If capitalism is so efficient...

Because the real world isn't a game of City Skylines and most people choose to live in cities/apartments.

Being compelled to do labor without reward, give away investment without profit, and creating incentives by force is called slavery.

Because it is efficient. Why would you house and feed people that do not contribute at all? Capitalism is weeding them out. It's a feature not a bug

theres suppose to be winners and losers, without it , it wont work.

Because we shut down mental institutes. No, seriously. All homeless people in Van's downtown east side would have a roof over their heads if it wasn't for le ebil institition meme

Please don't pretend like you wouldn't give Kate Upton a deep dicking.

" The Four Horsemen " youtu.be/5fbvquHSPJU
Watching this right now, pretty based

If you make shitty choices, then you will likely live with your parents, and if you have no parents, you will be homeless.
Capitalism is about producing resourceful members of society, not producing resources for members of society.

Because this is a stupid question that posits good versus some non-existent perfect system.
Nobody said capitalism is 100% efficient only that it's the most efficient system we have in existence.

Because it would be foolish to waste money on houses for those that won't work to maintain it or do anything meaningful with their lives.

Let me tell you a story. I have a buddy who has a shitty father that comes around every once in awhile. The father is homeless and by his own admission he chooses to be homeless because he would rather be lazy and spend all his time boozing with charity money than he would working and living a fruitful life. This is the case with 99.9% of all homeless people. They choose to be homeless.

There are very very few hard working people that don't have a place to call home. And those hard working people who are in that situation will almost certainly remedy it themselves because of their work ethic.

Capitalism only rewards meeting the needs of people with money. Also in an ideal capitalist society nobody would be homeless because homeless people could just build their own homes. Hard to do these days with all the regulations.

Black Jews.

You know how report works on Cred Forums?

report you stupid nigger do it
ill come to your house and rape you and then shit on you and the kill you

Because actual homeless people have severe mental disorders and belong in institutions. Stupid ass liberals and neocons wanted to close the nuthouses and this is the result

Oh and don't confuse actual homeless with professional pan handlers.

Capitalism is shit, but it isn't to blame for this problem

No there isn't. If it wasn't for BS laws regarding who can build what, and where, you could have small homes built for 50k, sell them for 70-80k and make plenty of profit. But it is more profitable to force people to rent, or buy a 4 bedroom home for $200k.

>fake blond hair
>weird Slav/Brit fetal alcohol syndrome face
> has probably been violated by countless kikes in Hollywood

No thanks

I hope you become homeless someday. Honestly.

No. Capitalism is efficient in the sense that nothing gets done unless it increases capital (i.e., creates a profit) for the elite. It is not efficient in meeting human needs by using our natural resources.

this sort of autism is why hitler killed autists

profitable in the sense of increasing human happiness? or profitable in the sense of making a rich guy richer?

No it's called being an employee. An employee creates $100 dollars of revenue for ever eight dollars he can take home.

There's no evidence for that except capitalist ideology

exactly. Capitalism is about producing resourceful members of society that can create a profit for rich people. It is not about using the resources of the land our fathers died for to benefit us all.

I'd take isolated poverty with capitalism over nation-wide poverty under socialism any day

One word: deinstitutionalizationism.
Fuck yeah, speech to text.

Homeless people are dumb, lazy, or mentally disfunctional.

Surely it would be a good idea to dump them into the woods.

>Capitalism only rewards meeting the needs of people with money.
Precisely. You have hit the nail on the head. In an ideal capitalist society, people without capital would not be able to build their own home, regardless of regulations or not. In an ideal capitalist societies white girls aged thirteen would sell themselves to old billionaires to pay for their family's food if their family has no capital.

>also niggers and jews

Kek'd

daily reminder that shops are empty in socialism because goods are given away as soon as they are produced. Daily reminder that shops are full in capitalism because not everyone can afford what is being sold.

Before you type out your butthurt, just ask yourself, would more people buy sixty inch TVs if sixty inch TVs were free? of course

>would more people buy sixty inch TVs if sixty inch TVs were free

Explain, in detail, exactly how you buy something that is "free".

why build shops then? why not have a system were you just get a shipment to your house? you make a list of the things you want and the weekly/bi monthly government cargo truck comes to your areas and drops off your cargo for "free" and your taxed appropriately? Seems so efficient!

T H I C C
H
I
C
C

You can always sell your labor for money. Being broke should be a temporary state that is so awful it drives people into the work force. These days it's trendy and comfortable because of hand outs.

Of course I would, but it's still weird to me that her man has a bigger ass than she does.

>i hope you become homeless someday
what is welfare? we're not even living in pure capitalism.
as i said, you must be dumber than an abo to become homeless in a western country, with all the free stuff that you get

I can honestly say that I wouldn't.

She's one of those people who looks extremely average/below average but people are crazy about because >tits. Her body type is just a refrigerator with tookpicks stuck in the bottom and tits slapped on.

>There is no reason to be homeless
What if I lost my home due to a natural disaster? Do I deserve to be homeless?

We don't have capitalism. We have a mixed economy that prefers mercantilism.

This question is basically easy to answer: government regulations make building cheap, shitty housing illegal.

Obviously many homeless have severe psychological issues, but for the most part, land-use regulations like zoning, height caps, density limits, minimum parking requirements, setback requirements, apartment size restrictions, and a ton of others chop off the bottom section of the housing market and force people onto the streets.

HE THICC

Efficient towards what exactly? Capitalism just takes into account human nature. How about you suggest an alternative?

I noticed that as well.

>would lube up and fuck her armpit / 10

Such an act would distort markets.
So what if there's an unsold house in the suburban neighborhood? If we gave it to the homeless, they'd destroy it and bring down property values of all surrounding homes, thus costing the economy far more value than just the value of that one home.

Capitalism is about profit and loss. If you bail out the losers there's no end to the costs

>muh freedumb
>Muh rent
>Muh "god given" property rights

Welfare isn't socialism you retard. It's Keynesianism

>In fact, why does anyone have to rent an apartment when we have enough land and timber to build small homes for everyone?
Millenials like Apartments because it puts them in close proximity to other people, as well as having a landlord who fixes stuff that breaks because they have no idea how to do it themselves.

what is insurance?.... I dont think you can have a mortgage without it actually....

>Do I deserve to be homeless?

Deserve has nothing to do with it.

You get what you negotiate.

For example, in your natural disaster scenario, your home insurance would cover a hotel for you while an adjuster processed your claim. Then you buy a new home, or rebuild.

What's stopping a homeless person from building that house with all that lumber and timber?

What would've happened to him 2000 years ago if he sat on his ass begging all day? Would he have a free house?

Capitalism is efficient but it doesn't give anything to people who wont work

can you give me the year and place where your "true capitalism" was practiced?

