Do Millenials Dislike Capitalism Because It’s Not a Safe Space?

Capitalism is thr best thing possible for a white man. It lets him create and profit from it, from a small business able to support his family to creating an economic empire to drive his country forward toward greatness. Schlomo only knows the value of crony capitalism where his uncle can give him a job analysing bullshit stock options.

GO AWAY CLICKBAITING CUCKOLD FAGGOT

Then the American Way is for you

I'm not talking about Shlomo's nepotistic tribal-jobs shilling. I'm talking about niggers being flooded into our countries to depress wages while outsourcing and offshoring takes place.

Good Goy ancaps and all sorts of other free market true believers think this is a Good Thing because they are tunnel-visioned autists who don't see the end result of this over a long period of time (spoiler: it's what's happening now with demographics and nations having massive debt due to not generating actual wealth).

That tipping point right at the 18-29 age group made me sad until I rationalized that younger people are stupid saps who haven't been jaded by the harsh realities of how the world really works. It's a jungle not a utopia.

But the race stats are a lot more telling of the public opinion going forward. These "minorities" especially the Hispanics will out number whites in the upcoming generations.

Socialism only works in racially and culturally homogenous societies. I wish more people could realize that.

That's how it's being used now in a crony-capitalism sense.

We went from an production economy to a jew-tier finance economy. This right here is what fucked us. No wealth is being created because there is fucking nothing being produced.

Removing the nose from our economy would really be a god sent. Bringing back production will restore some order.

We can have socialism is homogenous countries. But it will never work in America unless the DofR happens, so don't hold your breath.

...

Capitalism, while encouraging rapid growth, leaves cultures wide-open for subversion. On one hand, you have Multinational businesses buying up politicians, so the lawmakers treat them favorable, while cracking down on competition. From the time of the Medicis the wealthy buy political office and influence, because otherwise the force of the government or competitors wielding government will rob them of their wealth. So you get what we have now where the establisment is so well-entrenched it takes one of them going rogue to upset the balance. Another side, what has the "free market" done to guard against society degenerating? Every dildo factory or porn peddler pops up because there's a demand for it, and no strong government to tell them "No, this is a net harm on the welfare of society." And this immigration and outsourcing problem the west currently faces, how does the free market select against reducing every single person into a fungible commodity?

Not to mention the rent-seeking class at prestigious sites such as The Huffington Post and Buzzfeed who build careers out of accelerating the decline of western civilization. (((Capitalism))) is actively funding our decline because buying comfort is easier than building a future.

This, combined with a delusional Utopianism that anything wrong with the current system is purely due to THE STATE intervening ("because no true free market would…") - which, like Communists, allows them to handwave any and every argument against their ideology.

Also

And lmao at anyone with a fucking sinecure at National Review calling anyone else the least bit critical about the current system a pussy that wants a safe space

If the USSA becomes a reality, people will figure it out pretty fucking fast, but not fast enough.

I lived in genuine poverty for the first year of being independent, it was a girthy redpill suppository I was not ready for, but eventually I accepted it. Maybe some of these little cupcakes will come to the same understanding if and when mum and dad throw them out the door. Until then, it's virtue-signalling and championing fauxcialism at all times.

what's an economy?

...

>>>/oven/

Hahahahahahahaha, he grew a beard to cover his non-existent chin. This faggot is so beta he is beyond pity.

We're getting screwed, that's what. The "american dream" scam run long enough, and it made a dream living - for a few. Everyone else minus the "few" worked on it and there is no payout for them. Our anger is a natural reaction you get after you've been scammed.

That's your real capitalism. Capital-ism. Capital of the "few" not you won the "free market", and they won all the power again, not you. And we're you as a pleb back in feudalism, because "muh capitalistic aristocracy" not you, never you. Bravo. It's the guillotines time to talk. that's you

Crony capitalism is just capitalism. They are literally the same exact thing. There is no "pure capitalism," just like there is no "pure communism." Because both of these pure ideologies ignore human nature. When human nature is added, we see their true forms.

Have you ever heard of Karl Marx?

Day of Rope

L.O.L., don't say that, user.. That will only make Holla Forumsiticians think that socialism is the right system for the racially and culturally homogenous society that they, we, dream of…

user…. What's that about?

Well it is mostly national SOCIALISTS here…

what is happening in the USA now is not capitalism

capitalism would let those banks fail,not be propped up by big gov

a capitalistic state would have minimal government
fewer regulations
more competition

prices would decrease or their quality would increase(and prices will remain constant)

what is happening now in the ENTIRE west is crony capitailsm which is why you see the young generation go full socialism because they can hardly make an income compared to their 65+ elders who lived in the good times

before mass migration from the third world
before when you could pay for an entire year of college & rent by working in the summer
before sjwism

National Socialism is not the same as socialism, though. For example, socialism can be found in some European countries today, but National Socialism cannot. Nearly everyone at Holla Forums can make this distinction.

...

Are you really trying to say that we don't live in capitalism?

Capitalism does not exist, because if you say it does, then you are accepting the paradigm that the philosopher Marx set up in the 19th Century.

Socialism just means workers democracy. It means nationalization of industry and services.

wew lad

Because of the reason I mentioned. You have to think outside of the box that Marx gave you.

Yes, but saying only "socialism" as that other user. did makes people think that the system that is proposed is socialism by itself without that extra National, as in National Socialism that you brought up with me.

Capitalism is garbage.
Who decided that importing the third world was a good idea, the Soviet bloc or the capitalist west? Capitalism is liberalism, it always has been and it always will be.

There's a big difference between one and the other…

Its not really anything to do with Marx's boxes; what we live in is capitalism. Almost everyone agrees that what we call the system happening now, is "capitalism". Capital exists, private property exists, waged labour exists. Sounds like capitalism to me. What is your argument to say that it is not?

