or not.

That wasn't him genius. I honestly get bored answering the same things in these kind of threads.

>I'm free to go be my own boss
You really think it's that simple? The world works like this? How are you possible going to compete against giant corporations? Say you work at Amazon. Go start your own amazon-like company. Great, see how that turns out.

That's not even going into the failure rates of small businesses

And dont leave anything for your children to inherit and waste all of your wealth and fail to multiply it. In the long term its better to inherit intelligence from your father than inherit his wealth. A person born in the 99th percentile of intelligence will massively outcompete a person who was born into the 99th percentile of wealth in the long term.

>In capitalism, once pigs control the market, only pigs keep controlling the market irrespective of whether wolves keep breeding better wolves or not.
This is even more true in communism.

>we need to remove all trade restrictions and deregulate all industries. no minimum wages, no licences. this can be achieved while maintaining personal responsibility.
I agree. This would be a fair system. However, I feel there must be one single regulation in this system - if a company gets more than 50% market share, then it will be broken down into daughter companies. I think this is the only regulation that must exist in a free market. Then it most likely would be a fair system.

>democratic communism
holy shit, double cancer.

Good thing the third position exists.

Fascism>capitalism>socialism/communism

god damn i was gonna do exactly this

amazon started out as a tiny bookstore.
how on earth could they compete??? it was impossible they could not have succeeded!

>You really think it's that simple? The world works like this? How are you possible going to compete against giant corporations? Say you work at Amazon. Go start your own amazon-like company. Great, see how that turns out.
It would be possible if the IRS didn't come after us, didn't have to pay massive taxes, didn't have to pay for the retarded healthcare system that doesn't work, and we didn't have to hire a lawyer to sort though mountains of regulation. Leftist bullshit kills small businesses and competition. How hard is this for you to fucking understand.

True. Some animals tend to be more equal than others.

>100% estate tax just means a new class of trust fund babies (who control the communist state) get to benefit when anyone dies.
I wasn't saying that we implement communism. Pic is for bait. I was talking about how to make capitalistic systems more fair.

Also, just to extend your idea to make it more stable and fool proof, in order to prevent people in power from benefitting from estates of rich people, you auction it to private enterprises first for cannibalization, and then you auction it to the public if anything remains. Or, the estate is used for a public project - this will ensure that a large section of society benefits from the estates of rich folks.

>how on earth could they compete???
Against who

>Life is essentially arbitrary. What works for one person will possibly not work for another.
A wolf will kill a pig irrespective of whether a wolf is polish or german and irrespective of whether the pig is singaporean or sri lankan. Life is not arbitrary.

oh, sorry, i forgot there were no big companies in 1999.
fuck i was wrong, hail communism, where do i get my red badge?

There’s more commies on half-chan than /leftypol/ nowadays. What happened?

are you fucking dumb?
it isn't arbitrary just because you think it is.
this is the dumbest argument i've ever seen.
a bird with colored feathers that gets more bird pussy than other birds isn't antithetical to evolution is it?
capitalism is a selection pressure
you just don't like what it is selecting
dumb fuck

Answer my question. Going hehehe troll and calling me cucked aren't answers.

whoops, same level of retardation though. Answer my questions.

Why is
>A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
fair? What if I don't earn what I deserve?

>You really think it's that simple? The world works like this?
Yes. I own a small business and it runs fine, I am surrounded in my community by small businesses doing just fine. Just because you are a lazy faggot doesnt make everyone.

>And why is that? What evolutionary purpose do entertainers serve? Does Kim Kardashian's sex tape fill my stomach? Does it keep me warm at night? Then why do we give it so much importance?
Why do you think the only needs that shouls be satisfied are the most base ones? Why are you on Cred Forums when you don't need it to survive? This place isn't needed to live. You are here purely for entertainment.
>Can you? How many people do you know who run successful shops?
Well, in the city where I live there are a shitton of shops, and it's only a city of 25000 people. How many entertainers are there? Many people can operate shops, not everybody can make good entertainment. Scarcity dude.
>Why? Because you're a Catholic? You're thinking is so basic that it's amusing.
It's what the Church says since porn is harmful for the community.

>Big companies become increasingly inefficient and inevitably will become unprofitable to run and simply collapse
They do become unprofitable in the long run due to increase in transaction costs - this has been shown - but there's no conclusive proof that they always collapse. That's arbitrary and the resources are always gathered by another company which becomes the next monopoly.

>try running a business all by yourself.
greed is a sin. It was my father's as well.
He was almost jewish about money.
He failed many business trying to do everything himself, not hiring anyone because he would have to share the profit.
He was a good bad example for me.

I partner with other people in business. People who are likewise motivated, and non-jews.
We charge fair prices and our customers love us. Start small, you don't need a loan, or handouts to start a business.

Listen, the point is this, it is in the nature of capital to accumulate at the top. Once that happens it isn't moving anywhere

Estate taxes destroy economic stability because there is no incentive for families to plan in for their children's future if you stole all their wealth when they died. Also rich families would just move their money offshore and avoid this so it would hurt the poor and middle class just like all leftist bullshit does.

...

>but there's no conclusive proof that they always collapse
That's because they lobby the government to protect them by implementing massive amounts of leftist regulation that puts small businesses out of business.