Insurance settlements give you a fat check only after an investigation. They don't give you a new house.
In fact, most large settlements are paid out in monthly payments, so it's not like if your house burns down you can just go buy a new home right away

>Cites timber and land as valid reason everyone should have a home
>Also doesn't realize that most who are homeless are doing it by choice

Fucking retarded socialists...

>Capitalism is efficient but it doesn't give anything to people who wont work
Actually it does, it just does so in an efficient manner.
Capitalist countries are by far the most charitable nations on earrh

Homeless choose to be worthless and homeless. The people who are just having a run of terrible horrible luck are not homeless for long.

Capitalism helps those who help themselves, and rewards them greatly.

Because the people who would purchase these things either cannot afford the price the market will sell at or choose to buy other things.

It's like asking why do people starve in a free market?
>Because those people are not worth the feed to feed them

Produce value if you wish to exchange that value for goods. If you can't do that, you should expect to fucking starve.

>blacks
>jews

Who will pay the lumber company to cut the timber? Who will pay the lumberjacks? Who will pay the sawmills? Who will pay the carpenters? Who will buy the nails? Who will pay the plumbers? Who will buy the land? Who will pay for the perc test? Who will pay to have the foundation dug and laid? Who will pay the earthmovers? Who will pay the plumbers, and the tilers, and the electricians, and the HVAC? Who will pay for zoning permits? Who will pay the taxes? Who will pay the guy who puts in the bathroom cabinet?

Oh, I get it...You want all their work to be free...........

Sometimes, shit happens, can't do anything about it.

But many people who are homeless suffer because either they didn't grow up and live with a strong family that would have supported them.

And you damn right know (((who))) came up with the stupid notions such as men and women being equal or religion being dumb etc that eroded the family strucutre and led society from big wide families and towards barely having a dad and a mom and maybe some siblings if you are lucky.

People wouldn't lose their way so easily if they had the rich support of an extended family, and the state's involvement in "supporting them" is not really a solution, it is an addictive life support that doesn't exist to help people, it's just there to hid minimize the problems by giving the illusion of a solution.

ok...then you stay with some family members for a while.....

oh you dont have any family? maybe you should have not been scum and made relationships in your life or not come from a degenerate home?

>Capitalism is efficient but it doesn't give anything to people who wont work
kek
baron trump has more money in his trust fund than you will earn in ten lifetimes and he hasn't worked a day in his life

You're all idiots. The reason there are homeless has nothing to do with there not being enough homes to go around. Its because the overwhelming majority of homeless are mentally ill, criminal, or both.

Think about what you would do if you were homeless, right now. You'd go to friends, or family, or a church, or a charity. You'd get cleaned up, take advantage of services provided to you, and stop being on the streets almost immediately.

Beyond the homeless themselves just being shitty people by and large, there is another factor here. Namely, it doesn't matter if someone owns a house if they don't make the money to support it and pay for utilities. There is such a thing as public housing. It is universally shit, because its occupants treat it like shit.

Communists and Leftists are so fucking retarded. If fixing poverty was as simple as throwing money at it, don't you think it'd be fixed by now? Fucking pinko bastards.

>What's stopping a homeless person from building that house with all that lumber and timber
Uh, I don't know, maybe the property laws that say he doesn't own any land or trees you fucking itard?

Living in rented apartment allows you much easier moving...
Once you buy a house, you're stuck on one place, which may get boring after some time...

-----

Then - there are homeless people, because - yes you knew it - (((merchants))) want to rent houses for high prices, so they prevent building cheap houses which could saturate the market.

We in Eastern Europe know it very well...

During socialism, it was not any problem to rent a large flat in the commie-block (tall panel houses) and rather very cheap. Shopping infrastructure and a sort-of culture and playgrounds arround, cheap and very efficient public transport (get anywhere in the city within a hour, faster than by car which stops in lines. Get out of public transport and be free to walk anywhere without need to return to original place for a private car, because anywhere else you get into public transport and drive back). (And your meme of empty shops during socialism is just a very false generalisation...)

After fall of socialism, they immediatelly stopped building these large houses. Now they build far-reaching sub-urbs full of small expensive houses, without any culture/shops/background, because "capitalists" are driving their cars into the city, having the low-ceiling bedroom-houses on city outskirts, without any "social" background or need of it...

And the houses are pretty expensive, you have to work for ten or twenty years paying hypotheque ( (((bank))) debt), stuck on one place in "own" house.

And since this politique of stopped house-building has driven rental prices to five - ten times higher, the people, who restituted (privatised which means "stolen from public") the houses, are renting them for high prices, and in turn by politics preventing building any cheap houses, so that rental profits are not damaged...

Because it's illegal for those homeless people to work.

>why do people starve in a free market?
You do realize there's only about 100 or so annual cases of starvation in the US, and they're exclusively limited to anorexics and criminally neglected babies.

Realistically, nobody starves in the US

the rich guy richer of course, what do you think profit means

People need to die in order to keep the rest of us productive

Is for the good of humanity... If we have everything we need you end up with the films idiocracy and wall-e being documentaries

Most European cities evolved incrementally and grew naturally over hundreds of years, with basically no zoning, or government land-use restrictions. In many cases the conditions were terrible for poor people, but there wasn't the sort of absolute lack of cheap, shitty housing that you see today. Over time, this incremental, free-market evolution allowed smart people to save money, improve their homes, mix commercial/residential etc. Does that answer your question?

>he hasn't worked a day in his life
Empirically untrue

Also, that criticism is completely unrelated to what he said. That's a classical misdirection fallacy known as a red herring

Yes, it's really quite hard to be so fucking worthless and incompetent to not be worth 10 dollars a week of bread and peanut butter.

Fine, if you really want to make this

>WHY CAN'T WE FEED ALL OF AFRICA?!!!

Because there is not a lucrative trade in dirt and sticks. Value has to be exchanged for the exchange to be worth the effort.

>baron trump has more money in his trust fund than you will earn in ten lifetimes and he hasn't worked a day in his life

Did capitalism give him that trust fund, or was it his dad who got rich using capitalism and the money his dad gave him?

Do any of you commies even understand what capital is?

> Housing regulations

I completely agree with this. Society's condemnation of slumlords and insistence on stricter buillding codes has done nothing to help the homeless.

How is it a red herring? The notion that capitalism rewards only those who work is clearly bullshit.

And when has baron trump worked a day in his life? Are you insane? He's ten years old.

I think it's safe to say you're a moron.

People being homeless has nothing to do with not enough resources, it's because they have mental problems.

Now, if you want to argue that they should get treatment, then make that argument.

Here is the thing OP capitalism runs on consensual transactions, so if i owned all the land and timber in this country why the fuck would i house others who in return have nothing to offer me.

Should i feel entitled to your personal belongings, do i have the right to take what is yours and give it to people who do not have the same?

