What age did you realize that a capitalism is evil?

Corporatism is evil, not capitalism

>>>/tumblr/
>>>Holla Forums

when I was in 8th grade

MY FATHER

Ideology, taken to extremes are evil. ALL OF THEM. Religion, employs fanatic ideology and is always evil.

I was 12 once.

When the black lung took my coal mining dad \nd we had to eat squirrel and dandelion greens soup all a da time

I was only 8 and i want eat the rich cause theyb is well fed and taste good

At the dank age of 11, when I lost my first game of Monopoly.

Okay leftypol, you've had your fun. Its time to go back now.

Is that Mark Hamill?

because they're talentless losers

But daddy im already in my playpen! :^)

At around 8
It just went downhill for my life perception as of then.
But I wouldn't call it evil. As some anons already stated it's just a tool. People are the problem. We are always the problem.

...

Capitalism isn't evil, Human nature is evil. No matter what economic system you elect to use, humans will climb over their fellow species in the mud. Myself included. When you have a better option, like a well detailed plon to use machines in a sustainable way to supply humans with resources, THEN maybe you can complain about human nature as a whole.

Capitalism isn't evil.
Just the people we allowed to take it over.
Case in point.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the worlds largest charity.Warren Buffet gives half of his income to it every year
Larry Ellison gives to it.

But then you have some one who gives it a bad name.
Trump sues his contractors so he doesn't have to pay them.
Systems aren't evil people like Trump are.

But who do you think is rewarded in capitalism? who`s succesful in it? the "evil" ones that just care about profit, so that`s what you`re going to see.

That is why there are taxes/ If you make money you pay for that right..
But when a certain party sells out to big business and start calling robber barons "job creators" is when the rich stop paying taxes and it is left up to the rest of us to support the government.

Gordon pls

Tax is theft by the state, two wrongs don`t make a right

he's right though

Capitalism is ruthless efficiency, like a woodchipper. Communism is horrifying inefficiency, like a twisted nightmare.

So how do you pay for defense,infrastructure,international commerce?
How do all the people who don't believe in government get their money sent to their grandma's basement if there are no taxes to pay for it?

Defense from what? from other states? It sure makes sense to pay some thugs under threat of violence to defend me from other thugs that would steal from me under threat of violence.
The rest can be solved with techonology and communication not with bureocrats or businessmen

Like that's going to worry a level 70 paladin

Income tax is pure theft.

Technology will be the death of capitalism

This is fucking bullshit because technology is what has, does, and will fuel capitalism for the rest of time.

it's fun to make stuff up, isn't it?

Do you propose an IVA, VAT tax like most places in Europe?
That is bad for business.
Taxes are and have always been necessary.
Evey civilized place that has ever existed have had taxes..
The Income tax in the 50s is what propelled America past all the other countries, economically.

CHECKED

I thought it was helping rebuild europe by being the only not destroyed modern country of the western world.

stay cucked, statist

lel

Scarcity is what fuels capitalism. Technology makes abundance (the polar opposite of scarcity). Technological advancement is an inevitability under capitalism due to the competition it makes.
People become unemployable, unable to compete with technology, thus people can't earn money, and can't spend it.
The economy collapses.
Nothing like this has ever happened in our history It will be interesting to see, if it happens in our lifetime.

no, it doesn't, dumbass.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Existence is finite. In order to create technology something else must be taken.

Electricity, for example, is not free.
You sound like some dumb newage highschool kid.

Income tax goes to paying the national debt, witch is the debt the government owes to the FED (a privately owned bank)
There is no reason why the government shouldn't be able to make it's own money, and put it circulation.
The only thing the FED does is make us slaves, using debt as a control rod.
I am not saying all taxes are unjustified, but income tax is.

Honestly the number 1 tax I wish didn't exist is the property tax. and i don't even have a house or land. it just seems wrong.

I think you been sucking too much dick and it addles your brain..

Technological displacement?
1=!1000
If a factory's management decides to upgrade, and puts a 1000 people out of work, but only makes one job (the person maintaining the machines) then it is technological unemployment.
No, there already have been job markets that already have been obliterated by automation. We just had other markets to pick the now unemployed, but that won't save us forever.

what are you even replying to
for cucks sake take a hint

Nibiru is coming

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru_cataclysm

While it may be privately owned it is still run by the US government,And all of it's assets belong to the US.
EVery country uses credit to buy things.
While 13 trillion dollars seems like a large sum of money to you or I, When your income is over 20 trillion there isn't much to worry about.

o shit better hide behind the other side of flat earth! :D

I can dig that I just paid property taxes on my properties and felt I had been raped.