>Do you think massive amounts of government regulation that companies need their own lawyers to do helps the small businesses who can't easily afford lawyers or the big businesses that have teams of lawyers?
True. But I was saying that regulations, though crippling, are not the only reasons for monopolies to rise. Monopolies have risen even in systems where the system was loosely regulated and this is because the competition can't keep up once a company acquires a certain portion of the market share - brand loyalty, increasing costs of competition, etc.

But I didn't mean to completely disagree with the specific point you mentioned. That was my mistake the way I phrased it.

Oh? and no one has any chances to grow for themselves?
man, that reminds me everything I own is the same quality as it was in 2000. nothing's gotten better.

That's actually communism that does that.

>Oh? and no one has any chances to grow for themselves?
Pretty much

>Also, why would Communism not be the same thing as turning an entire country into a single monopoly?
Commie pic is for bait. Do you have any arguments against a capitalistic system being arbitrary? Didn't think so.

jews

>so not arbitrarily
Weeeeak troll. Up your game.

Trump

why do the private enterprises deserve it? they'll become the upper class.
Who gets the proceeds from the auction? They'll become the upper class.
What if none of the assets can be used for a "public project"?

Who determines if the assets of the "public project" aren't being abused? ever hear of cities starting million dollar projects that do nothing for the town, yet a few private individuals get very wealthy?
happens even under capitalism, it would be 100 times worse under communism.

Just fuck off and die.
Go take your commie buddies and go live in a commune on the coast of Tanzania. See how well that works out for your dumb ass

>True. But I was saying that regulations, though crippling, are not the only reasons for monopolies to rise. Monopolies have risen even in systems where the system was loosely regulated and this is because the competition can't keep up once a company acquires a certain portion of the market share - brand loyalty, increasing costs of competition, etc.
So if regulation helps monopolies any at all then why not get rid of regulation? It should be obvious to anyone who sees reality by this point that big businesses are lobbying the government in support of progressive leftist ideas. Why do they do this if it isn't the main way they keep power?

>what evolutionary purpose do entertainers serve?
what purpose do shopkeepers serve? Technically, all we "need" is food, water, air, and shelter, so i guess we should get rid of all industries that aren't made up of those 4, right, because that's """true evolution""""

>I wasn't born in the ghetto, but I was bused to a High school that was 65% black.
Ok, but luck played no part in your current position in life? Everything you planned went your way?
>I know what CNN tells you on tv, but thats a bunch of bullshit.
CNN is cancer.
>My classmates and I started a business together. We went our separate ways, but keep in touch, and they are successful to this day. The color of your skin, and your environment doesn't hold you back.
I'm not going to say you're LARPing just yet. But you do have to understand that it's hard for me to believe your story simply because you say it's true? How about you logically argue how the blacks you know became successful. No need for fancy statistics. Just prove to me that luck played no part in theirs or your success - all you have to do is prove to me that everything you planned exactly the way you predicted it, and everything you didn't plan for, didn't affect you in anyway.

do you measure your quality of life by a "rate of profit" chart?
that's not a good way.

You already said that it isn't arbitrary you fucking retard. You said race, gender, family, etc. plays are role in wealth accumulation. That means it isn't fucking arbitrary.

In communism, there can be no pigs or wolves, just sheep as everyone is "equal". Capitalism allows the strongest to rise to the top.
>b-but some people start st-stronger!
So what? Lots of start-ups start at the bottom.
>b-but it's unnatural for people to start with advantages!
the runt of the litter starts with a disadvantage, don't see you talking about that

>>I can't argue with people who think some people deserve to succeed more than others.
>That's not the same thing as "people aren't created equal".
Sure. I wasn't trying to imply that all people are created equal. Just that if you think a section of the population doesn't deserve to succeed simply because they're niggers, is not good logic.
>People aren't created equal, that's a natural reality that all biological evidence shows.
I agree.
>This doesn't mean that we think that niggers don't deserve their own success
This user doesn't think so>niggers are a terrible example because they expose the myth of "equality". they're not, and do not deserve an equal opportunity

Communism is based upon the idea that everyone will do their part. And that everyone whos rich wont just leave before the taking of their wealth. It's retarded and I believe the quickest way to bankrupt a country people wise

Checked for truth!
Historically speaking, communism doesn't really have a good track-record in dealing with such issues. There is usually a political elite which wields ultimate power, and the working class is exploited without remorse.

Proceeds to starve.

so true, the diseases, brutality, and smells would overwhelm you. Communism is a race to the bottom where everyone is living dirt poor and the .05% of the leading class live like kings. Fuck communism, my family fled from it and it fucking sucks.

>>some people deserve to succeed more than others
>This is an undeniable fact of life.
Based on what? Your leaf brains?
>I dont see you trolling the savanna to make sure the king lion shares will all the scrawny hungry ones.
Last time I checked Lions didn't have farming tech and advanced societies. You don't even know how to strawman properly. You leafs are pathetic.

if you think a section of the population doesn't deserve to succeed simply because they're capitalists, is not good logic.

>so who is going to plan the central economy?
Pic is for bait. Do you have any arguments against capitalism being an arbitrary system? No? Didn't think so.

Forced equality is just as arbitrary as forced inequality ; prove me wrong

>prove to me that luck played no part in theirs or your success
prove a negative?