Capitalism is the most efficient allocation of recourse because its drive is not ideology like what you are proposing, its ran on trade from individuals who weigh their options.

this is very interesting czech bro very informative.

can you tell me more about other aspects of living in the warsaw pact?

What was work like? How much did people work per week? Did they have to do work at home or on weekends? How many days off per year were allowed.

I am seriously curious. thanks,

And be honest with me, even though i am a socialist, i want to know the bad aspects if there were any. But also compare them to how it is now under capitalist czechia

I don't think you get how this works, commie.

Planners set up quotas to be met every five years, these quotas were almost never met but managers pretended they did because the truth meant the gulag, planners had no idea about the shortages and got the fudged numbers claiming that everything was great, so it created a feedback loop were there was never enough but nobody would admit it.

That's why you ended up with people waiting in line for hours just to get some milk and faulty products being put onto the "market" not because of malice or greed but because nobody would admit there was something wrong.

Canada is not socialist as it has a free market, same with Sweden and all those lovely European countries people love to drag into this.

But that's the Lockean Proviso.

You should probably agree to do so, because of the thinly veiled threat of force.

>manual labor is the only kind of work
You really think he maintains a fortune by doing nothing? Just sits on a somehow infinite pile of gold?

He didn't say capitalism rewards only those who work. That's a strawman argument

no one "consents" to you owning all of the land and timber, it would come down to the police protecting your property rights ie coercion

there's no "consent" in capitalism and is probably the most idiotic thing I've ever heard

Capitalism =/= free shit you stupid liberal

They pay out monthly? Like a mortgage? So you go get a new loan and then use your settlement payments for your new house.

>He didn't say capitalism rewards only those who work. That's a strawman argument
>Capitalism is efficient but it doesn't give anything to people who wont work

??????

> overwhelming majority of homeless are mentally ill, criminal, or both.

This is simply not true, or at least not the origin of the problem...

The homeless people are homeless because they are unemployed. They are unemployed, because they are unemployable, because they are dirty, almost illiterate. They are dirty, because they are homeless...

Once you fall there - for example because of bad debt and executor steals your house, it's almost impossible to get away...

Then yes, out of desperation, they are often drinking cheap alcohol. Hunger is better tolerated with a cigarette (or any tobacco from fag ends...)

Then - without state support (after one year unemployment the state support ends), one can either beg or steal ( or die of starvation? )...

So yes, finally, they end up being mentally ill and criminal ... This is not an origin of their problem, but their ultimate end...

---

During socialism in Eastern Europe, there were no homeless people, and there were no unemployed people, since work was mandatory and getting kicked out of work was very seldom...

On image - "Hotel of Vaclav Havel" , who is a symbol of throwing away of our socialism and returning us back to capitalism - hence bringing these homeless people problems...

It's not always that easy. Both the insurance side and the bank side will make things very difficult and make you jump through hoops

So in your ideal world, life is horrible for poor people. Got it. At least you are honest.

>this suffering is good for me
classic Stockholm syndrome

*questioning black guy pic* when you read libertarian ideology and you can't tell whether its satire or not

Oh, my bad, I misread the post IDs. I already refuted that claim by mentioning how capitalist countries are the most charitable nations on earth

I know this is bait, but i will take it

Get over yourself bud, not everyone starts out equally, there are those (pic related) who start out with almost nothing but then offer their services (consensually) to others for goods and services.

And what the fuck do you mean "there's no "consent in capitalism"
This morning I bought a cup of coffee for 2$, i consented to give up my 2$ and the establishment offered me three cups worth of coffee, no one was forced by the other party or a third party.

>and your[sic] taxed appropriately.

There is your answer. Government logistics is the most wasteful way to transfer goods and services. It attempts to remove risk from the equation and that is impossible without wasting a ridiculous amount of energy and resource in the process.

Better to let people judge the risks and consent to pricing between them, without government involvement. It frees up energy and resources for a government to protect those agreements in other ways, namely by defending it from threats or risks its subjects do not consent to.

Related and forgotten pic

Capitalism and the free market isn't about refusing to help each other. It's about finding the most efficient way to help each other. We don't need charity to be centralized in the form of a welfare state. Let us discover the best way to help each other

Because labour costs money and the poor aren't about to build their own houses that meet the required health and safety standards.

>Hunger is better tolerated with a cigarette
It's a good thing the cure for hunger is food then
Food costs less than alcohol and cigs

Homeless and unemployed people by definition do not participate in a capitalist society despite living among us

/thread

>there were no unemployed people, since work was mandatory

American commies are trembling in fear from this one simple statement.

The way they bitch about not getting enough "free" shit is nothing compared to the whining and gnashing of teeth that would occur if they were forced to work for their "free" shit.

*"free" = someone else paid for it.

>This morning I bought a cup of coffee for 2$, i consented to give up my 2$
you consented because youd end up in jail if you stole it
you also consent to giving away your wallet when a nigger points a gun in your face
there is no consent at play here at all it is all coercion if the protection of sacred property rights go away moron

I think there have been absolute improvements in technology, building materials, amenities, norms over safety etc, that won't go away if we scrap most of the land-use regulations I believe are screwing over poor people. In other words, cheap , shitty housing today won't be as horrible as the cheap, shitty housing of ages past. By making cheap, shitty housing illegal, we just remove options for poor people. If you want to help them, give them money to rent housing, and let them decide how shitty and cheap they want.

Most homeless people are homeless because they chose to destroy their lives with drugs. Capitalism is a social construct in which hard work is rewarded, and degeneracy is left to sleep in the street.

I invite you to take a stroll down Hollywood boulevard and prove me wrong. Mind the scientologists, they dont shut the fuck up.

because they would rather sit on their ass and do drugs/drink as capitalism is so efficient there are plenty of suckers they can manipulate emotionally into giving them money for altruism dopamines

Homeless people are more a failure of Mental Health care than a shortage of houses. There are more than enough empty houses for all the Homeless people in the country.

If you cannot see the difference between buying a cup of coffee and being mugged, you're retarded.

>The reason there are homeless has nothing to do with there not being enough homes to go around. Its because the overwhelming majority of homeless are mentally ill, criminal, or both.

This is very true here (third world country) homeless people are usually drug addicts (not always though. OP argument is still valid)

your argument is "they are not even human, basically"

you have never had a full time job have you?

>Lockean Proviso
This is why once i get out of college and start making bank I will be moving to Luxembourg or Singapore

Before you /thread your own post, you might want to consider how retarded what you just said is.
They participate in a capitalist society by simply existing

Or you know, we could just redistribute the land and money equally and build good housing for all.

As if any of those bums would lift a finger to do any hard labour themselves. Instead of building makeshift shelters from scrap wood and metal from the junkyard, they spend their nights in public areas that other people have built and maintain.