I know that, that doesn't make it fucking right, plus income is a private between an employer and an employee, the government has no business in it.

take what hint?

So you propose a sales tax like Germany?
They pay about 20% on top of everything else just to buy something.
Cheaper to buy a Mercedes in the States than in Germany.

generally, shit like sales tax, and property tax goes to something like schools, roads, and that kind of thing.
If that is good thing or not, is up to you, but income tax doesn't so anything for you.

Oh Fuck!
And here I am with no tin foil hat

oh noes!

Yeah it kinda does.
First it builds highways that I drive on.
It maintains the electrical grid.
And not to mention that it pays me.
I am a retired vet.
So it does mean a lot.
Local taxes pay for schools along with matching government funds.

...

income tax go to the national debt, that doesn't include anything you listed

goes*

Some of it does go to the national debt.
But not even close to most of it.
Less than a quarter goes to pay off debt.
And almost 60% is owed to the US

To a certain degree capitalism flawed, but communism is truly evil. Zizek is an idiot he talks like he just snorted 10 lines of coke and has a dick in his mouth.

germany, unlike america, provides it's citizens with services that the middle class can benefit from like education. In America, you are either poor and receive services off everyone else's dollar or you are rich and it does not matter. Additionally, much of your american tax is used to pay into an ever increasing debt that will never ever actually be paid off. If a debt just gets larger every year, it is not intended to be paid at all. Our government pays so much for a large military so no one knocking one day to collect. We, the citizens, pay taxes through force in an effort to keep pumping helium into a balloon which will eventually pop instead of tying it to string so you can hand it to your child, a metaphor which can also be compared to a government official saying you must stoke the flame burning in your kitchen or they will come take your kitchen from you and your family.

They are also being replaced with 3rd world Arabs and blacks because their leader is a globalist former communist. That's the difference between international socialism (Communism) and National Socialism. The latter actually works to the benefit of the people and doesn't seek to destroy them with external influence.

Actually Germany has a higher percentage of debt to gdp than the US does.
I am aware of germanys education and medical gifts to the people.But Germany is only 1/4 the population of the US.
The US has more people with health insurance than any other country in the world, With medicare and VA benefits combined we have over 75 million insured and Germany has 80 million peopleThe rest of our 240 insured are on the capitaluist system and pay less as a group than germany does through taxes.
Germany pays a much higher percentage of their income to the state,
The US owes less that 3/4 of its income to debt Germany is over 3/4
The facts are it is working but it could be better.

Yeah Nazism works Just ask Adolph.

Capitalism isn't even. It's only when government intervenes. Making minimum wage ect.

that is when it crashes countries.

Inflation. It's the end result of Capitalism+government+and human rights

Inflation?
When was the last time that the US had inflation above 1 percent?
And with out the government involved the big corporations will continue stealing from the middle class.
Don't believe in trickle down economics.
That just means "Give me all your beer and when it starts to trickle out of their bladder. you may drink your part.

maybe dreams do come true?

AYE HITLER I KNOW YOU LIVE FOREVER AND ARE HIDING SOMEWHERE ON THIS IMAGE BOARD. TALK TO ME ABOUT NAZISM.

Capitalism with laws protecting people from it, is the way to go..

Why the fuck not? Did they forcefully take it from other people?
I don't know anything about them, so please educate me if I'm wrong on this.

Brother you need to put down that crack pipe.
That shit is fucking with your head.

but dubs…

All governments and economies have failed at some point or are failing. It's the majority of people, both in power and out, that are generally the problem.

i know user, i know

I think you clicked the wrong link; here let me help you with that.
8ch.net/leftypol/index.html
There you go. You're welcome!

This user "rewards based off of an individual's agency and personal drive" the Kardashians have never had either, yet they are rich, and will never have to work a day in their lives.
Success in capitalism is base more off luck then anything.

When I was 10, then I outgrew it around the time I hit puberty.

15
I then realised how idiotic socialism is at 17, after studying history.
But, y'know, those 100+ mil people dead, no true socialist did that!