>So black people are fucked in the USA because of genetics but you want to take money from productive people and give it to them to waste anyways?
No. Now, do you have any arguments against capitalism being an arbitrary system? No? Then just stop.

Prove that capitalism IS an arbitrary system.

>"own success" meaning elsewhere and not the eternal resource drain that they collectively are

>Monopolies have risen even in systems where the system was loosely regulated
such as

>but there's no conclusive proof that they always collapse.
Why would anyone work for an unprofitable company, hold stocks in an unprofitable company. Its not within the interests of shareholders to keep the company running. This is, unless there are government policies which prevent those inefficient corporations from collapsing, This could be excessive taxation and overregulation, this could be the government bailing out the companies with freshly printed money.

Capitalism doesn't reward arbitrarily, you fucking idiot. It rewards those who offer value to others who are willing to make a voluntary trade. That's about as worthy a method of rewarding behavior as any. And the vast majority of industrialization happened when the state took its hands off. People lived more or less the same existence for millennia until the 1800s.

i'm arguing for the status quo. the results speak for itself.
you're arguing for a system that has been tried 27 times, and only 5 countries still try it, and all of those are living near poverty where people will risk their lives to escape the country.
your "arbitrary" statement is meaningless because you're suggesting it's just a matter of words to change the entire economic system of the world.

capitalism thrives because it plays on natural incentives. More food = survival. less food = death = communism

>Quit dodging my questions please
Who me? I thought you were having a discussion with the other commie.

>Now explain
>>A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
>Please.
The chance of succeeding is approximately the same for all individuals. This allows evolution to constantly pick the best individuals in the system, genetically.

>Doesn't that go for you as well? Communism doesn't really reward people who stray from the template.
Pic is for bait. Do you have any arguments against capitalism being an arbitrary system?

Natural selection, in evolution, prevents the unfit from breeding by removing them from the genepool. What force prevents everyone from breeding in a communist system, if everyone is the same?

>So you want hunter-gather society to come back and somehow this is communism?
I'm not advocating for communism. Pic is bait, but coming to your point. No we don't have to regress to a hunter-gatherer society. We just have to ensure that the wealth individuals earn in a lifetime, is used up in their lifetime, and once they die, returns to the public or the state - so that others can now "buy" it off the state for their own purposes. This prevents dynasties and inheritences screwing up the gene pool in the long run.

>Just prove to me that luck played no part in theirs or your success
>all you have to do is prove to me that everything you planned exactly the way you predicted it

I don't believe in "luck" so asking me to prove your fairy-tale isn't going to happen.
Planning, on the other hand, is crucial to success. Things do not always go as planned, you have to keep making contingency plans.

Like when socialism failed, because the peasants didn't want to go to work.. They changed to communism, where the elites were given guns to make the peasants go to work.

>>democratic communism
>holy shit, double cancer.
kek.

Do you have an argument that capitalism IS an arbitrary system? The burden of proof lies on the one who made the claim...

If it is Communism, there is no democracy, the Party is always in power and the laborers are considered non-intelectuals. Communist regime is a type of dictatorship.

>The chance of succeeding is approximately the same for all individuals
Yeah. I'll ask my neighbour, the handicapped, black, trans, jewish midget to compete in a strongman contest. He might not win, but according to you he has a good chance.

So in your view, capitalism is fine as long as there's a 100% inheritance tax?

>Answer my question.
This question? >> A fair system is where everyone gets what they deserve
>How is this fair at all?
Isn't that the definition of fair? What's your definition of fair then?

>arbitrary

I don't think that word means what you think it does.

In capitalism I do X work I get Y pay.
I do 2X work I get 2Y pay.
Nothing arbitrary about that.

>Why are you on Cred Forums when you don't need it to survive?
Kek. Feeding my addiction for good conversations with non-normies.
>You are here purely for entertainment.
Guilty as charged, but I'm aware of it.
>Well, in the city where I live there are a shitton of shops, and it's only a city of 25000 people
And yet you don't own a shop. Why is that?
>How many entertainers are there?
Millions. You just see the most popular ones promoted by Slutty Wood and WhoreTube.
>It's what the Church says since porn is harmful for the community.
I know why it's harmful, but do you know? Don't give me that bible shit. Yes, bible got it right, but why is it right? Do you know? If you knew you wouldn't be arguing with me about Olga being superior to Kim Kardashian.

>Estate taxes destroy economic stability because there is no incentive for families to plan in for their children's future
Like I said before, I'm not against families spending money on educating their kids. In fact, that's evolutionary K-selection at work. What I'm against is inheritance. Inhertiance fucks with evolution and doesn't incentivize individuals to choose their spouses well.

Communism is the most individualistic ideology.

Even if we ignore that it is just snake oil in order for Jews to get into power.

>That's because they lobby the government to protect them by implementing massive amounts of leftist regulation that puts small businesses out of business.
I'm sure you understood what I said. What you're saying is not untrue, but it doesn't hold true all the time. There are various reasons why monopolies don't collapse, and lobbying and government protection is just one of them. The main cause is that it's very hard to get people to change their minds once they're loyal to a brand.

So you're fine with parents spending their money on their kids when they're alive, but not once they're dead?