Hobos have a ton of excuses ready for everything, they place all the blame on society and other people and lack any semblance of personal responsibility.

>Why is capitalism good when something that doesn't mean capitalism is bad?
Please go back to government and economics you idiot. Capitalism doesn't just get resources to give away to people, That's socialism and hey you know what why are there homeless in socialist and communist countries?

He's retarded and ignorant about economics, but that doesn't mean capitalism is wrong

Thats wrong.

The real answer is because there is a finite of WEALTH. Capitalism is a machine and wealth is the fuel.

>homeless people are non-persons
this is your brain on capitalism

>you consented because youd end up in jail if you stole it

In a system where police and jails are provided through taxation, maybe.

The other option is you run fast enough to steal the coffee.

What would happen if there were no police or jails?

You're fast enough to run away with your stolen coffee.
You're strong enough to threaten the coffee producer and take it.
You're neither, and the coffee producer catches you and beats your face in with a rock.

>wallet

Communists don't have wallets. They use other people's money.

I think history and theory have pretty definitively shown that markets tend to better at those sorts of resource allocation questions than central government planning. If you want to help poor people, give them money and let them decide how to spend it. I suspect most would rent cheap, shitty apartments.

Equity > equality
Standards of living have increased to never before seen levels for everyone because of capitalism. There are less poor people, and people are less poor.
Being a poor person now is much better than being your average medieval person. That's because of capitalism

> this is very interesting czech bro very informative.
> can you tell me more about other aspects of living in the warsaw pact?

I've been young during socialism, only going to school. Have been ending high-school when socialism terminated, so I've actually got only the best part of it...

Army service was mandatory 2 years, full of bullying.

People were working Monday - Friday. There were some 3-4 weeks per year of paid holiday. Only other possibility was getting ill and having paper from doctor (some doctor could write it for a "bottle" of some drink...). Manual worker usually got better wage than engineer, all were small...

Many people were drinking, even in work. They could not throw you away ...

Also many people were driving out of city to cottages on weekends or just tramping in nature, playing guitars by the flame... TV was boring, there was no internet, people lived and joyed much more together than today...

There were problems getting some sort of goods (electronics), some were on limits (no more than kilo banana per buying person), but shops were not empty.

Renting a flat was cheap. Many factories were giving jobs with a flat. Studying and healthcare were free. Child houses with educative free-time spending was very encouraged.
Public transport was also not much expensive. (but cars were expensive and one had to wait in the "List" for it...)

Travelling abroad was very complicated burreaucracy, to western countries impossible.

The propaganda was boring and stupid, everyone knew it, many laughed it in private, just nodded "yes" in public. (Today propaganda is more crafty and treacherous, and now we also start to be not allowed to speak about some thinks...)

There were no homeless in socialist east germany and socialist czech republic. Same in the other soviet countries, i believe. Just food for thought.

Replace the word wealth with resources and everything you said is correct.

Wealth is just the product of economic activity. It's anything that has value. Resources are what is limited and what fuel the economy. Wealth can be created, but capital is finite

Capitalism is not practiced in the United States anymore. What is practiced now is corporatism. This were small business owners get rubbed out by large multinational corporations. It's too efficient and does not require as much labor as capitalism does. Hence you get more people slipping through the cracks I.e. Homelessness. You should see Portland and Seattle. There literally dozens of small tent communities spring up. Also down in Kalifornica the same.

You know what you would be saying in 1500 AD?

Standards of living have increased to never before seen levels for everyone because of feudalism. There are less poor people, and people are less poor. Being a serf now is much better than being a slave in the roman empire. That's because of feudalism.

These homeless camps exist because government land-use regulations like zoning have made building small, cheap, shitty housing illegal nearly everywhere in the US.

You have a point there about housing costing too much, but you just can't give away stuff for free because what is given away for free isn't valued. Have you ever wondered why homeless people are homeless in the first place? Sure, there are homeless who just hit on hard times because of bad luck, but a lot of them just can't be helped. Even if you give them money, a place to live, and a job, they will go right back to being homeless. Why? Because they don't know how to manage their own lives.

In our worst years (thirty years ago more or less) we had in Bogota thousands of war refugees from other parts of the country. How did They get a house if They had nothing and the Government did nothing for them? They made their own houses, where land wasn't owned: eviromental reserves in the hills. That's why our poorest population in the city lives in the hills.

Technically capitalism did avoid these people to become homeless but with terrible enviromental and social externalities.

If socialism is so efficient, why have they had more starvation crises than any other modern political system?

>The Soviet Union alone had 3 major famines/starvation.
>Venezuela is having one RIGHT NOW.
>North Korea likely has had several famines but they keep it under wraps better.
Not even Sand Niggers and their shitty authoritarian governments have those issues.

>we could just redistribute the land and money equally

What "we" are you talking about?

Is this the "we" that exists in your fantasy world where everyone is exactly the saaaaaame?

When "we" build this good housing, what part are you going to give?

Are you an architect? a plumber? an electrician? a carpenter? a a bricklayer? a roofer?

And, how are you going to force me to provide your dinner when you're busy all day building this house for free?

The USSR definitely reduced extreme poverty, however overall poverty levels went up across the board. He wasn't making the poor more wealthy as much as he was making everyone poor.

Corporatism is a subset of capitalism, in much the same way that the free market is a subset of capitalism. Capitalism is an umbrella term for any economy where the means of production are privately owned. The extent of government involvement simply distorts the markets, but it doesn't change their most fundamental concept of private ownership

Capitalism is driven by competition. 6 multinational corporations own th man. 30 years ago there were 30. Just like W/gun regulation, it must be well regulated in order for it to work.

Here is the thing though, im not some Anarchist fagot, I understand that If i stole that cup of coffee (lets pretend that there would be no consequences) that my fav coffee shop would lose money, and if others followed by my example the coffee shop may not exist because it needs to be supported. Even if i could get free coffee from this shop I would rather pay for it in order to sustain the coffee shop, because i like shop and want it to continue to operate (can you see where consent is playing a part in this yet?)

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
That's not at all what I'm saying, or what I would say in those circumstances

>Why don't people use their time and resources to benefit me for free?

I wonder what it feels like to be a fucking commie retard.

>why are there homeless people

because we don't hire felons and drug addicts

There is and was one thing really superior in our country, that I wish rest of the world also learned...

The "touristic marks" - traces in country, marked with visible white&colored signs, well marked in maps. It is easy to plan and make a route (trip) in nature, you know that there is a passage way, where it ends, how far is it, that you will not get stuck and need to return...

cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turistické_značení_v_Česku_a_na_Slovensku

google.cz/search?q=turisticke znacky&sa=G

(Because people here during socialism could not much travel abroad, they traveled very much inland, in woods and over mountains...)

I'm fascinated with your last point
>Today propaganda is more crafty and treacherous, and now we also start to be not allowed to speak about some thinks...