When I realized that humans are evil and all government systems are evil "all of them" communism, socialism, capitalism every thing is shit! It's all shit. I am building a spaceship and leaveing this shit with tay my wufiii.

yeah bro, capitalism is like totally evil

If it were, scientists would get payed lot more.

what you personally think something should be worth ≠ what it actually is worth

I believe that I don't believe

Considering the alternatives are shit like socialism/communism which are absolutely fucking terrible, I'm going to go ahead and so get a fucking job OP.

The concept of monopolies scare me, I think we should give all power to the state so they can control everything, this way a single organization won't get in control of everything.

...

That means it's fair game to take away their fortune?
Would you also take away a naturally strong man's strength and a naturally beautiful woman's beauty because that gives them unfair advantages?

I am not saying it is fair or unfair to take away shit from anyone, but I am saying capitalism isn't fair, as luck isn't fair.

...

And this is why Monarchism is superior to all.
;)

Im not even going to lie so far every single country with a monarchy in addition to the normal government has been doing much better than those without
Also why aren't we making republics anymore, where its basically a bunch of provinces/states that work together for protection

Of course, everybody knows that life is not fair, but you can greatly increase your chances through hard work.

This man decided to have only one income source.

Unlike capitalism, Gun are made on the purpose of killing people.

You can protect yourself with a gun without killing your assailants.
It's just that guns are pretty good at killing them if all else fails.

or you work hard for no reason

Well, it's still your choice if you are willing to take the risk.
In socialism, there are bound to be people who are forced to work for other people.

that is great, I don't like socialism or capitalism.
I am with this fag, and would like us to use technology to transcend the need for people to work for living.

When I was like, 12 or 13, I don't know. You'll grow out of it when you're a man, OP.

Technology COULD free us from work, but it's actually being used to enslave us more.
Now push your Amazon button to order more Doritos.

...

I don't know about evil but it is stupid, the world wasn't meant for mass production. The overuse of resources is fun right now but it's gonna make this planet uninhabitable and weirdly people seem okay with it. They will say things like "yeh but then we can colonize other planets xD" not only is that just assuming something we are so uncertain on but it's dismissive and shows zero respect to our planet. If we treated this planet better then we wouldn't have to search for a new one to inhabit. Some people seem to fool themselves into believing that the earth will have an infinite supply of anything we want, that's just not true and as resources get more scarce there are going to be serious wars over resources maybe even a new world war.

...

People are not "weirdly OK with it".
Capitalism eventually becomes self aware, and uses the media to brainwash people into defending rampant consumerism.

Environmentalism is attacked hardest, followed by socialism, because they are the greatest threats to just burning though non-renewable resources as fast as possible.

Technology won't "save us" and we'll soon hit insurmountable diminishing returns

What kind of criticism of socialism is bad?

When it comes from an American? All of it to be honest, because it's irrational nonsense.

Some things (health care) are just better when they're nationalised. It's more efficient and leverages colossal buying-power against drug companies.

The United States has a lot of welfare programs that appear to be more designed to make people dependent on them rather than allowing them to get back on their feet.
I agree that nationalized health care is a good idea, though, but I do think people who take deliberate measures that are detrimental to their health, such as being obese or smoking, should have to pay more into the system.

They usually do. Not sure how your tobacco taxes are.
Did the US class vaping as a "tobacco product"? That would be a fuck-up because that's a massive health saving right there.

Tobacco is pretty expensive here, so I guess it may be used to subsidize health care, but I don't think there are any measures in place to punish obese people.

How is an ideology that's all about self reliance and focus on what a man is able to do rather then what he can do for you, Evil?

age 15 but this basically

must be real nice know future

They did, in fact, classify it as a tobacco product. Because big tobacco and the medical associations paid by big tobacco lobbied for it.

I think capitalism would be a great thing if money didn't have a huge say in what the government decides.

I'm a physics fag. I know what is literally impossible (or impossibly hard).

Non-physics fags don't understand Carnot efficiently, so they just expect things to improve linearly because "technology always improves".

Another example is chemical batteries. Again non-physics fags expect magic batteries to eventually arrive but they never will, because even the best energy density possible is actually really shit.

Computing power. That's ultimately constrained by thermodynamics.

And so on, and so on. Thermodynamics is a total bitch, even before you begin to factor in economic and political reasons why good stuff will never exist.

That's why people propose shrinking government to a size where it is not profitable to try lobbying it.