>happens even under capitalism, it would be 100 times worse under communism.
You're trolling at this stage right? Or did you not read
>I wasn't saying that we implement communism. Pic is for bait. I was talking about how to make capitalistic systems more fair.

so do you advocate burning the inheritance?
Who gets it?
If you don't burn it, someone will take advantage of the extra resources and become the ruling class.

>So if regulation helps monopolies any at all then why not get rid of regulation?
Not a bad idea. I think there must exist one single regulation in all markets - if a company gets more than 50% of the market share, then it'll be broken down into daughter companies.

We are created equal. but we are endowed differently by our creators. Parents have a responsibility to properly endow their children.

You can't just pop a kid out your ass and say "be freeeeee" if you do that you should go to jail, not be rewarded with gibs.
So many muh-socialism people in this thread with mommy issues. Go slap that bitch, you'll feel better.

your inability to comprehend incentives does not mean someone else is trolling.
if inheritances are not completely destroyed, someone is going to get a lot of money for free.
That's incentive. in a communist nation full of poverty, people will be hunting for that sort of opportunity.

Democracy and communism are shit. I don't even want to imagine a combination between them.

>arbitrary
There is like 5 different meanings to the word.
Random - Not quite. Capitalism operate by specific rules and regulations, even when (or argueably even more when) laissez-faire.
Unreasonable - The very soul of capitalism is based on reasonable pricing of goods and services. Only the inept and irresponsible cannot find reason in a capitalist system that works as intended.
Tyrannical - It could be, but no more than any other system; Communism included.

The other 2 meanings (that I found) is when something is decided by a judge (an arbiter), and an arbitrary number (undetermined) in mathematics.

Yeah, it was satire. Nice digits btw.

Under communism, the guys with the guns make all the decisions, there are no other "judges" you just shut your fucking hole and do you job, or you get shot.

"I will ignore the fact that modern capitalism benefited from centuries of human tech advancement under monarchies and theocracies."
And? The scale of technological development matters more than time spent developing and far more development in tech has occurred in the last century than most others before hand. And along side that was the increasing rate of capitalism and democracy (not even directly connected but simply the best combination) which also lead to an ever increasing development rate. Oh and results matter the most so... This all lead to, increased food production, increased energy supply, longer lives, lower crime overall and other shit.

So yes the ever decreasing poverty rate associated with Capitalism destroys your argument.

Yeah the thing improving mankind is antithetical to evolution try harder.

Capitalism is natural law. In Nature, the animal with most power rules. To obtain power you must outperform other beings and work to survive.
In Capitalism, the Alpha lion maintains hierarchy, structure and order. Anyone is free to challenge him and climb up the ladder.

Communism is unnatural law. It forces the able bodied to work and give their hard earned labor product to others who dont care whether society survives, and perpetuates the survival of the weak and lazy, ending natural selection.
In Communism, the Alpha lion does nothing. He and a group of other lazy lions threaten to kill any cub who doesnt work continuously and surrender ALL their earnings to their ruler. Its not possible for cub slaves to enter the inner lion circle without first becoming a proxy for the current rulers.

Capitalism is natural selection based on the needs of the people, regulated by the needs of the people, and produces a well ordered structure based on supply and demand.
Communism is simply a few people who want to be rich and powerful without working, so they trick the poor and desperate into murdering their own leaders, and then enslave the entire population to their whim. Anyone who supports Communism and denies being a power-hungry self centered egomaniacal slaver is a deluded idiot, possibly doing the bidding of the true Commies unwittingly.

That's true, and historically proven. So far the "comrades" have brought little substance to the table.

Even if all your criticism of capitalism is true and we would agree it's crap, it doesn't change one thing: it's still better than communism.

i heard something interesting, it was "if communism was able to apply labor to critical areas of need efficiently, the soviet union would still be around"

>and once they die, returns to the public or the state - so that others can now "buy" it off the state for their own purposes

LMAO does "buy" mean "free gibs" ?
Let's just murder the wealthy then we get our free stuff faster, and besides, they need to die so we have the means of production in our hands, right ?

Hey, uhh... if you have twice as much as me, I get to kill you and split your shit with my beste, right ?

He doesn't share his wife's means of reproduction with the commune

>Capitalism rewards individuals arbitrarily
It doesn't.

Capitalism is fair because producers are rewarded based on whether the people like their product or not. If a producer makes something and no one wants it, he goes out of business. If the producer makes something and people can't get enough of it, the producer is rewarded for satisfying the demands of the consumers. If you can't give the people what they want, you crash and burn. The result is a system that rewards the competent and punishes the incompetent. This ensures that the best rise to the top. How can communism ever compete with this?

...

>As long as I have food to eat and a basic shelter to live in, everything else on top is an evolutionary luxury that cripples me and my progeny in the long run.
LMAO the delusional fork has killed this one

Nice!
Someone should report him to the Commissar. Every worker should get his share.

related

>You already said that it isn't arbitrary you fucking retard. You said race, gender, family, etc. plays are role in wealth accumulation. That means it isn't fucking arbitrary.
Kek. Nice try at a strawman user. Best so far.

So you're saying you know beforehand which races each child was going to be born into? As in you can say 100% certainty that a black child was going to be born to a particular black family before it was conceived by them?