Would you say that is a problem in the US? I hate niggers, but what their black lives matter protest is perfectly legal, though retarded. It don't include acts of violence and street blocking, but the message is just as valid as me saying niggers are monkeys that need to go back to africa.

This, where do you think the labour and investment would come from to house these people, other people. Capitalism is about trading recourses not forcing people to work and pay under a gun in order to house people who are not worth the nails their house would be made out of.

youtube.com/watch?v=XdH38k0iUgI

George Carlin pretty much sums it up. Capitalist societies need a lower class to scare the middle class into working and staying in line.

But that's not true. The Soviet Union had every problem the West had, to include serial killers; often government interference made it worse and kept it secret. Homeless people in the states survive because we have so much for them to pilfer.

Would you throw away what you don't want if you've received them for free?

Would you ponder a long time over whether or not to buy something if it was free?

Would more garbage be produced daily if everything was free?

You only want your freedom to insult-segregate-harm others

That's why Marx said from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs

Socialism isn't democratic, it's not about being an independent entity. Everything you do is for the whole, not the part.

Because markets reward ability, and ability varies.

Does anyone else get partially triggered when they see someone with only one arm's worth of armor?

LoL, who do you think gave the Rich that money, If you don't like Rich people stop using their services, throw your computer away and the rest of your belongings and go live off the land from your own work.

...

capitalism allocates capital efficiently. that doesn't mean people without money necessarily get more of it.

There's also work ethic. Some people are just lazy, yet they feel entitled to everything.

I really hope your not trying to attack Capitalism with this report because in case you did not see numb nuts it was a the GOVERNMENT who ordered that, not a private institution.

WOOO GO JAGS

THICC

Typically I've assumed that's the shield arm and needs the most protection when shielding with a shield.

my point is that your position on capitalism today is the same as the stupid peasant's position on feudalism in 1500 AD. And most peasants actually believed that about feudalism for a long time so this is not a joke. You are have serious stockholm syndrome that's all.

I know. I'm just dropping some screencaps showing how bad government has messed up the free market.

Far from it, it would be foolish to insult-segregate-harm others if it wasn't in my best interests. That freedom that I want isn't just for me, but for every citizen in my nation. My hatred for them won't mean a damn thing if the rules are applied equally.

Oh they've been doing this since the Great depression.
My great uncle was a farmer who got a monthly check from the government to not grow anything. There are tons of farming subsidies aimed at restricting production so that supply won't be too high that farmers can't get a good enough price for their goods to make a living.

Agriculture is different because it's a perfectly competitive market. A bushel of apples from farmer A will cost the exact same as a bushel of apples from farmer B. So the price is important to keep farmers profitable.

That's why there's an age old joke
>How does a farmer double his income?
>He puts up a second mailbox

People are not rich directly due to their ability's. For example Kanye is a terrible artist as well as a moron. But people still buy his shit. People are rewarded by other people and their recourses and services.

The homeless are fucking crazy, and you should fix their MENTAL problems before you fix their residential problems.

Otherwise, you're gonna have homeless people take a shit in their home and spend their welfare on drugs and whores.

>pass laws to artificially protect property values, making it impossible to sell houses below a certain level.

>pass minimum wage laws so people can't hire low value workers

>bailout banks after they cause a mortgage crisis, subsidising the continuation of their failed lending model.

jeez senpai, capitalism sure is shit. wtf i love marxism now.

I am a government policy analyst. Will answer your questions for more Kate Uptons

this is utterly fascinating thank you so much and have a nice happy life czech bro

Im maintenance worker for space lift boosters. Ive been working since I was 15 and put myself through college without anyones help.

igor is the village drunk. he failed out of school in 4th grade and is unable to read or write. he cleans toilets.

we make the same salary and live in the same housing conditions and eat the same food.
Do you see why the soviet union had walls to keep people in? It all sounds great on paper but in reality is a festering shit heap. Go get a job, you ignorant, liberal commie fuck.

>You're the exact same as them even though we can empirically observe these claims in order to verify them now, whereas those serfs back then just took what they got.

You're retarded. The numbers prove things are getting better. It's not the same argument they used, it's much more complicated

I reject your immoral premise that I am obligated to live and work for anyone but myself.

Because capitalist governments have no concern for community or nationalism or concern for the less fortunate. It's all about the money and nothing else.

Why else are our cities designed in such a way that you have to fight other people just to walk a few blocks to get to your job in a cramped office space where you are treated like a hamster on a wheel.

Even Nazi Germany who we are taught are the most evil civilization in the history of planet Earth cared deeply for their young people and provided jobs, accommodation, meaning and purpose to their lives. What have modern capitalist countries done? Allowed you to pay huge amounts of money for a small dingy apartment where you get to have your mind and soul consumed by watching TV or browsing the net.

We don't need to live in cities for defence anymore, we should evolve our living and quality of life to match the worlds affluence. Every man, woman and child in america alone could have his or her own acre of land.

News flash Mr 15 year old OP

Most homeless people are homeless because they are giant pieces of shit. Not all, but definitely most. What do you think is gonna happen if you just build a house for some degenerate and put them in there? Look what happened with all of that housing after hurricane Katrina... They let the houses rot and ruined perfectly good domiciled costing everyone a fortune.

In addition to that, the poor in America live better than the middle class throughout most of the world. They are literally eating garbage in Venezuela right now.

Like democracy, capitalism might be the best system yet devised but it is still flawed.

You're pretty much already working for everyone else just by paying taxes from your income.

Are you retarded? Read my posts, I'm defending capitalism. I'm very educated in economics, and I know why socialism is flawed

I just said what Marx said. Jesus fucking Christ take the stick out of your ass before you jump to conclusions

Its actually much more efficient to allow people who fail at life to fail at life than it is to subsidize their failure.
Objectively your entire premise fails to account for this and you must move your goal post to address it.

>My hatred for them won't mean a damn thing if the rules are applied equally.

Your hatred is shared by many others. You know better than me what happened when everyone had the freedom to hate black people

Maybe the black lives matter thing and even the black crime are just results of historical mistakes your ancestors did.

4 u

If you actually believe in this bull shit why don't you start working for free and offering others your services and goods and only invest in yourself enough to survive, take your laptop and go donate it to a school then fuckwit and stop posting.

>from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs

On paper, that might sound good.
It doesn't work in the real world.

Again, even if you have some useful skill, how are you going to force me to provide your dinner when you are busy all day building a house for someone else, from whom you receive no payment for your services?

Are you going to stand over me all day and force me to grow your food and cook your dinner?

If so, then who is building that house for free?

You can't force me to provide your dinner, and force someone else to build a house at the same time.

And even if you could magically be in two places at once, while you're using force to extract a free dinner from me, and a free house from other people, your potential labor is wasted.

Wasted.