Americans are beyond fucking retarded.
You can't "shrink" a government because power simply exists.
There's no such thing as a power vacuum, because it will be immediately filled by kike run corporations, who will capture the government, and any regulatory bodies anyway.

Same argument against anarchy. Great in theory, but NOPE.

You're a physicist, not an engineer.
How the fuck can you claim to be able to predict the course of technological progression?
Yeah, power needs are important, but isn't only variable.

I am not American.
You can shrink the power a government has by not granting them the authority to rule over certain things.
While it has failed on multiple occasions, in general, free speech is protected in the United States.
If you give the government an inch, they'll take a mile.
One example of this, and the reason why gun advocates appear as zealous as they are, is gun control.
In some areas of the United States, gun ownership is de facto outlawed and in many others it is heavily regulated in spite of the second amendment because people kept allowing them to make "reasonable restrictions."

Stupid Americans have lost all their civil rights OTHER than gun ownership.
Now they sit at home with limited speech, and a TSA fist up their ass, waiting for their property to get seized by corrupt police, but at least they have a shitty little pistol.

If you don't have a strong central government, you end up with myriad corrupt little quasi-governmental organisations, that are free to fuck up your life.

American has no justice, except that which can be bought, and live under corporate tyranny, and all because they can't fucking organise a proper government, and not that federation of states shit.

It's because no one wants to get their hands dirty and murder some mother fuckers trying to overreach. "Oh we're a land of justice that gives everyone a fair trial"

Ya know what, If the blacks have such a problem with cops, they should organize, and fight to the death or assassinate every single cop that has killed an innocent. Trust me, If cops that killed innocent citizens were one by one murdered, The rate of ANY police killings would drop substantially. (im not justifying BLM, im just saying that if they really gave a shit they'd go kill some mother fuckers)

If we still had the ability to pay taxes separately from the currency we have as income, we could all just organize and stop funding them, but now that they've set up their own personal direct deposit from your paycheck, all you can do is resort to violence to get a message across since labor strikes wont work in america, some other fuccbois would line up ready to take your job, and protests are a joke.

You talk all those platitudes and still it's one of the better countries to live in.
How is free speech more limited than gun ownership in the United States?
Are you sure you are not talking about Europe (where I live) where both gun ownership and free speech are heavily regulated?

Adult age, once I understood that there are necessary evils. :^)

They did not plunder or steal any of their money, people willingly gave it to them directly or indirectly.
It makes more sense to blame the general public for showing interest in the most boring celebrities ever than to blame them for exploiting that stupidity.

The Kardashians sold the rights to videotaping their marriage because they knew there were studios willing to buy those rights.
And those studios paid top dollar for those minutes on tape because they know a lot of people are gonna buy their magazine or see their shitty shows to know about those incredibly banal and boring people getting married. It's the customer that bought into that that's to blame for this, if blame is to be distributed.

So yes, the Kardashians do deserve their fortune.

I know efficient batteries are actually one of the biggest problems we currently face, namely proper storage of power.
It's the number 1 reason renewable energy sources aren't used everywhere, not necessarily their investment costs.

But there's more ways to do this than just "better chemical batteries". Different processes that allow the storage of energy in other means like chemical energy or potencial energy in some form. Even plain old thermodynamics could help as soon as we find some good isolant.

And for the matter of computers, there's also the possibility of scaling it down further, reducing the power usage of individual components or keeping it the same while further expanding it's power.

Efficieny isn't just about having more available but also about using less for the same result.

europe and america are in the same boat of overbearing limitations.

In america, there is a certain cultural assimilation where if anyone says what they think everyone is offended. It's more intrusive to ask someone who they are voting for than to ask them their sexual orientation. I asked my father 7 different times who he is voting for and he said "iggy pop" every time so he could ignore my question.

people get insulted if you ask them how much they are paid. People get insulted if you say you support oranges over bananas. Everyone has varying degrees of victimization syndrome that doesn't allow them to work together to get anything done. since every individual is comepletely and utterly alone, it is easy to herd them in the direction you want to. This is why we are used as a cash cow.

Europe isn't a country, if you're from around here you'd know that.
And every European country is substantially different from each other especially in it's population and the way they think.