>I believe 100% of all wealth is attributed at birth and no one else in the world works at all
>Why must I work? In nature, the Human has no requirement for food or shelter, these are evil capitalist needs
>How dare other people work harder than me and have nicer things?
>I wish I never had to work and everyone else were forced to work FOR me under the penalty of death. And if they try to escape the country, I'll kill them and their families!
Yeah, commies are truly fine and moral people

waiting for buttfuck the tard op to shove the white flag up his own ass

>>b-but some people start st-stronger!
>So what? Lots of start-ups start at the bottom.
Start ups? Do you think the tech industry is the only industry there is in the U.S. you CS faggot?
>b-but it's unnatural for people to start with advantages!
>the runt of the litter starts with a disadvantage, don't see you talking about that
Yeah, and just like runts in nature, small business don't survive for long when there's a monopoly around.

Capitalism makes much crap that people are forced to buy anyways because a company might have made something good in the past but now they have a strangle hold on the market they can get away with making shit.

...

>if you think a section of the population doesn't deserve to succeed simply because they're capitalists, is not good logic.
Why do you say that I implied that capitalists shouldn't succeed? This is me
>Yeah, I made a mistake here. I meant to say make the estate tax a 100%, and not eliminate it. But coming to your point, yeah, that's fine. I'm fine with parents spending money on kids education to improve their chance of success. That doesn't make the system outright unfair. What makes it unfair is inheritence and continued support and opportunities from parents.

>Forced equality is just as arbitrary as forced inequality ; prove me wrong
Depends, are we talking about lions or humans who've discovered farming?

If the government didn't create these massive corporations, there would be a far greater amount of competition and people would have the power to control the markets and dictate quality more effectively.

>Prove that capitalism IS an arbitrary system.
>Humans discovered farming more than 12,000 years ago. We've long gone off the path of evolution. Capitalism tries to replicate a jungle environment in a world where 1 billion people grow crops sufficient to feed 7.2 billion people. Thus, 6.2 billion people receive rewards that are arbitrary in nature.

>Dude capitalism is like, not cool cause it’s against evolution and doesn’t reward me for not working
>Get polandballed by Cred Forums
>Bro, we invented farming thats not evolution, and neither is communism so we should be communist

kys commie

>>Monopolies have risen even in systems where the system was loosely regulated
>such as
East India Company.

>Why would anyone work for an unprofitable company,
Assuming you're talking about a monopoly here, for job security.
>hold stocks in an unprofitable company
Cause all other companies are put out of business by the monopoly and thus you're better off, in the long, not owning stocks in any company but the monopoly.

>I can't argue with people who think some people deserve to succeed more than others.
How can you type this, knowing that communism is exactly that: the inner party deserves everything the laborers do. Youre a disgusting slaver.

and it's all a god damned legend

>you're arguing for a system that has been tried 27 times, and only 5 countries still try it
Once again dude, not arguing for communism and you don't have any arguments against capitalism being arbitrary.

>Social Darwinism or letting people do what they want with their lives.
Hmmmmmmmmmm

don't really think it's arbitrary, you have to have the will to go out and make money. If you just sit around don't expect any cash to come in

>What force prevents everyone from breeding in a communist system, if everyone is the same?
Man, retards after retards having no argument against capitalism being an arbitrary system. This is the absolute state of capitalist retards on Cred Forums. Burst their bubble and you immediately regress to morons who argue against communism.

Absolute brainwashed normies all.

weird that "a legend" really pisses off a bunch of bolshijews

>I don't believe in "luck"
>Things do not always go as planned
Pick one.

>Do you have an argument that capitalism IS an arbitrary system? The burden of proof lies on the one who made the claim...
>Humans discovered farming more than 12,000 years ago. We've long gone off the path of evolution. Capitalism tries to replicate a jungle environment in a world where 1 billion people grow crops sufficient to feed 7.2 billion people. Thus, 6.2 billion people receive rewards that are arbitrary in nature.

We as a people need to light a fire under the jews, and get their asses to Israel. Their job is to rebuild the temple, so Jesus can return. President Trump, cleared the way, building a US embassy in Jerusalem, to protect them while they work. And I don't want to see any contracting this out to the high bidder, or asking for gibs to pay for it, just shut up and start laying those bricks.

>So in your view, capitalism is fine as long as there's a 100% inheritance tax?
Yes.

>not filtering down the weak and letting the strongest ones perpetuate, while still maintaining a superficial freedom of action

hmmmmmmmmm

>So you're fine with parents spending their money on their kids when they're alive, but not once they're dead?
Yes.

>The white thinks he can tell me how to select the best to past their genes.
lmao

>so do you advocate burning the inheritance?
No. There are many ways to dispose of an estate - auction to the public, except the children, such that private and public entities benefit from the estate. You can have rules that prevent the same people from winning the auction every time. Not difficult.

>Capitalism exploits you for working.
As opposed to Communism where taxes are 100% of production?

>your inability to comprehend incentives does not mean someone else is trolling.
Unfortunately, I have a PhD in econ - contract theory. So I understand the concept of incentives very well.
>if inheritances are not completely destroyed, someone is going to get a lot of money for free.
Please elaborate on this.