And, then, you come to realize that your threat of force is more valuable than providing food or building a house.

And then, communism ends, once again.

>that lack of hips
she's all blubber

because you tax them into poverty

>For example Kanye is a terrible artist
Nigga have you listened to College Dropout?
It's not only a great musical album, but it's also very redpilled.

There's a reason Kanye has so many Grammys.

I will agree that he hasn't made anything good since MBDTF, save for some parts of yeezus

>My great uncle was a farmer who got a monthly check from the government to not grow anything. There are tons of farming subsidies aimed at restricting production so that supply won't be too high
a government program to pay farmers not to farm is ridiculous

stop hating and get on with your life. trust me.

See It doesn't even work on paper. Socialism lacks the price system of a free market to effectively inform the population about the scarcity of resources, leading to both surpluses and shortages

She's a cutie. No idea how she got a modelling career though.

(your pic related) That laundry was stupid. By refusing to consent to washing black laundry, they gave up a good revenue source. But, it was their decision, far be it from me to tell them how to run their own business.

capitalism is about who eats the most burgers, nothing more

Have you ever helped someone out before in the long term?

Like I said, it's in order to artificially limit supply in order to keep the price high enough for farmers to make a living.
Is it efficient? I never said it was. But do they have a reason for doing it? Yes they do

last time i checked there was also more uninhabited homes than homeless in the US. capital is not efficient at allocating resources because it makes no accounting for emotional reasoning. pic related

it is a historical fact accepted by mainstream scholars that conditions in 1500 were better than roman days. So actually, your argument is exactly the same as the stupid peasant. No, you actually are a stupid peasant.

Alright he is not that bad but MBDTF and Yeezus are his only good works of art, my point is though the consumer are the ones who dictate the market, which will end up with cases where Kanye is traveling the world enjoying the cream of the cream of society while much better artists like Mild high club cant afford yearlong vacations.

Yeah! We need more homeless people to even things out!

>provide service to 12% of the population
>85% of the population stops using yor service
>good business

Yes the gov has their reasons but the gov is totally and completely incompetent and has no idea how to properly run a farm much less the entire agricultural industry.

>retarded ancap bullshit

wow i think someone has got a bright future in business

Are people slaves that they should be forced to work for you? We are all the mercy of nature, capitalism is the means for cooperation.

demanding something but giving nothing is not cooperation but theft.

Blacks and Jews.

Now that your crybaby ass-shit's out of the way, the reason we don't do it is we don't have to/get paid to.

That sounds cold until you realize you'd have few producers and many consumers. Hand shit out, and it's not paid forward.

>I love welfare, but only for white guys

Not empirically observable. Historians aren't economists

So eat a dick

Real growth is production of what people demand. If your group is really better, promote them to increase demand

yeah pretty much

>tfw Anarcho-Capitalist

That is why income tax is illegal. And don't give me the amendment crap, that is like a thief saying nothing is wrong with stealing by virtue of saying nothing is wrong with stealing.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Never said they weren't. It was just an anecdote relevant to your posts.

>working for free
This is literally impossible, if you do work someone is reaping a benefit. Unless of course you live in a capitalist country and do nothing but browse the net all day in an office while getting paid $25 an hour.

What would be a better society imo is if we lived in rural areas but kept the technology aspect. We could have people doing code and freelance work on computers. By spreading out into rural areas there will be more demand for work (houses to be built, plumbing, cable lines, etc). It is absolute horse shite that people "want to live in cities", people live in cities because they are forced to and the fucking hollywood media shows us images of cities being exotic, cool, trendy, hip places to live in when it's a dog eat dog rat race hell hole.

This pic shows better what i meant

>weird Slav/Brit fetal alcohol syndrome face
do you even know what the fuck you're saying

Long term, no because that requires a lot of money. But I do help out short term whenever possible.

This.

When you run the numbers, your statement is correct.

how is that weird exactly? what, are you a manlet?

200k? Shit nigger, I'm moving to America.

Jim Crow laws hurt the southern economy more than it helped it. A korean war vet I know would tell stories about how shops would have signs saying
>No Soldiers, Niggers, or Dogs

Maybe, just maybe my friend agreed with it because he also had stories of fucking every prostitute near the army bases and smashing niggers heads in during a race riot on a german base. Perhaps the lack of consent on one part can be changed by the modification of behavior on the other.

The 85% of the population may have not wanted to consent to doing business, but racial reasons are completely retarded.

When I learned that governments pay farmers to destroy their crops and livestock in, while people around the world are starving, supposedly in order to attempt price controls I knew the gov was bullshit.

>That is why income tax is illegal

Legal and illegal are true social constructs.
Why does anyone pay income tax?
Because men with guns will come take you to a prison where other men with guns will force you to stay, if you don't pay.

We can brag all day about how much we're elevated above the other animals, but in the end, might still makes right.

Always has, always will.

Yes buddy people really want to live in cities you know why? Thats where all the babes are, the bars, the places to be. It sounds like you can rise above all the degeneracy though and find a better way to live in a small town, and hey all the power to ya
(All i want is a cute germanic girl to live with on the country side while we raise our children where they can explore the wilderness and i don't have to worry about niggers kidnapping them)

1) we aren't living in capitalism
2) not every efficiently deserves a place to live.

>This pic shows better what i meant

It's still a silly picture.

So you forced white people to send their children to school with blacks.
At gunpoint.

How have things improved for either group since?

Are blacks smarter?

Or, are whites getting dumber?

Communism is all about the lowest common denominator.

You don't make people 'equal' by elevating the dumbest and most useless.

You make everyone equal by crippling those who are capable of achieving more.

tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

Who would consider a 40% tax rate "free market?"

...

>Waiter, this pasta is old!

Also, kys

...

My point is: if your ancerstors hadnt excluded black people from the same education and economic opportunities the white people had, your black population would have been less criminal more succesful today

This is an example of a market failure. Government needeed to intervene to prevent racism to get out of control

>people really want to live in cities you know why? Thats where all the babes are, the bars, the places to be.

The country is a rough place for chicks.
No one stares at them, or hits on them.
No one gives them truckloads of attention.

The few who care more about their family than their ego thrive out here.
The rest go absolutely batshit insane.

Sure, cities create more than attention for women.

But, I guarantee if all broads moved to the country tomorrow, EVERY city would collapse within a year.

Sorry for my broken english

I am currently learning it

she's really hot but has a very disappointing ass

Honestly it all boils down to this. Do you think you deserve to be fed after a certain point just because you happen to exist and made it past childhood?

Some one will always, fucking always, have something you either need or want. Be prepared to exchange goods and/or services to get it from them.

in the best way

Not every human has to have their needs met. If they contributed, they would have enough capital to survive.

...

Because people need to pay for shit. Unlike communism, people don't get handouts in a capitalist society.