You might live up north, where "crime thoughts" are actually being enforced.
Down south, nobody cares. There's a generalized feeling of apathy that blankets every reaction and nobody gives a fuck about what political party you vote, how racist you are or even if you own illegal guns.
It's not that they agree or not with either you or free speech, but rather that nobody expects things to change ever and trying to go against the flow is a lot of work for little to no return.
Mediterranean countries are mostly like this, you can pretty much do whatever the fuck you want here and nobody cares about "das offensive, muh man!"

Those are not instances of the government prohibiting such speech.
While in some European countries this has certainly led to legislation prohibiting speech that will offend, the United States has been (mostly) safe from that thanks to the first amendment.
People are doing their best to tear it down, though.

I live in Austria. Being a national socialist is prohibited here.
While I do actually lean to the left, I don't think speech, unless it is directly and immediately harmful, such as ordering people to murder other people, should ever be regulated by the government, no matter the historical circumstances.
I do think this intellectual laziness is one of the factors opening the doors for the current hysteria about "hate speech."
Where do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

What age did you realize communism is childish ideal that can not be achieved in practice?

I don't even think communism is ideal anymore. How is being forced to work for others and striving for excellence being disincentivized ideal in any way?

And yet people keep losing their jobs left and right for being offensive to the wrong crowd.
It doesn't take a law to screw people's lives, only those that would enforce said law.

That's History screwing your country. Sorry about your loss, but national socialism is a shitty policy anyway.

Portugal, where everyone is so fucking lazy they'll vote on a candidate so he wins the first round of elections and we don't have a second one. Yes, this happens.
My father tells me it's common among all Mediterranean countries. Spain, Italy and even Greece or south of France are mostly the same. General apathy to the point "free speech" laws that restrict it are pointless. Even in my country, lots of people are salty about niggers and their reparations that we gotta pay. They can spout whatever racist shit they want and nobody cares. Still illegal to fire based on that and I think a nigger can sue you for calling him that. Not that anyone cares anyway.

Like I said, I am not fond of Nazis, but it is a very dangerous precedent to set.

I think companies should be allowed to fire employees for "having the wrong opinions"; it is unfortunate, but I would also hope that people in general will not work for or do business with spineless companies that bow to mobs.

I also think companies should be allowed to be openly racist, sexist, and any other form of discrimination you can think of.
The free market should decide if such a company should be allowed to subsist, not the state.
That is because I do believe anti-discrimination laws are what opened the door for affirmative action policies to spring into existence.

Ummmm, it's called socialism and it's a system that's proven itself to work.

And before you try and post examples of socialism "failing" I'll just cut you some time and let you know that those WEREN'T socialism. In those cases when we gave total power to the state they turned out to be dicks and not do what we want and that's not socialism.

The idea is to give total power to someone and then have them be nice and great guys and then have the people who replace them be good leaders too.

You see the problem of capitalism is that people are inherently greedy and will take advantage of being in a position of power, this no longer happens under socialism.

A nice balance between capitalism and socialism is what is needed. Keep your people healthy and give them just enough to get back on their feet if they get fucked.

Beyond that, I think many of the "failings" of capitalism are actually misattributed.
The government should not subsidize any private company, especially ones that are already rich and do fine on their own.

Regulation should be minimized. Competition should not be regulated. The only "regulation" should be laws that protect citizens from morally bankrupt companies that would, for instance, poison drinking water to maximize profits (this is something that actually has happened).

Those are my thoughts. Maybe I'm wrong.

You know what the communist kids tell us every time we point to Mao or Stalin? That those weren't "real gommudists".
If you're gonna classify every failure as something unrelated to your system, I'm gonna call that a "no true scostman" fallacy, because that's what it is.
Try to post examples of Socialism actually working instead of asking everyone to ignore all the cases where it failed, that might convince people.

That's Monarchy.
That's Fascism.
That's Meritocracy.
That's Democracy.
That's Communism.
That's literally every form of representative power where you trust your resources and obey a ruler with the promise that he will be benevolent and caring with his people. That's even Capitalism if you consider that the idea of capitalism is giving power to the corporations and have them be "nice and great" and the corporations that replace them being "good leaders" of the market too.

Socialism isn't different from any other political system: it works on paper, it breaks down when people are involved.
My country has an overly Socialist policy and the result is that the underclasses it's supposed to protect get used to the welfare and free cash in state incentives they get. What was supposed to be a safety net to bounce low class citizens back to middle class at least has become a mattock where they lay asleep without moving a finger. Socialism doesn't work, it only breeds laziness and poverty. It needs heavy regulation to prevent abuse but that's just admitting the system failed.