>
>>As long as I have food to eat and a basic shelter to live in, everything else on top is an evolutionary luxury that cripples me and my progeny in the long run.
Get with the proletariat soviet, no one is forcing you... it's just you're a stupid greedy little faggot that just has to keep up with the Joneses or you'll run the streets murdering and screaming the commie revolution is here to stay !
Then you'll just demand the latest greatest shit you don't need anyway, for free, again... it never occurs to you idiot fuckheads to refuse a purchase

I was AFK. So what's the problem whether capitalism is arbitrary or not? Does it matter?

>>arbitrary
>There is like 5 different meanings to the word.
>Unreasonable
This is the one I was referring to
>Only the inept and irresponsible cannot find reason in a capitalist system that works as intended.
That's not true.

Don't blame me, blame the commieshit who wants to control your life

I just say you're free in the jungle, but it's up to you to be strong enough to survive

The only reason I work is for the sake of my children. I could have retired long ago, if I was a self-centered hedonist mamma's boy like you.
Do you really want (((them))) to kick you out of your mom's basement when she croaks?

op makes claim presenting nothing to back it up
op ignores all the strong evidence against him that shows capitalism has lead to the best time for humanity and is not arbitrary as its traits is what caused this period
op acts like child

>The scale of technological development matters more than time spent developing and far more development in tech has occurred in the last century than most others before hand.
Your graph says otherwise. Technology influences standard of living, which in turn influences the definition of poverty.

Also, how can you be retarded enough to rely on a graph that uses $ to measure poverty in different countries when the dollar is backed by oil which gives the U.S. an unfair advantage in all poverty indices. Why? Because people don't pay the Saudis Indian Rupees to get their oil - the pay them in dollars - which in turn requires all countries in the world to sell U.S. shit so that they get the dollars they need to buy oil - a crucial resource required by all world economies.

>>Bro, we invented farming thats not evolution, and neither is communism so we should be communist
ahhh... it's so retarded I couldn't follow the assholes argument.. thank you, I'll ingest tons of drugs and get drunk off my ass, hit my head with a hammer, then come back so I don't need help with the idea translation anymore

op is gonna be pissed when farming outer space saves the human race, and thus those most evolved astronauts and their rocket scientists farming on Mars

>not true
>t. inept retard that needs to grow up and get a job

>Capitalism is natural law. In Nature, the animal with most power rules.
In nature, a wolf breeds wolves, and wolves always eat sheep. In capitalism, if a sheep rises to the top, then it keeps outperforming the wolves because it buys out the government and gives its wealth to its lambs. Capitalism is anything but natural.

I fail to see a counter-argument.
Inept, because they fail to provide goods or services in order to sustain themselves.
Irresponsible, because they either spend beyond their abilities, or neglect their work for frivolous pursuits.

>LMAO does "buy" mean "free gibs" ?
Auction, retard. Read the whole post faggot. Learn to troll well at least.

>He doesn't share his wife's means of reproduction with the commune
How do you know that? Did his wife tell you?

It's "The Wolf of Wall Street", not the sheep.

I think that was the plot of Zootopia

next time pretend to not be a retard

>auction
How does one bid on a communist auction? With privilege tokens and needs change?

>The only reason I work is for the sake of my children
Same here.
>I could have retired long ago, if I was a self-centered hedonist mamma's boy like you.
So I say we shouldn't cripple our kids with inheritance, and somehow that's hedonistic? At worst I'm Spartan in my approach to life and you think that's hedonistic?
Kys boomer faggot.

>Wrong FPBP, correct is:

Its not arbitrary, you get what you are worth commie scum.

If you rise to the top, you're not a sheep. That inherently makes you a wolf.

>>not true
>>t. inept retard that needs to grow up and get a job
Says the Nazi fag posting on Cred Forums on a Monday afternoon.

>Inept, because they fail to provide goods or services in order to sustain themselves.
>Irresponsible, because they either spend beyond their abilities, or neglect their work for frivolous pursuits.
No no, I've been talking about inheritences in capitalism. Yeah, I didn't really do a good job framing the original post.

bongs are not allowed an opinion about capitalism
until they overthrow the monarchy, and behead the snake that OWNS them. now bin that knife, queencuck, or grow a pair.

By that "logic", ALL agricultural societies are arbitrary, not just the capitalist ones.

>It's "The Wolf of Wall Street", not the sheep.
You do realize that most of what Wall Street does is essentially shift wealth from one person to another, and they really provide nothing of value other than investments in the IPOs for companies?

>Your graph says otherwise
What the fuck are you on about it shows a biggest dip occurring in modern times. And an increasing standard of living is something for capitalism and extreme poverty is still quite strict. US dollar is used as its the main currency of the world and main one used to compare nations due to simply conversion rates... and other currencies are backed by far more oil.
There is no way you are not trolling if you can't read a graph.

>In nature, a wolf breeds wolves, and wolves always eat sheep. In capitalism, if a sheep rises to the top, then it keeps outperforming the wolves because it buys out the government and gives its wealth to its lambs. Capitalism is anything but natural.
>I think that was the plot of Zootopia
Kek.