Social justice and safe spaces are a part of capitalism. It is the commodification of subcultures and their feelings. It will be used to sell them shit they don't need by appealing to their feelings and sense of guilt.

they hate it because "muh big corporations are the reason I don't have everything" sounds better than "I'm poor because I'm a worthless waste of oxygen that can't do anything useful"

...

youtube.com/watch?v=EJQRGt4mjzU
They are both shit but one is more shit then the other.

...

Yes, but is being constantly regulated and generally done so in favor of supporting certain companies over others. In fact that's one of the large differences between Capitalism and Corporatism. Corporatism acts in favor of certain businesses and corporations, capitalism follows a more " Let the pieces fall where they may" ideology in which businesses are allowed to fail and succeed by their own merit and management.

The government hasn't followed Capitalism or anything resembling laissez-faire economics since the Great Depression with the introduction of the New Deal which soon opened the door for more and more government regulation and intervention within the economy.

That's not something unique to Capitalism…

Well, it's a very simple definition of Capitalism…

Government regulations on capitalism don't make it not capitalism.

And waged labour is unique to capitalism.

I don't need one, all I have to do is look at the misery that the implementations that Marxist philosophies led to, then I can say he was "barking up the wrong tree", so to say, and toss it all out. You should stop being so attached to words, especially from such flawed sources, user. That's really faclie thinking.

*facile

Just forget about Marx. He has nothing to do with it.

This is capitalism.

Just forget about capitalism.

Cut the crap. Capitalism isn't some

But what results from using currency. Even the all so powerful Eastern Communist bloc practiced state capitalism. The idea is to attract as much capital as possible.

The jews in their greed are trying to get everything under their control and they've almost succeeded with liberal capitalism and not socialist capitalism.

Now they want even the tiny specks of capital still sitting around, and use the millenial useful idiots to get them. they made sure millenials were getting fucked from the start, with almost no guarantee for them to have a happy life, blame it on some weird concept called capitalism so they can put even faster the leash on us.

I wonder why

I dislike capitalism because jewish corporations can't be allowed to sell life saving drugs charging exorbitant prices. The State have to establish a price cap to those needs. That's the role of fascism: a limitation to idiotic capitalism that doesn't go as far a socialism.
BTW the capitalistic patent system is shit: a small company invest in research, sells the drug for some years, then all big corporations are allowed to make a profit on that drug that they didn't research for. Making profit over somebody else work and investment, nothing is more jewish than that. Libertarians say it's for "competition", but it's bullshit, the price of the drug is decided by deals between the corporations, not competition. If the price of the drug is capped by the state, you don't need "competition" to lower the drug price, and the small company can have the exclusive over it's own product.
Fuck capitalism, fuck libertarians and fuck the jewish corporations they enable.

Do stock traders, bankers and businessmen dislike capitalism because it's not a safe space?

If so then why do their businesses and institutions requests bailouts from the government?

Why don't these stupid goyim buy into the system anymore? Oy vey, I mean it's not like they realized (((we))) exploit them all right? (((We))) can't sponge wealth from the Boomers forever…

This is low energy click bait shit, divide and conquer garbage.

Yes it's a bit accurate.

Capitalism means you are valued at what others decide because others decide what they want to pay you.

Anti-capitalism means you value yourself at what you want to value yourself.

Capitalism just runs so contrary to what these millennials want that it's not even funny (well sorta).

While I don't think the free market is perfect, that criticism is largely correct. Most anti-capitalists are useless and skill less so they prefer a system that guarantees certain resources (instead of leaving the market open for them to strive to earn it) even if it causes economic stagnation and perpetuates a society of weakness.

Probably has something to do with capatilism pushing nigger migration for the sake of profit

No they hate it because they were raised by baby boomers.

tldr: millennials hate capitalism because it's a nice punching bag to divert attention and anger from 'those' people. i'm not just talking about kikes. e.g. what are 66.6% of (insert-race-here) businessmen if not kikes with (insert-color-here) skin?

millennials are confused by the different manifestations of capitalism. capitalism practiced by anglos is different from capitalism practiced by africans, central americans, or asians. genetic differences lead to these different manifestations of capitalism. laws for employee protection, for example, are strict in places like europe or canada, but they are close to non-existent in certain other, equally developed countries. take dubai for example.

millennials have been brought up with the preconception that genetic differences do not exist because Muh Equality.

it is no wonder that as the anglosphere becomes more globalized, the deletorious characteristics of genetically alien capitalist implementations are increasingly making themselves felt. so millennials rebel against THAT, assuming that it's the true, demonic face of 'capitalism'. when in actual fact the dehumanization and exploitation being done to them is caused by Globalism. so they mistakenly believe the answer to Everything must be More Equality. and obviously the best way to do that is open borders, because all human lives should matter equally to all humans - a view which is sadly not adopted by 'those' outsiders.

a healthy amount of racism serves as nature's defence mechanism against exploitation from outside groups.

people don't feel that bad when they fight hard and fail within a game with well-understood and well-enforced rules i.e. the 'nation-state' spoken of by Trump. they feel PISSED when they think the game is rigged e.g. massive third-world immigration depressing wages and destroying their standard of living, etc.

the ((educational)) system works so hard to make people believe that racism is Bad because racial characteristics are instrumental in terms of why certain abstract systems - e.g. democracy, capitalism - do not work optimally in some places, but flourish in others.

disclaimer: yeah i know it's not all genetics. sociocultural differences, historical, et al.

/shitpost

I don't think you understand what "free market" means.

Neither ideology is good because they ultimately don't care what's good for their fellow people.

No, they are just parasites that would need to produce wealth without socialism to survive, instead extracting it from others work.

Millennials are the most racially diverse generation of Americans.
When he criticizes them, he is being a racist.

I would have more respect if you just flat out said, "niggers don't like free markets because they can't compete with whites".

In socialism there is a "full employment" policy, that means there are no "parasites" - everyone works. Amerifags can't even imagine the world where you get a job the day after you finish school, even during you get assigned internships to prepare yourself. That's how normal system works. Not the "you're free - to die, sucker" like capitalism.