That idea is correct but like I said, it needs heavy regulation.

You give your citizens a safety net in case misfortune strikes so they stay healthy and can get back on their feet, some will consider taking those helps full time. If it can be an alternative to an actual job, many will take them without ever trying to get back on their feet.

I'd at first tell you "absolutely not, companies do the most unscrupulous things for cash and end up treating their employees like shit, firing them to keep hiring cheaper ones".
But then I keep remenbering how companies are now refusing to hire new employees because it's a pain in the ass to fire them. I honestly don't have a solution for this, the world is fucked.

Here's something I said in another post:

What do you think about that?

When i seen that socialism and communism killed 149 million

when i realized that capitalism gave us phones, internet, facebook, computers, rc cars, and 8ch

fuck off kike

I think that has nothing to do with Socialism, that's what I think.
And that it's correct too, of course.

You need to chill the fuck out Adolph.

Huh?

Politics, amirite?

Should I type slower?

Please don't. Just tell me what your post means because I'm retarded.

It's just a namefag that wants to call you Adolph Hitler because you think companies are run by grown ups that don't need daddy telling them this or that word is a bad word.

Your racist,sexist post states all the tenets of the Grand Old Nazi Party.

Alright.

Grownups?
Retarded children more likely..

You have to go back.

...

Have you tried an ESL class.
I hear they really work.

Children need grown ups constantly telling them what to do. Not simply because they keep fucking up constantly, but because they don't know better. It's not fair to held them accountable for their actions when they are that young.

Companies, CEO's and grown men however have at least lived and learned enough to understand the consequences of their actions and what they say.
If someone wants to start a chain of restaurants labeled "Dead Niggers", this should not be illegal in any shape or form.
They are grown up and should understand the backlash that name is gonna give them, they should be held accountable by their clientelle on what kind of establishment they are trying to make and just who exactly they are catering to.

And if it should happen that enough people like or don't care about the name that the company still gets enough clients to sustain itself, then a "Dead Nigger" restaurant has as much right to exist as any other.

Now those idealogues that would shutdown such place because of it's name, those are the actual retarded children. It's the will of every client that sustains that restaurant that it keeps open and serving them. Demanding that it be closed because of it's name, because it offends someone, that's going against the will of all their clients, for the sake of personnal feelings.

Asking for the closure of that restaurant, trying to dictate what is and what isn't allowed based on principles alone, disregarding actual people in favour of personnal feelings or some hypothetical high horse you never had to begin with?
That's childish behaviour where you cry until someone does what you want, and it's retarded because it never ends well for you.

You got a full thread of arguments on "why capitalism is the best thing since sliced bread: it invented sliced bread".
It doesn't count as triggered when you're BTFO in every post. :^)

Is that supposed to be an insult?
English is my second language.

Just because they are above the age of majority doesn't mean they have any sense at all.
Businesses need laws to keep them from fucking everyone.

yes yes now go back to exploiting the common worker for profit. go on

Obvious.

Don't you mean "obviously"?
Otherwise you would have had to say "It's obvious" for it to be a complete sentence.

SO, I could call you an ignorant cunt and that would be acceptable behavior?

Really?

If you mean acceptable as in legal, then why the hell not?

Not as in legal.
As in common decency.
Do you understand that term?

Common decency is subjective. Furthermore, it would depend on the circumstances.
What point are you even trying to make?

You may be too young to remember a chain of restaurants named Sambo"s
The owners nickname was Sambo but people associated it with the old children's book "Little Black Sambo"
Both the book and the restaurant chain are gone with out a single law being passed to get rid of them.
The public demanded it..

The point I am trying to make is that racist behavior should not be tolerated by anyone especially a government of the people.

ITT: Class traitors protecting the system of their own oppression

Must really suck to be oppressed.

How far would you go with that? Would you punish people up for saying "nigger"?
I think you are quite incoherent.

Speech is protected but if an organization refuses service to a person based on who they are, that is very disgusting.
I am sorry you can't understand that.

Even if that were the case, (which I don't universally believe; Do you think a gun store should have to, for instance, give service to a known terrorist?) do you think it should be illegal?