>My point is: if your ancerstors hadnt excluded black people from the same education and economic opportunities the white people had, your black population would have been less criminal more succesful today

Yeah.
I'm going to need proof of that.

Haiti had a revolution over 200 years ago. They killed thousands of white Frenchmen and captured all of the infrastructure those Frenchmen built.

And, they celebrated by destroying all that infrastructure, and chopping down all the trees, and today their culture is rape and mud cookies.

Detroit was a thriving city 70 years ago.
It collapsed under negro rule.

Name one place that is more successful with a majority black population. Just one.

One single place.

...

>Sorry for my broken english

Your English is fine.
Better than most Americans of any color.
It's your ideas that are fucked.

Even if you're only 20, you've seen the disaster that comes from socialism.

You (or I, or anyone else) cannot elevate anyone beyond where they want to be. You can't.

You can force them to be less, so that everyone feels equal.

Your choice.

...

>Government needeed to intervene to prevent racism to get out of control
where the fuck have you been, they've been doing that for the last 150 years...

racism got out of control about when adam stepped out of eden and saw his first nigger

her face and tits

in clothes shes hot af

Pretty much. Capitalism is generally described in terms of macroeconomics, which is bullshit, because people do not make market decisions based on the velocity of money, or the national bank's interest rates, but rather through voluntary. personal interactions of both monetary and nonmonetary nature. Ignoring this leads to the ignorance of the social component of the economy, and it's eventual total misallocation because social suddenly is made synonymous with aggregate and average, which only leads to distorted views of costs and life necessities.

I once helped my former best friend in the long term, but in the end he showed no gratitude and took me for granted. It was then I realized that the only people who deserve help are those who have a willingness to help themselves.

oh look, another thread about socialism with a picture of a hot lady as bait.

really gets the neurons going (no seriously the skypes do this on purpose to get the neurons going and it works 100% of the time)

>racism got out of control about when adam stepped out of eden and saw his first nigger

Newsflash: People are happier and more comfortable when they live among others who are like themselves.

It's impossible to legislate out nature.
Even if blacks were 'exactly the same' as whites, we'd still despise each other if forced to live together.

Look at Europe.
They were so much alike they invented Catholicism and Protestantism so they could fight each other.

Niggers would be classified as a different sub-species if it weren't for the PC religion.

If we won't fight them, they'll happily fight us.

Not paying people enough to live and telling them to apply for government programs that we the people pay for is theft of the American people and is not cooperation but is theft.

I make 25 dollars an hour but still dont want my taxes going to every ones welfare when companies could pay them more since they dodge taxes anyway.

It's greed.

First off, no, being a slave in the Roman Empire was actually better.

Second off, no, feudalism essentially extinguished the Roman middle class and it didn't recover to Roman levels until mercantilism introduced something akin to capitalism, as long as you weren't a darkie.

And in general, bullshit, Romans had potable water, while feudal lords were more often than not slightly drunk because beer was the only safe thing to drink.

Fucking commies are so retarded.

...

>Not paying people enough to live

Do you really believe that a paycheck is a holy instrument, handed down by God?

>Not paying people enough to live

Why do you believe I should work, and give the proceeds to you, just because you exist?

Fuck you.

Come and take it.

Here's a story for all the commies.

The year was 1607. The first 104 settlers had arrived from Europe in Jamestown in the Virginia Tidewater region of the US in May. They found soil which was fertile beyond what they had seen in the lands which they had left. Fruits were abundant. Wild game such as deer and turkey were everywhere. There was no shortage of fish and other seafood. And yet within six months 66 of the original Jamestown, Virginia settlers had died. Only 38 survived.

Another 500 settlers were again sent to settle in Virginia in 1609 and within six months 440 of these too died by starvation and disease. This was called ‘starving time' and one eyewitness described it in English of those times, ‘So great was our famine, that a Savage we slew and buried, the poorer sorte took him up againe and eat him; and so did divers one another boyled and stewed with roots and herbs.'

How could this be? How could there be such death and starvation amidst so much plenty of meat, fruits, and fish. The fault as the witness said lay not in the ‘barrenness and defect of the Countrie' but in the ‘want of providence, industry and government'.

What caused this lack of ‘industrie'? Were the Virginian settlers lazy and indolent? It could not be. People who were sent there were the chosen ones – the very best of men.

The problem was that all the men who were sent were bonded labourers. They had no stake in what they produced. They were bound by contract to put all they produced into a common pool to be used to support their colony as a whole. This was communism in its purest form. Everyone was supposed to work according to ability and take according to need.

As so frequently happens with present day government policies, the results were the opposite of what was intended. Since hard work was not personally beneficial for the settlers they responded by working less.

Phillip A. Bruce, a late 19th century US historian, wrote of the Jamestown immigrants, “The settlers did not have even a modified interest in the soil … . Everything produced by them went into the store, in which they had no proprietorship.” The result as Bruce wrote would be what anyone who has any knowledge of human nature would expect, men, even the most energetic, refused to work.

This is what happened in Mao's China and in Soviet Russia on a grand scale. In America a few hundred deaths stopped the communist experiment, in China and Russia, millions had to die before these nations abandoned the principles of Marx, Lenin, and Mao.

Jamestown changed course just two years later in 1611 with arrival of the ‘high marshall' Sir Thomas Dale from the UK. He understood the problem, freed the settlers by abrogating communal ownership. Each man received three acres of land and, other than a lump sum tax of 2 ½ barrels of corn, did not have to contribute anything to the common pool. The colony immediately began to prosper. It prospered because each individual directly benefited by his labour and knew that he would also bear the full consequences of any reduction in output.

Communism doesn't work because it destroys the reward and work nexus. Communism doesn't work because the absence of property rights heralds the end of all incentive to produce. Communism fails because people do not wish to sacrifice their lives for others who are unwilling or unable to work.

The End.

Why do leftists want to bring in refugees and multiculturalism when there are homeless people, enough land and timber to build houses for them but instead you want to fund ficki ficki

You must first work to understand what capitalism is, and the answer will appear young one.

Because housing bubble is profitable.

I live in an ultra impacted college town and lost my financial aid for a whole year over a clerical error and ended up houseless. It fucking sucked, I think the statistic I was that like 10 or 15% of students who attend my university have an extended period of houselessness at some point.

>Why do leftists want to bring in refugees and multiculturalism

Lefties know they're the bottom of the barrel.

They know, consciously or unconsciously, that their only hope is to be surrounded by people even more useless than themselves.

Think of it as camouflage.

Because building working camps for them draws too much (unwanted) attention.

her commercial dressed as this character

Kate Chubton

youtube.com/watch?v=uHskC7JRL9M

>why does anyone have to rent an apartment when we have enough land and timber to build small homes for everyone?
We have more than enough materials. The issue is labor.