No such thing as "capitalism", user.

Read this:

Fuck off commie, I'm living in (((EU))) and you parasites are stealing almost 90% of wealth I'm creating, if you add up all taxes: income, VAT, excises, mandatory (((insurance))) on everything, mandatory state and (((private))) retiremn fund and (((inflation)))

Lets have a look shall we?

Later… some jews contributed and built on their work… (Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, and even Rand brought it attention) but the origin of Austrian Economics, which is our only valid understanding of how markets work, was European.

Capitalism is just how markets work when you don't fuck with them. It isn't something rigidly implemented systematically, it is the absence of such rigidity. Austrian Economics has consistently explained how interventionism and central planning distort and break down market forces causing nasty things like business cycles, depressions, famine, etc…

itt Holla Forums is still economically fucking illiterate and can't into economics.

Well, yeah.

You can condition a brain pretty easily. If somebody is raised as a sex slave, they'll have the mind of a sex slave for many years, probably the rest of their life, even after they're freed.

Raise somebody with complete comfort and security, then throw them into capitalism (which is essentially a giant never ending competition) and they will reject it.

...

Govt intervention doesn't make it no longer capitalism, though. Historically the market in capitalism has nearly always been closely linked to the state.

If state involvement in the market makes it not capitalism, then something is only that thing when it exists in its purest ideological form. This state involvement in capitalism is just one of the ways capitalism can manifest. Its still capitalism, essentially.

Pretty fucking childish, but I would expect nothing less from a socialist.

Jobs don't work that way, neither has the drug war, neither have laws against murder, rape, etc… The problem is that such an arrangement would require omniscience and total authoritarian control on the part of the central planner.

As your agency is busily "creating jobs" for college graduates, how will you determine whether an engineer should go into food manufacturing vs. car manufacturing vs civil engineering?

How will you accommodate the glut of psychology majors and women's studies majors who basically are worthless outside of flipping burgers?

Your problem with capitalism isn't really that you're against letting individuals sink or swim, it's that you want the responsibility of your own failures to be offloaded to a nanny-state so that as you're sinking you can blame external forces for your situation instead of being shouldered with personal accountability.

Of course your answer will be "we'll manage all of those decisions too" (since all answers to failed government have always been, "we just need a little more government control to handle that") which, though you evade the fact, leads you to a totalitarian nanny state of peak control.

It only works if you have peak control to stabilize the structure, and the only way to exert total control correctly is to have total and complete knowledge… which is inaccessible to you outside of something like an NSA birth-to-death data collection model, where these kinds of decisions can be offloaded and automated.

You "love your race" but you advocate a world in which your race are treated like herded cattle.

You "love your race" but this approach to governance confesses that you believe your race is incapable of handling its own affairs.

I'm not going to read this shit.

Instead I'm going to remind everyone that capitalism is not a "space". It's not a system. The system is commerce.

Capitalism is not commerce.

Capitalism is the condition of the system of commerce being controlled by capitalists.

Capitalists are super-rich manipulators of money, such as banks and hedgefunds.

When commerce and economics are controlled by capitalists, it's to their benefit. And then the government is controlled by capitalists as well, and you have oligarchy.

You're not a capitalist just because you have a management job or own your own business.

You're a capitalist if you can buy a company, lay off everyone, buy their mortgages, foreclose on them, then bring in new debt-slaves in the form of immigrants and the young; saddling everyone with debt so you can make interest on your deals.

Are you really trying to twist the "That's not REAL communism!" argument towards capitalism? Are you retarded or a leftist?

Surely a system of commerce in which large scale capitalists own the vast majority of the economy, is best described as a system of capitalism?

Basically sums up your level of education on the subject, and also appears to be a statement of how you've handled accumulating knowledge on the subject throughout your past.

A capitalist is someone who understands that private ownership of capital, price systems, competitive markets, voluntary exchange, wage labor, etc… leads to the most rapid prosperity for the most people… and when governments get involved to control, regulate, or otherwise manage the operation of otherwise voluntary systems it begins to break down or become warped.

The word you're looking for is "cartoon villain."

...

Here's your problem.

What were people doing before capitalism?

It violates capitalist principles, and introduces distortions into markets, which is why its then referred to as a "mixed economy." It's about as healthy as a "mixed-race person."

I like how capitalism is voluntary. As if you can choose to not have a job, if there's no social welfare.

Until the capitalists used their money to change legislation in their favor. This is the nature of capitalism. Crony capitalism is the same exact thing as capitalism. Crony capitalism is just the real situation you get when you implement ideas from the capitalist ideology.

Privatize the printing of money, if you want no regulations.

...

Feudalism.

So you are literally using the "muh true capitalism" argument? Has this fantasy capitalism ever existed?
I guess the USSR wasn't communism either.

...

Holla Forums is not a discussion board for all things politics. It is more like a party. Would the Swedish Feminist party be considered a safe space if they kicked out a Swedish conservative nationalist from their ranks? No. Would UKIP be a safe space for kicking out a liberal globalist? No.

Also there's no reason for you to reply to the first Anons to sage your thread as if you are being silenced.

I'm actually pretty shocked about that, unless those geezers don't think there social security is a social program.

Yes Carl. It's the process of definition. If a thing no longer meets the definition to be described as X then it ceases to be that thing. Pretty fucking straight forward.

What we can easily point out over the course of history in the United States is that the extent to which markets were unmolested by government, the more rapidly we became prosperous. This have drastically changed though…

- Money is fiat paper
- income taxation, direct and unapportioned
- welfare nanny state (new deal / great society)
- etc…

What we're doing in America is coasting off of the prosperity generated when we had purer and purer forms of capitalism. Things are managed to such an extent today that you can't even build a fence in your own yard, on property you own, without getting a permit (synonymous with "Permission from the Government").