>Protip:
the strongest and smartest and most capitalistically ambitious travel hundred and thousands of miles, sometimes on foot to reach the nations with the most capitalism...Not sure what crazy shit you're talking about. If I'm a fucking loser, capitalism gives me nothing, it takes a great deal of commie brothers forcing the grain sacks toward their faggot half dead loser lazy assed nigger gibsmedat fuckheads to keep them alive. Otherwise, dummy tries to steal it, gets caught because dumb criminal, and is shot dead on the spot.Capitalism says that's fair, only commie pinkos start whining and shitting their pants claiming the master with the gun already took from the workers and therefore is in the wrong. You're just a dumbass who, thanks to communism, is still breathing.

>next time pretend to not be a retard
No no, you don't type what you you tell yourself Norwegian fag. Only retards do that.

Queen has no power m8 and we use capitalism too.

>Immediate deflection when faced with an argument
hmm

>If you rise to the top, you're not a sheep. That inherently makes you a wolf.
But what about your kids? Are the kids of rich children just as much wolves as their parents? Is this always true like in nature?

>>The only reason I work is for the sake of my children
>Same here.

don't you mean... your wife's sons

>By that "logic", ALL agricultural societies are arbitrary, not just the capitalist ones.
I don't think so. Early agro based societies were fairly communistic in their approach - so I don't think they were unfair.

Is there any real difference then? In the long run, this just encourages people to make sure their wealth gets passed on earlier, so your goal to make sure that "everyone gets the same" doesn't really work out.

What's unfair about someone deciding to give their money to their children? They spent an entire lifetime earning it, why can't they do as they please? But nice job making this about another issue completely.

>>Your graph says otherwise
>What the fuck are you on about it shows a biggest dip occurring in modern times.
I meant to say your graph does not account for the tech progress made before the 1800s.
>US dollar is used as its the main currency of the world and main one used to compare nations due to simply conversion rates and other currencies are backed by far more oil.
Do you really believe this, or is this your weak attempt at a troll?
>There is no way you are not trolling if you can't read a graph.
You seem like a decent chap. Tell me what you think the graph is trying to show. No no, don't tell me to see it, I saw it already. I want you to describe in words what you think the graph is trying to prove. What's the underlying hypothesis for which the graph serves as proof?

We're not talking about fairness, we're talking about arbitrariness. Your argument was that evolution stops working in an agricultural society because there's a food surplus, and that aspect of agricultural society is the same in both systems.

>In capitalism, if a sheep rises to the top, then it keeps outperforming the wolves because it buys out the government and gives its wealth to its lambs. Capitalism is anything but natural.
So here you claim the big shot CEOsheep is actually a communist at heart, giving away it's wealth to it's lambs...the workers proletariat just got their free gibs... so no need for seizing the means of production... If you meant the head sheep's progeny, that also supports survival of the fittest, as the head sheeps genes are now passed on with a wealth advantage to continue the greater bloodline that already rose to the top.
You're just fucked in the head.

>>Immediate deflection when faced with an argument
This is the title of the OP
>Capitalism rewards individuals arbitrarily and is antithetical to evolution
Pic is literally for bait

i have to say that ive GOT to reply my man
its just too luscious for me to pass up
how come all these other people were allowed to reply but im not
IM REPLYING

>Okay, should parents be able to spend time/money on educating their kids when they're young?
Yes. That's part of K-selection and nothing wrong with that.

>inheritances in capitalism
Ah, I see. So if I get you correctly: You suggest that inheritance of wealth breaks the natural order, turning the offspring into an elite class with resources that are disproportionate to their abilities? And this in turn can make someone that is genetically inferior hold power over superior individuals? That is quite the idea to be honest. I wonder if there is a solution to that conundrum. A final one, even.

I wouldn't say that is their main function, but I wouldn't claim that it isn't prevalent.

>>>The only reason I work is for the sake of my children
>>Same here.
>don't you mean... your wife's sons
Oh no no, I'm not like the other fag who claims to have 5 kids with his wife. Both my kids look like me. The seed is strong in my family.

>Queen has no power m8
Parliament serves at her majesty's pleasure, you wanker. You think the queen pawned her jewlels to buy 17 mansions and 4 castles (18,000 bedrooms total)
she gets a cut of all the taxes, check m8
nothing happens without her approval
>b-bb-but i read that she's not even allowed to have an opinion

>Is there any real difference then?
Yes, kids don't get additional capital when they start their lives as adults.
>In the long run, this just encourages people to make sure their wealth gets passed on earlier, so your goal to make sure that "everyone gets the same" doesn't really work out.
True, a 100% estate tax is a start, and like you said, eventually everyone will abuse that system as well. And as they abuse it, you can change the system to ensure that parents are only allowed to invest in their children's education and nothing else with respect to their kids.

Bookstores never existed before Amazon? Wow

blasphemy... you can't be trusted to raise a child
now hand it over to the village idiot immediately

>What's unfair about someone deciding to give their money to their children?
So you became rich due to luck, and when you pass it to your kids, you make sure generation after generation benefit from your luck. In nature, if a strong wolf is bred, then it eats all the gazelles, but the strong gazelles survive and the luck of the wolf is restricted to one generation. Not in capitalism - the luck propagates for generation after generation.
>They spent an entire lifetime earning it, why can't they do as they please?
I'm not against them using it for personal pleasure and to educate their kids. I'm agains them passing it to their kids as capital.
>But nice job making this about another issue completely.
??? How is this not in line with the OP?