It is not universal, just in free countries.
As for the terrorist question..
If a person is a known terrorist he shouldn't be wandering about to buy guns.
But that has nothing to do with racism..
It would be(and should be) illegal if you didn't allow Jews to buy guns.

I'll give you this example:
A known terrorist is wandering around in your country, but because the statute of limitations for his crimes has expired and because there is no reasonable cause for law enforcement to consider him a threat, he can just walk into a gun store.
The owner of the gun store refuses to sell guns to the terrorist, and because the owner of the gun store cannot legally refuse to sell the terrorist guns, he is taken to court, loses, and forced to sell him guns.

Obviously this is a very extreme example, but it could be applied to even more extreme or much more innocuous cases.
What do you prefer, businesses deciding on their on discretion whom they do business with or them being forced to do business with people they don't want to do business with?

I prefer the first option and let the free market figure out the rest.

You used a flawed example.
First, The statute of limitations on terrorism does not apply.
Second.
A person could deny service to a known terrorist.
Unless he denied him service because of his race.
If a person sold a gun to a known terrorist and he committed a crime with that weapon,, the business owner could be named as an accomplice.
Just like when you get cut off at a bar.
Dram Shop laws hold bartenders and bar owners responsible for people that are overserved.
Also in my state it is against the liquor laws to serve alcohol to a known "drunkard"

But a shorter answer is a business can deny service to a person, just not based on race or sex or age or sexual orientation.

What about religion?
About age, do you think a toddler should be allowed to buy booze or a gun?

Religion is also a protected class.
As for the toddler, as long as he is over 18 he can buy a gun.
But they can't deny a 70 yo from buying a gun based on his age.

Can they deny someone who has spoken favorably of Shariah to buy a gun?

Toddlers are fun to watch when they are drunk.
You can buy a gun at 18 but you have to wait till 21 to buy booze.

Cannot deny a person buying a gun based on religion.
Whether it is Sharia or Leviticus or the eight spoked path..

Maybe to you, and maybe to some other people, can't speak for them, but not for me.
If it was my right to shut you up, I'd do it, but since it's not, I can't do it.
However, if you later on require my help, I'll be less inclined to do so.
It's perfectly acceptable to burn whatever bridges you want, as long as you're willing to accept you can't walk them anymore.

Common decency tells you that you don't know what's gonna happen tomorrow. It's not a good idea to go around insulting people since you never know if you're gonna need their help or depend on their opinion of you.

Common decency also tells you that a society where everyone greets each other with an insult is not a very good society. Why, just imagine if there was a city modeled after Holla Forums.

If you gotta use age to prove your point…
Try "too foreigner". Not everyone is american, you know?
And how exactly did they do that? Did they stopped going to the restaurant because of it's name? The owner got served the consequences of picking a loaded word for his restaurant name.
Doesn't mean he wasn't free to do so.

One thing has nothing to do with the other.
McDonalds can freely refuse to serve any customer without any reason at all. What do you think "we reserve the right of admition" and many other variants that you see outside many "organizations" actually means?
If you were talking about healthcare or some other essential service, I'd agree that everyone should have the right for it. But if a medic wants to say "I just cured that nigger's cancer", he should not lose his job for that as his language has no relevance to his competence.

What kind of country\state is that? Are you in Texas?

Alright, but that's not how I would want the law to be. Sorry.

A business can deny service to anyone without even having a reason.
If you go to a bar and ask for a beer, there is no law in any country that forces the bartender to serve you.
He does so because he wants your money, but if he doesn't want your money for whatever reason, you aren't gonna get any beer.
And trust me on this one, you don't want things to be any different.

You are mixing this with laws about equal pay regardless of sex, religion or race, which is more a worker thing actually. Protection, put in place both for the worker and the economy at large.
If a particular race would have a lower wage, they'd be the only race getting a job, for instance.
You may also be mixing this with basic rights to healthcare and similar stuff, where everyone has the right to them, regardless of sex, religion or race. But again, those are basic human rights protected by law. Getting served in a restaurant or buying a new TV are not "basic human rights".

And if you are a foreigner then it wouldn't matter how old you are.
I think that the wrong idea about laws is rampant,
Speech, no matter how offensive is protected in the US,by the constitution.
But racist actions are not..
You can name your restaurant Dead Nigger restaurant.
But you have to allow the protesters to exercise their rights, too.