Notice
- manufacturing base gutted
- jobs flooding out to mexico / china

Trump isn't going to just make a new rule and restore the economy, he is going to unburden it and track backward toward less intrusive governance.

I just read through the part of Mein Kampf where Hitler explains the reasoning behind the party name. It has nothing to do with describing their actual economic policies accurately. They only cared about how the words sounded to the people's ears and which kinds of loonies could they alienate by choosing a certain name.

NSDAP policies were not socialism, at least not in the American sense of the word.

More like mostly (((CIVIC))) nationalists here sadly.

So the USSR wasn't communism then? :3

All of these were created by capitalists because this is the nature of capitalism. People get rich and then these people use their wealth to secure superior positions for themselves.

The failure of the "true capitalism" retards is that they take human nature out of the picture, bit it is human nature that causes capitalism to end up like the USA or the UK, just as it is human nature that causes socialism to end up like the USSR. That is because these abstract ideologies like capitalism and socialism start from their ideological framework and then try to force reality to conform to it, which doesn't work. You need to start from.the standpoint of nature and human nature, then build from there.

Of course there would be social welfare, and there always has been… it just wouldn't be controlled by the government. Private charity was infinitely better than the dindustry we have today of funneling money from productive whites into reproductive niggers.

The only reason government welfare exists is that women voted that niggers weren't getting good enough gibs when charity was privately handled (like capitalists would handle it).

If charity isn't voluntary then it isn't charity. If it is forced then it is a form of rent. Some people are better off not helped, and it should be up to whatever family / friends those people have to make that call.

What requirement doesn't the USSR satisfy on principle to be called Communism?

I've tried explaining that here before.
The larp is too stronk in the youngins.

They did in fact have to eventually implement a very limited form of capitalism to try and stay afloat, because their economy was nosediving into pure shit at incredible speed. It just wasn't enough anyways and it only dragged out their demise. They said it was just a temporary thing though on the path to the "no money, free shit for everyone" utopia.

Communism is so retarded that they had to use that capitalism that they hate so much, just to not colapse immediately.

And this is completely false history anyway. USA never had anything close to a free market. It was all just regulation and taxation at the state level rather than the federal level, but it was not free market. Tariffs, too, a huge no no to faggot lolbertarians.

its trotskyism and stalinism :^)

Most of these old people believe that social security is something they paid into so it is not real welfare. They don't take into account that they were paying in just a tiny fraction of what they get out. They literally believe it is like some savings account or something.

lol

These were all imposed by a government, which means they were not free market forces, they were not voluntary, they do not respect the principles of private ownership, or even self-ownership.

Money as fiat paper was not a market force, it was a collaboration of internationalists looking for a way to exert control over and extract wealth from the country. Income taxation was brought about because governments wanted more gibs from private citizens to finance wars that nobody wanted (hence the false flags), and couldn't find a way to obtain them, so they put a tax on "profit" (which initially only impacted profit on business, then later classified wages as profits, which is a fucking lie).

You can't just generalize like "it happened in America therefore it is attributable to capitalism." That is lazy childish thinking, and does not follow.

Capitalists are the only people that think we can all collectively benefit from essentially hijacking human nature (greed, profit motive, selfishness) to benefit everyone via voluntarism.

Yea the "human" nature of kike internationalists. But yea, keep believing all the 'muh exploitation History you were taught about industrialists in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

U mad, user. U mad.

get rekt mate
who drove up the pension age, who drove up the costs of living, who drove off with political carreers, who are still sitting in positions of power while new talent is trying to get in.
Who caused the economic crash? Who fucked up the environment? Who is making the youths work harder and harder, for less and less?
You can stick that stupid shit in your ass, where it belongs. This generation has learned on the internet, and we will not work for illegitimate purposes, and you know it.
We will not submit like our parents, we will not care if the world burn.
Why don't we care if the world burns? Because we did not ignite it, nor were we able to do anything about it.
tl;dr fuck yourself with a cactus.

After capitalists asked them for it.

All abstract bullshit that are not real. Again, read what I wrote. Your ideological bullshit is not real. You don't see it in reality because it cannot exist in reality unless it is being artificially propped up (which can only last for a shirt period of time). Crony capitalism is simply the reality of human nature taking a hammer to your naive ideological delusions of "pure capitalism."

You literally sound exactly like a communist, because you are exactly the same as one. You are stuck in your fairy tale world of abstract ideological utopia, so anytime reality exerts itself and smashes your fantasy, you can claim "that isn't real capitalism" or "that isn't real communism." No, that is the reality of capitalism. It is like an algorithm. You start with these certain starting conditions of ideological capitalism and once you set it in motion its output is crony capitalism.

And the ideology of capitalism is internationalist, you dolt. Capitalis is internationalist in its nature.

...

All I need to establish in order to make the point is that we've gone from more free to significantly less free markets over the last 250 years. That, fortunately, is incredibly easy to do.

archive.is/aNwgQ

Trying to compare 1816 with 2016 by saying "we've always had regulation and taxation at the state level" ignores the magnitude of difference for sheer convenience of trying to make it normalized when you know damn well it isn't.

lmao

...

Which worked perfectly, until some kikes showed up and fucked with the money supply and introduced gold coins.

An hero

Not inherently, unless you can argue otherwise…

Nationalism vs Globalism is a debate apart from Capitalism. Markets exist under nationalism, and markets exist under Globalism, therefore capitalism (unmolested markets) can coexist with Nationalism or Globalism. Of course I would strongly prefer Nationalism, because there is no reason for us to allow ourselves to be exploited by internationalists.

Exactly zero of what I'm talking about is purely "abstract."

Voluntary cooperation isn't "abstract" it's a tangible agreements that take place between people billions of times a day globally. That is as concrete as it gets. When I walk into a job interview and accept an offer… that is concrete. When I go buy groceries at Store A instead of Store B and agree to pay those prices instead of growing a garden… those decisions are concrete. Private ownership of capital is also not abstract. If I own a logging company and we're contracted to clear out an area, that is concrete. Contractual service agreements and rental properties are concrete. Self-ownership is also not abstract. Concepts of "Positive Rights" vs "Negative Rights" determine how we organize ourselves on principle for the sake of consistency and Social Order.