Political loyalty.

>We're not talking about fairness, we're talking about arbitrariness.
This is me
>However, time and again, capitalism has shown that monopolies form in the long run - since from an evolutionary perspective only those who are addicted to growth survive in the market - irrespective how much damage they cause others. Monopolies essentially set up a huge economic rent - the cost of entering and competing in the market becomes tougher and tougher. Add to this, the benefits people receive due to their social standing and financial background, it's easy to see that capitalism is not a fair system - those who win at the start, keep on winning irrespective how good the other gene sets are in the population.
>So you became rich due to luck, and when you pass it to your kids, you make sure generation after generation benefit from your luck. In nature, if a strong wolf is bred, then it eats all the gazelles, but the strong gazelles survive and the luck of the wolf is restricted to one generation. Not in capitalism - the luck propagates for generation after generation.
> Your argument was that evolution stops working in an agricultural society because there's a food surplus,
And because of this surplus, many humans receive rewards and losses in an arbitrary manner.
>and that aspect of agricultural society is the same in both systems.
Which system? I'm not trying to promote communism. Pic is for bait. I'm saying capitalism is an arbitrary system.

And the progress before then was less than within modern times this is well known such as time between planes and spacecraft for an easy example of rapid technological growth that far outpaces current times. You are just ignoring how technological progress before that graph starts is tiny compared to what occurs within.

No its the facts. US dollar is strongest and thus most used backup currency and thus used most in conversion. Gulf nations have greater share of oil and use it to back their economies/currencies far more than US.

It shows decreasing poverty rates alongside the most economically and politically free period of human history (as during that time monarchies lost power and more nations became more capitalist) alongside the greatest period of technological growth. In short, Capitalism HAS lead to greatest decline of poverty ever.

You must be trolling... I have to say that as you are clearly acting in a way that denies proof/ a level of stupidity that should be assumed trolling for sanity..

I would argue that it is natural to want to ensure the survival of your offspring. While giving your entire earned wealth to your children might go over the line of just survival, it is following the natural instinct to care for your child. This natural instinct is just applied with what we, as humans, have created.
>I'm against them passing it to their kids as capital
So you want to steal from them because you decided someone else deserves it? That's some serious entitlement.

>nothing happens without her approval
Stop drinking that weak shit you call beer and sleep.

>So here you claim the big shot CEOsheep is actually a communist at heart, giving away it's wealth to it's lambs.
Isn't that what Cred Forums's idea of communism is? Few people in power keeping it for themselves?
>If you meant the head sheep's progeny, that also supports survival of the fittest, as the head sheeps genes are now passed on with a wealth advantage to continue the greater bloodline that already rose to the top.
Hahahahaha. So you agree that the CEO got to the top arbitrarily, but somehow his bloodline is better than the rest? At least try to troll properly.
>You're just fucked in the head.
Projection much?

>With privilege tokens and needs change?

A fool and his money are soon parted.

>You suggest that inheritance of wealth breaks the natural order
Yes
>turning the offspring into an elite class with resources that are disproportionate to their abilities?
Yes
>And this in turn can make someone that is genetically inferior hold power over superior individuals?
Yes
>I wonder if there is a solution to that conundrum. A final one, even.
(((Kek, I don't know))).

...

>You are just ignoring how technological progress before that graph starts is tiny compared to what occurs within.
Dude, pi was discovered centuries ago, and still plays a huge role today. What we have today is built on top of what came before. That's why I hate arguments that say capitalism brings people out of poverty because technological improvements have been made at a steady pace throughout history.

It's only in recent times (during the British empire) that tech became so advanced that warfare shifted from physical battlefronts to economic battlefronts.

>No its the facts. US dollar is strongest and thus most used backup currency and thus used most in conversion.
Then how the fuck did those faggots who made the graph extend the graph to the 1800s when the dollar wasn't a reserve currency? Did you check their methods or did you decided to believe their graph because you thought no other faggot on Cred Forums would call you out on it?
>You must be trolling
Yeah man, with more than 90 posts, I'm the troll.

>You suggest that inheritance of wealth breaks the natural order
>Yes
How so?

That is true. Communism, eugenics, abortion etc are rooted in darwinism. Good fruits like, private property rights, human rights etc are rooted in Christianity.

>I would argue that it is natural to want to ensure the survival of your offspring.
True, and I have nothing against people investing in training and educating their kids. K-selection is human nature.
>While giving your entire earned wealth to your children might go over the line of just survival, it is following the natural instinct to care for your child.
Does it? Giving your wealth to your child is like giving into a tobacco addiction. You're sooo addicted to taking care of your child, that you don't think twice before crippling it by giving it capital and wealth that it did not earn.
>So you want to steal from them because you decided someone else deserves it? That's some serious entitlement.
Hey, I didn't say I want rich people's stuff for my kids. I just want it put back in the system and the rich kids should restart the cycle of working hard like their parents. This really ensures good genes are passed on from generation to generation. Now you just have rich degenerate fucks wasting their talents and marrying whores because their survival and prosperity doesn't depend on good decisions anymore.

>A fool and his money are soon parted.
Not in America. It takes 7 generations here.

genuine question

do you not value your individuality?

>I wonder if there is a solution to that conundrum. A final one, even.
Hohoh, got em!