The KKK is legal
lynching is not.
You could call your restaurant

Lynching is not prohibited because it's racist, it's prohibited because it's manslaughter.

NO it is against the law to deny service to a person based on the protected classes.
I can deny you drinks if you are drunk or even stupid.
I can't deny you a drink because you are a Jew.
You need to talk to a business manager or owner.
In the US if you deny service you can be charge with civil rights charges.
I know a fellow Night club manager that had to close his doors because of discrimination.
Police sent a black guy and a white guy.
The black guy was told the club was at max capacity.
The white guy was allowed in.
First time cost 5 grand and a week closed.
Second time they took his liquor license..

True
but it is kinda racist too.
Don't cha think..

What's worse, killing somebody because you hate their race or killing somebody because you hate their guts?

Why?
Does it really matter
The civil rights violation is a federal crime.
Whereas the murder charge is usually state..

Different crimes.
Which is worse murder because you are high on crack or murder because you are a terrorist?
Same thing.
Murder is state
Terrorism ids federal.
Except terrorism can get you the death penalty.
Even though it has been decades since the US killed any body through the court system.
Civilrights violation may get you 15 years at most.
Also Murder in the commission of a felony is also a separate charge.

Guess you all got tired.
Later

I wish I had some popcorn on me

Then why say "Maybe you are too young to remenber…" if age doesn't matter?

Naming your restaurant "Dead Nigger" is not a racist action. It's lacking in foresight, but it's nevertheless within your rights.
Similarly, refusing to serve black customers is also a right you have since you can refuse to serve anyone you don't want.
There isn't a single law that forces a restaurant to accept any and all clients, every private organization is free to choose whatever clientele they want based on whatever criteria they want, including gender, race or religion.
Lady's night is blatant sexism and yet it's perfectly allowed. Gold courses that deny access to niggers are all over the place. You even have restaurants barring people's entry for not wearing ties.
All perfectly legal because they simply aren't forced to serve anyone they don't want to serve.

Which includes rallys outside your establishment urging people not go eat there and explaining what racist shitbag I am for naming my restaurant "Dead Nigger".
But preventing clients from going in or vandalizing in any way my restaurant is actually a crime I can charge them with.

Show me what law says that.
Human rights are protected by law, public services are also protected by law and all rights granted to citizens by the law are granted to everyone.
Equality of pay for the same work is a right granted by law, bosses are required to pay the same to an employee regardless of gender, sex or religion.
This does not mean however that they have to hire you over someone else. If a company is only hiring white people, that's perfectly acceptable and legal.

Bullshit, you're drunk. Do a little research and go check out what the "we reserve the right of admission" actually means, then go see if there isn't always a table saying that outside every club\restaurant\bar
There isn't a single law forcing them to serve people. They don't need to serve anyone they don't want to and they don't even need a reason to do it.
If a jew asks for a drink and they refuse it, they won't even tell you why to avoid problems, but it's perfectly legal.

So if white people lynch a white man… That's racist? Do you actually think these things before posting them?

Guess your D is for "drunk".
Explains the lazy ellipsis…

I wish I had some Tequila on me. Oh wait…

based zizek

Fuck off commie.

The same age that I realized that some companies have a consumer base which specifically targets homosexuals, people who consume alochol/drugs, etc.
t. Holla Forumsack

Free market extremists need to be put down.

So basically all the Americunts

...

While not ideal for EVERYONE (the weaker and those not born to an already successful lineage), capitalism is like a quickly paced version of evolution where businesses pop up as little single celled amoebas and try their best to evolve into animals that ruthlessly devour one another in order to become better. The trick is to create a business that acts more like a plant structure that can continuously make gains out of nothing and just uses the resources around it to thrive. The banking system is somewhat like a hybrid between a plant and a parasite.

...

Capitalism is just an economic system based on private property and trade there are 1000 of different variations of it.

Bernie Sanders America would still be capitalistic.

how about saying something that not everybody else already knows

I see a lot of young people saying that they are against capitalism when in reality they are just against big corporations having too much power.

Have you been an idiot all your life?
Was there some kind of organic damage?
Too much crack?
Asphyxiation ass play
I could reply to your stupidity but it wouldn't make sense since you just have no comprehension of reality..

Haha! Not seen this guy for years!

ITCHY ITCHY ITCHY!

Ugh, he's back.

Fuck off you boring, incoherent retard. You're all over the place.

bump