Anti-Intellectuals that complain about "abstracts" do so in order to blanket dismiss ideas they can't deal with… and its painfully obvious you're in a thread where you can't intelligently even critique capitalism outside of rhetoric that Marx wrote.

...

There are no gooder goyim than the National Review goyim.

Just like how they call themselves Conservatives when they're actually Communists of the Gramsci school following the Long March blueprints to subvert society with Cultural Marxism, they defend a system they refer to as "Capitalism," but it is in truth not Capitalism, but a hodgepodge of corporatism and plutocratic nonsense that has been smashed together for the sole purpose of draining wealth from powerful nations like America, the UK, and Germany to prop up the second and third world. It is an economic policy that exists solely to support a Globalist agenda, and nothing more.

Actual Capitalism has not existed in America since Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve into existence in 1913.

Not at all, but instead of blanket dumpstering ideas I'll be the one to look at the historical forces involved rather than childishly blaming "human nature" (which you haven't even argued beyond naked assertion). Ok faggot lets say its a problem with "human nature" what is the solution? (nb4 oppressive totalitarian technocracy)

In this case I think it represents a contradiction between two spheres of organization and social order; between economics and governance.

In short: One cannot declare politically that "all men are created equally" and then adopt an economic model that allows them to disprove this via competition on a daily basis.

American government and markets were destroyed because it couldn't properly handle globalism or the incompatibilities between individualism and egalitarianism. The obvious reason is these were not forces in 1776… and the founders couldn't fathom hoards of non-whites flooding into the country or international jewry doing its level best to enslave the planet. The pace of agrarian lifestyles can't exactly rapidly cope with the disruption of industrial revolutions. The racialist aspects of life were taken for granted as racial in-group and out-group were obvious when colonies interacted with Indians over the centuries leading up to the American Revolution. There are a lot of contributing factors… none of which are as simple as your laughable cynical depiction of "human nature" or cartoon villains.

The founders couldn't foresee that "All Wars are Banker's Wars" and that even though they explicitly declared that the only money is gold/silver it would be repeatedly subverted by foreign interests to pay for wars with paper and institute debt enslavement.

Even despite not being able to cope with these later crippling inadequacies, in a mere 150~200 years the United States went from new country which was heavily agrarian (to completely crippled by a civil war) to unquestionable supreme world power…

tl:dr

Why do I get the feeling when I start looking into these fine European gentlemen, that I'm going to find a bunch of slimy sweaty hand-rubbing Jews behind a curtain?

No, never mind, don't answer - I'll find out soon enough.

Good luck. Check em.

Cucks tryna be edgy.

Gas yourself summerfag.

This seems to be the core of a great many problems for the US.

One might argue those incompatibilities were exacerbated by conditions which arose, in part or in whole, from Semitic sources.

Indeed, though on that last bit I have to question as to how they could have no realized the hazard of the Jew, given this was a period of court Jews in Europe, and more than that, it was a period quite-literally thousands of years after ancient Greece and Rome, the writers in that period no doubt being contributory to the ideas the founders employed… And even in the times of Cicero, the hazard of the Jew was well known.
It seems hard to fathom that men of that period were unaware of the behavioral patterns of the Jew, and how their system might fold under subversive pressure.

It should also be noted that, IMHO at least, the founders failed in the semantic arena - they did not foresee the evolution of language, and so, though their ideas may have had merit if one restricted themselves to the parlance of the time, this evolutionary process of language resulted in degeneration of their ideas in concert with the degeneration of the language via which those ideas were expressed.
IOW: The meaning of words changed, and with those changes came assumed (through ignorance or malevolence) changes to the ideas expressed via such verbiage.

Jews were repeatedly and explicitly involved in, often the direct source of, these evolutionarily-derived miscommunications, usually to their own benefit.

Ehhhh… 'Human nature', no, but I would suggest the 'cartoon villains' of the Jew

This seems laughable, but perhaps it was true.
I'd like to see you back this up a bit.

And those (((foreign interests))) were often, perhaps even most-commonly, of what (((persuasion)))?

Seems like every war the US has entered since near the start of the 20th century were, in one way or another, directly or indirectly, motivated by Jewish action.

And within another 15-20 years it will be bloated national corpse, crawling with parasitic muds, kikes and degenerate whites.
I'm just sayin'… that worked out well.

Venezuela is homogeneous and yet it collapsed

Venezuelans aren't human.

Agree

The cartoon villain he's repeated referring to is that of the "corrupt industrialist who exploits everyone" which is a Marxist meme and has no basis in reality. The "robber barons of the early 20th century" is a meme taught to children in government schools because government wants you to believe that government was responsible for things like workplace safety laws, the abolition of child labor, etc… when it had nothing to do with those things until well after the fact. The example I gave was based Henry Ford here but I could have easily used Vanderbilt or Carnegie. Not to say they were free market purists, or even particularly good people… but they didn't deliberately fuck people for control and profit like…

You're a capitalist if you can buy a company, lay off everyone, buy their mortgages, foreclose on them, then bring in new debt-slaves in the form of immigrants and the young; saddling everyone with debt so you can make interest on your deals.

That was the bit related in the video, which isn't itself a dead end.

Yes, kikes.

Post-WWII has been an absolute train wreck, but none of that can be attributed simplistically to capitalism.

Fascism, obviously. The state must be absolutely dominant over capital and the capital-holding class.

No, it was destroyed by rent seeking, which is inherent to capitalism. Jews are the problem, but part of that is that they are simply the best at capitalism because capitalism rewards all the traits inherent to the Jewish race (capitalism rewards lying, scamming, rent seeking, nepotism, etc.).

We need a system where the decision procedure for who gets the most power is not simply who is best at making money, since those who are best at making money are not often the best people (more often they are the worst people).