Where are we going to find millions of people to work for free, purely for the benefit of others?

Would you spend eight hours a day, five days a week building houses for free?

L O W T E S T
O
W
T
E
S
T

You get out what you put in

>We have more than enough materials. The issue is labor.

When commies think of free labor, they picture everyone but themselves.

Don't ever try to wake a commie before noon.
It's like trying to shave a badger's balls.

...

Shouldn't the gaping hole be on the bottom?

Fuck you I laughed.

Kate Upton is one of those weird broads who looks better wearing clothes.

Still, we're shitposting on an Iraqi grassweaving forum at 1 in the morning, so being drunk enough to fuck supermodel a few years before the wall beats the fuck out of her and forces her to eat 10,000 calories a day isn't entirely out of the question.

Worked in a soup kitchen, can confirm all homeless are drug dealing drunks who cant even manage not to steal from other homeless in shelters or not stab staff so get kicked out.

Every homeless man you see is absolute shit desu.

Capitalism is the norm but it is no way natural or moral or superior to every other ideology

>not come from a degenerate home?
People should be punished for their parents sins!

if shit posting on Cred Forums is so easy, why don't you write a book and actually make your parents proud for once?

STAND ASIDE.. I GOT THIS

how many homes have you built for the homeless?

haters

this.

can I have a tv?

The real reason her and Amy Schumer haven't done a movie together...

good idea.. build me a house. I'll even provide the land.

...

Now after waking...
This is my rather idealised view, an old-man childhood ...

Also has to say, that the people were stealing a lot. There was a saying, that who does not steal from state (factory), that is robbing his own family...
The people were not any much religious or even spiritual... Some where, but had to hide it.

> I'm fascinated with your last point
> >Today propaganda is more crafty and treacherous, and now we also start to be not allowed to speak about some thinks...

Your MSM's propaganda point is now Hillary Clinton. And it were WMD of Iraq, the evilness or even lack of democracy of Qaddafi (there was the best level of direct democracy in Libya before the West destroyed it). Your propaganda is obsession with evilness of B.Assad (who is rather a gentle man).
You switch on Media, and get a total stream of B.S. lies.

Our today's propaganda is Bruselles, is USA's point of view... "The USA _mistakenly_ attacked Syrian troops ... ... of which the USA and Russia is arguing..." The woman in advance knows, that it was "mistakenly" and only later admits, that those bothering Russians dare to doubt it to be non-intentional.
The "scientific" debate with genetical engineer, who just does not understand the superstitions, that people have against GMO, which are so natural, just methods changed a little... (no mention of dead bees, no mention of killing herbicides). The law, which mandates vaccination, and a debate arround... How a non-vaccinated child is dangerous among those vaccinated (! so why are they being vaccinated, if it does not protect them from the non-vaccinated one ?!)

and so on...
the stream of lies and prepared points of view is tremendous.

Why do millennials have the mentality of a child when it comes to anything even remotely involving economics? Most homeless people have problems that are completely unrelated to whether or not the means of production is privately owned.

Because capitalism is just an economic system where the means of production are owned by management or shareholders. A capitalist firm can coexist with a socialist firm, one that is owned by the workers.

The problem comes when either firm starts to influence governance. This is called corporatism, and is a form of oligarchy. It results in inefficient markets, and is what the united states is today.

Dude, user. Stop for a second.
>>Capitalism
>>Capital
It's NEVER been about meeting human needs, but filling human desires. Making. Capital.

Carlos!

> I'm fascinated with your last point
> >Today propaganda is more crafty and treacherous, and now we also start to be not allowed to speak about some thinks...

And what are we not allowed to speak about?

For example, our popular (finance) minister who very probably could win PM on nearest elections, have mentioned, that one particular gipsy concentration camp was rather a work-camp for those, who refused to work and were roamers. Which it exactly was. (More-over, it was on Schwarzenberg estates, because they needed work-force to handle windfallen trees. Schwarzenberg descendant is now in opposition, but was a very bad minister in last turn cabinet).

The (((minister))) of human rights, the despicable rat born in USA, little similar of Trudeau, gipsy&faggot-rainbow minister, immediatelly started a cry of "Holocaust denial !", "Worst crime!", trying to impose an impeachment debate in parliament over his colleague (second party in ruling coalition) ...

You cannot even mention any kind of truth about WWII now.

And why? Because after 100 years, when historians will walk today's peoples opinions, they would not see any kind of dissent, everyone agreed with mainstream view and it was perfectly true then and later. This way you _create_ historical truths after 100 years from now...

What are Germans not allowed to speak about? For example about Migrant crimes... About racial or national distribution of crime offenders, about gender distribution of intelligence...

Political correctness is worse propaganda than was in east-Europe socialism times...

Those child bearing hips on the right.

Giving someone a home is not as simple as building them a house.

Thanks to the housing bubble there's actually enough pre-built housing to house all the homeless in the country. The problem is that it's not economically sustainable. Much of that housing was built in areas you need a car to reach, and the homeless don't have cars. All housing requires maintenance and upkeep, which requires resources the homeless don't have. Modern housing comes with plumbing and electricity, which means water and electrical bills the homeless can't afford.

What's more, the homeless are themselves often part of the problem. In a wealthy, charitable society like ours, people are rarely homeless for no reason. Typically they have some form of personal or social dysfunction which renders them unable to effectively maintain a home on their own. They may suffer from mental illness or have criminal tendencies. They may simply be a bit dim or just lack the life skills necessary to be a good home owner and a good neighbor. Dropping someone like that in a housing development without effective support and oversight will at best fail them, and at worst degrade the community around them as their problems become a problem for their new neighbors.

fpbp

>If capitalism is so efficient, why are there homeless people even though there is enough land and timber in this country to build houses for them?

That's even worse than assuming people are hungry because we're not growing enough food. There are no homeless people who are homeless due to a lack of available housing. In fact, there's really a glut of housing out there. Homelessness is usually the result of ruined finances rendering people unable to pay for the housing they had possessed. Apparently, the average "stint" in homelessness is only 25 days between when their last housing lapsed and when they're able to find new accommodation. For those who are homeless longer, it's usually because of mental illness.

> In fact, why does anyone have to rent an apartment when we have enough land and timber to build small homes for everyone?

Efficiency. For the amount of effort required to build a similar number of units, building an apartment block is easier than building a subdivision.

uhhhh thique

Of course ! It would be racist otherwise. But the locals treat them like no-go zones. Where drugs and assaults happen on a daily basis. Portland is trying to figure out how to integrate these new communities into their city. They are having a heck of a time doing it. It only makes the local news because it does fit the MSM narrative of "the economy is great". If a republican was in office there would be whole issues of National Geograffic on TV and in print dedicated these cities popping up in Washinton, Oregon and Californica, and ????. Those are the only places I have seen them. I will try to get pictures and post up here.