Sure Shlomo, let's the big food corporations sue your country for not accepting to wash your daily food with bleach and chemicals that will bring about more diseases in one generation than it ever did.
Let's let big pharma handle your medics without restriction.
Let's let corporations make you work 45 hours a week with no minimum wage.

Praise the TAFTA/SOPA/PIPA!
Let all these crooked people take control of our countries and lives.
I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

It's hilarious to me how many "fascists" and "national socialists" on this board don't even realize how dominated their viewpoints are by Marxist class warfare bullshit. Then again it is summer break… could just be a new influx of cancer. Class warfare only exists when classes are stratified along racial lines, in multi-ethnic societies, and social cohesion breaks down. Europeans have traditionally been proud of their wealthier families as role models and examples of success to be emulated.

This is actually what you just said…

Nope. Explicit cultural racialism (meaning white ethno-states without jews) fixes this instantly.

That would be government regulation.
FDA is a government agency, the companies aren't wasting "bleach and chemicals" for fun, they would prefer not to incur the cost.

That would be government regulation.
The financial, medical, and pharmaceutical industries are the most regulated in the country. Logic would dictate that these regulations aren't doing a god damn thing.

Minimum wages are Government regulations.
Corporations can't make you work, since you can quit, and minimum wages really only create higher wages for the people that get to keep their jobs. The rest will be fired or "laid off" because arbitrarily increasing labor costs doesn't work.

Open borders trade policies are government regulations.
Capitalism and internationalism are not the same thing, and not inherent to one another.

The "crooked people" you think you've identified are government actors. Your solution? "We need an all powerful fascist government to fix all of these problems!"

Every time you point to something and cry "capitalism" I'll lift the sheet and reveal the government because it's fucking easy to do.

You're bad at this.

Best Goy award for, "How dare you evil capitalists imply I can act rationally on my own behalf… I won't be freed from the Jew until the all powerful government frees me!"

No, you still don't get it. The word "Capitalism" means nothing more than Mr Marx's invented word for bad.

Supporting "Capitalism" makes you as much a Marxist as supporting "Communism." Stop putting so much faith in his philisophical system, or else you're made into a useful idiot in the same way a cuckservative who goes around yelling "I'm not racist" is one. The same could be said for a pro-white who says "Sure, I'm racist" and then complains when he loses his job. It's because he has already accepted the paradigm.

19th Century philosopher Karl Marx: "Capitalism is bad"

19th Century useful idiot cuck:
"What's that, there is a new word being talked about by the intellectual class? I'll adopt it! …I am now a Capitalist."

Mr Marx:
"Great, now I have divided and conquered due to the acceptance of my philosophical paradigm!"

Argument:
The definition of capitalism is just "bad" according to Karl Marx, who is the person who original coined the term and completely determines its meaning to this very day.

Do an internet search for "Pierre-Joseph Proudhon"

this is true, though what should be the proper non-pejorative term for those who support markets, private property, and free enterprise?

Also as a bonus, since you got counter-dub'd so fucking hard. Capitalism is not simply "disagreement with Marx, just like a communist."

...

It's just businessmen and merchants. If you were against regulating entry into markets, then you might call yourself transient, because participating in markets normally requires good-will relations with the established tradesmen in the area, user..

I think that if a state interferes into markets at an unacceptable amount, then words to be used would be tyranny. If a market is restricted because of being in an area that has geographic or ethnic restrictions against sophisticated markets, these things need to be addressed for what they are, not hidden behind words that Mr Marx made popular more than 100 years ago…

That man's religion is economics, user. How incredibly facile.

Not an argument,
…and you're wrong anyway since his channel and site have been about philosophy for probably close to a decade now. Since economics has philosophical principles that can be analyzed and debated it becomes a topic frequently for the benefit of pleb retards like you and most of the socialists in this thread that can't into econ.

it's so easy to pick (((you))) out

you're always several months to a year behind

it wouldn't surprise me to see shills trying to blend in posting nyan cat or some shit

Hell is forever, "Anonymous". Remember .

Oh look, another post that isn't an argument.

I actually laughed.

Europe is a regulated market where we don't have (so much) big pharmas, nor do we have food cleared with bleach and nor do we have 45 hours jobs and no minimum wage.

Sure, it's clearly not what big companies want.

Yes, the valorization of capitalism implies big actors getting bigger and bigger in time (profit) and space (reach, new investments). 1984 (and every futurist dystopia basically) describes exactly that.

I never stated any of this and don't believe fascism is a solution.

Lol, so far you litterally did nothing to prove me wrong.

What Trump and all the nationalists in Europe are trying to do is putting a brake on that insanity of the market by containing inside the country's borders, because it's a game nobody can win, especially not when you have to compete with chinese and indians, unless we all become India and China, which is what's happening surely but slowly because of the falling profit rate.

I wise I could write more, but I gotta sleep. Good night fella.

Enjoy your filtration, Hell-bound Marx-cuck.

If they can somehow operate profitably with ever increasing competition and changing market conditions then yea, they deserve it to get bigger… but these never become monopolies without government help.

What you're referring to is something like government bailouts for kike banks as capitalism, and it doesn't even pass the smell test. Bailing out the auto industry, bailing out the airlines, bailing out banks… 'muh capitalism.

Trump is putting a stop to foreign exploitation by renegotiating trade deals, and building a wall, he isn't ending capitalism. It's funny considering Trump is a huge real estate capitalist who now develops hotels and golf courses for profit.

He alone blows your "evil capitalist" narrative the fuck out of the water. Even self-funding his campaign (i.e., a lone capitalist buying own way to the White House with his own money) for some reason isn't looked at negatively by you? I love the irony.

Back to your safe space faggot.

:^)

MAAAARRRXX CUUUUCCKK

Don't forget user, "I'm very rich."

Doing econ threads on pol is like running a race against palsy patients. I'm really doing it more for you…

Do you honestly believe 3 volumes of Das Kapital is reducible to "capitalism is bad"? You don't have to agree with the guy but this just makes you sound stupid.

There is no class warfare, numbskull, because the state is above all classes.

Jews do outcompete goyim in capitalism because capitalism is their niche. They are dominant under that system for the reasons I already explained, because capitalism rewards lying scummy conmen. The lying scummy coman will outcompete the straight laced honest businessman 9 times out of 10 in capitalism because he is willing to do more to win. He will bribe, conspire, lobby, and do whatever is in his power to win. This is what capitalism selects for.

A system built on virtue (fascism) instead of a system built on the ability to con and swindle goyim (capitalism) is best.

"Sound stupid"?

Wait, what's that I hear?

Get wrecked, clown.

Are you fucking retarded? Look at how the U.S. started. That is why most people are upset. Things fucking work but you have to intervene at some point otherwise some cunts are are going to fuck it up for everyone. What we have now is just cunts being cunts on rampage. Stop acting like you are a fucking idiot because if you don't get it by now you should be sent to fucking Mars just to see what what would happen.

Finally, someone who understands that the issues are structural - capitalism as a system facilitates these things. It is do with the structure of how the system of capitalism works.

FUCKING SPICS AND NIGGERS REEEEEEEEE

...

...

archive.is/uJSGt

i am disappont in u pol

What argument or point are you trying to make here? This is just a shitty response clogging the thread

...

Another great contribution

This is what makes your participation in this thread so completely laughable and childish. It's so blatant how much of this you haven't actually thought or read about in any depth.

Completely childish nonsense, and you reassert this over and over like you're throwing a tantrum. The principles that define capitalism are inherent in humanity, such as inherent self-interest, self-ownership (which extends into private property), objective laws applied equally (i.e., rule of law) as opposed to the rule of a dictators feelings that particular minute.

Really, ok what is virtue and which virtues is fascism built on?

Wal-Mart is getting fucking dumpstered globally because it can't handle small shifts in price variance. Volatility in geo-politics has created a natural constraint on the scale of Wal-Mart and they are getting btfo. Combine that with people in the United States who can't stand Wal-Mart and just don't shop there period… preferring places like Publix, Kroger, or Whole Foods. Either way this doesn't stop you from opening a local grocer tomorrow, you're just a lazy spoiled fuck that wants a nanny state to do it for you.

There are a lot of definitions for this, all of which involve petitioning a government and manipulating the political climate to benefit themselves, which isn't capitalism. Take for example corn subsidies… which is government regulation and not a market force… subsidizing shit like ethanol… but as a consequence its also something we feed cows now, and make cheap sugar with so Coke can pump 2$ 2 liters into everyone. (Yes, obesity is largely caused by the FDA and government intervention in food).

There are some significant barriers to entry but these are government mandated constructs and not market forces, like patent and copyright laws. The biggest barrier to entry right now is the disproportionate increase in taxation from the government of medium sized to small businesses… which obviously isn't a market force. So, what excuse do you have for not starting that business?

You've got nothing but excuses, and you're not the caliber of person required to own and operate a business so you're crying about it.

tl:dr you rack disciprine!!

Say what you will but it is undeniable and incontrovertible that capitalism in its current form is easily controlled by (((bankers and big corps))).
All media and capital will easily be taken over by jews in any "free" market capitalist society.

See Fascism and Nazism. Their economy flourished under an autarchic corporativism system that mixed private property with govt handling of the big capitals.

Capitalism has become outdated with the invention of mass media and finance: in capitalism, money controls you, and jews control money.

I'm actually pretty glad that a Marx-cuck doesn't like my posts in this thread.

Tell me more about how I don't look smart by cuckolded standards, user..

More where that came from, friend.

On they day of the rope, if it has wrinkles im fucking lynching it.

See

L.O.L., nah.

How can capitalism be accurately defined in any form as near total regulatory control from government?

Even the most fundamental concept of capitalism, private property, is gone. You don't even legitimately own property anymore, and I encourage you to forfeit paying property taxes and find out who shows up with guns to confiscate what you "own."

Calling what we have a "form of capitalism" is like calling Neo-Conservatism a "form of conservatism" in which it conserves absolutely nothing. It doesn't even make sense linguistically.

The presence of non-whites breaks things for whites, news at 11.

Hitler's economy was largely deficit spending or "borrowing for public expenditures" where he hired people to build roads and shit, gave subsidies to farmers, and tax rebates to stimulate industry. It was all fiat… and the speculative boom encouraged foreign investors (capitalists looking for profit) like Standard Oil, GM, and IBM to dump money into Germany.

Burning brightly for a few decades and extinguishing isn't hard, it's that whole "long game" part that gets people. Can you spot "the miracle" in pic related? I sure as hell can't.

Capitalism has a profit motive, but profit doesn't mean Fiat paper. Fiat paper is controlled by Jews, but they can't regulate the value very effectively of hard assets… which is part of the brilliance of the founders mandating that money be only silver and gold and only the government had the power to coin.

Is that a Street Fighter character?

Here we go, found it. I remember reading this in February. Just to give you an idea of how fucking wrong Hitler's economics were…

archive.is/2IcCD
Original: rawstory.com/2016/02/ben-bernanke-says-hitler-was-the-guy-who-got-economics-right-in-the-1930s/

[Jew] Ben Bernanke says Hitler was the guy who got economics right in the 1930s

What is childish, that's how it worked in the past in socialist countries. Your argument for "childish" is childish.

You prefer authority under feudalism i can see. Democracy fixes authoritarianism, with some pencil pushers that fix stuff. Yes, nothing fixes itself, you need some work done.

Psychology majors - to psychology stuff. You have jobs to do - you assign people. And if there is such surplus in some areas, and you suck at your job - flip burgers.

When a person is born - it's done. It needs food, shelter, clothing etc. Either you give them something to do in economy so they can work in exchange for this, or you have a bad "parasite", because again, there is no magic. "Not my problem" is only solution for yourself, not the economy.

But you only have smug faces as an argument, no nobel prize for them, wanker.

Guy in the OP looks like old Bobby "Someone's gotta stop these Jews!" Fischer

Good post

When the half of your income disappears it's not a collapse, you just lost it and you need to live more frugally from now on. Venezuela just went back temporarily to being a poor Central American country, like they were without oil. Prices will go up - they will have luxuries like they had before.

Yeah, keep repeating yourself that, it will make it true, morons. They still have the cheapest gas in the world, think of your precious capitalism next time you overpay at the gas pump because no socialists to keep them low for you.

Nah, Bobby Fischer was based. David French is literally a cuckold who is raising another man's nigger child.

"hey guys, feudalism is ok, because the king cares about his things the most!"

Cuck. Why?. Because "self-interest, self-ownership", but you're happy someone else owns everything. Yes, i can assume you're nowhere the level of rich capitalists that you defend.

He was truly a genius
Poor bastard

Funny, one of the arguments circulating around here occasionally is about how Kings actually are better than parliamentary democracy because of the fact that they in fact DO care about their country the most. They also like not having peasants / workers / voters with pitch forks chopping their heads off.

But lets ignore how little you actually fucking know about history of monarchy and just point out that any fascist "leader" with absolute power would be effectively the exact same as an authoritarian monarch, which you hope handles things perfectly because he "loves his country the most"

What is the difference between a Monarch and a Dictator? Their tastes and preferences.

Nope, but I'm not jealous of them either. …and I'm smart enough to know there are too many variables in a market to make any intelligible decisions that won't blow it up.

I grossed under 100k in salary last year… but that doesn't really matter. What matters is that you're losing the argument because you're one of the larpy newfag cancer "fascists" and "national socialists" that are voting for a "greedy capitalist."

Like most of you disappointed non-stem failures, Hitler was an Art student that didn't know dick about economics (which is why he couldn't fix it, and failed in WWII).

Remember to cast that vote for Donald J. Trump in 2016.

Well, sort of answered your own question there.

not bad.

That would be you, my autistic libertardian friend.

Self-ownership is not inherent to humanity (>implying there is even some abstract "humanity" anyway). And extending this non-existent characteristic to private property is in no way justified either way. You have two major assumptions here that happen to be wrong.

And again, these things are abstract nonsense, not real. There are no "principles" in reality. They exist only in your autistic ideology. Just like a communist invents these conceptual phantasms and then insists they are real.

The virtues are the qualities that make a good leader. As opposed to the qualities that make a good businessman (completely different).

Wal-Mart is really irrelevant to this topic because economies of scale apply more to production, not as much to retail.

Yes, it is a part of capitalism. You can deny it all you like, but there has never been and will never be a capitalist economy without rent seeking. Money buys access to power and those with money use it to establish conditions favorable to them. The only way to prevent this is to control the markets to such an extent that it would no longer be considered capitalism.

No. All sorts of subhumans, conmen, and retards run businesses. The lowest shitskin in Africa can run a business. The lowest Jew can run a business. It doesn't really take a whole lot to do it, yet you pretend these people are some extraordinary elite class or something.

Not really. I have a lot of discipline. Enough to get a PhD in mathematics. More discipline than 90% of entrepreneurs.

You are uneducated and don't even understand how the German monetary system worked.

Nah I hate it because its just another method of slavery to kikes or freaks, with an even worse ability to enter than chattel slavery.

At least there your life is set from birth, but under capitalism you actually have to pay to get in.

Europe is a steaming pile of shit.

Dislike of Capitalism is nothing to do with "safe space" idpol shit. Jesus Christ, Holla Forums idpol is just as bad as liberal idpol.

Capitalism is a form of cancer that spreads like religion. It's ideology in material form. It has completely failed in everything it has tried to accomplish.

Marx was a pretty yuge advocate of free trade :^)

Because a shark is the same as a goldfish, they're both fish after all :^)

So is yours you dipshit.

Fuck you people piss me off. You hide behind this tinsel of metaphysics when you're just as materialistically selfish as the biggest fat cats, only poorer.

Kill yourself, faggot, but crawl back to your own board first because I'm tired of cleaning up the bodies of dead commies on my turf.

Why do you hate white people?

Oy vey, no reward without risk. You want to keep up with the Joneses don't you? Don't forget to plan for retirement, and take out loans! Save your money, and pay no mind to the negative interest rates, you don't need guarantees or any of that other stuff, (((we))) have that under control goy.

Kill yourself.

I dislike capitalism because I don't want to work. But it'd be a waste not to work since I'm getting an engineering degree soon™

I'm pretty sure most millennials just don't want to work so they can be a special snowflake making their tumblr tier "art" and whatnot.

Also

You shitbags really don't understand anything we talk about here, do you? And Marxism is even more of an ideology than capitalism, since at least capitalism contains some economics truths. Marxism begins with falsehood as a premise and builds an entire system of falsehood from this.

Also, going along with the Utopianism theme among laissez-faire market libertarians/Republicans, is: elevating quality of life in your own nation isn't enough. They believe in using economics for global peace and dismantling racism and hierarchy because "muh exception to history"

muh true capitalism

- Starve two generations of jobs and purpose
- Lie to them, push Marxism
- wonder why Millennials don't like 'the current system'
- blame them systematically while force feeding them shit "god, why do you keep eating shit?"

Frankly, real capitalism hasn't been tried due to government intervention and control of the markets

All world powers have had unrestricted free markets with no government intervention like the UK and the US

I don't

Of course gender is different, it's also fucking irrelevant

I bet you subscribe to Ron Paul's newsletters

That's cool.

Just a reminder that non-white "workers of the world" like Tariq Ali, and many black leftists, are going to kill you guys first, not us.

Unlike Communism, Capitalism works better the closer you get to the ideal. Saying "capitalism hasn't been tried" is not an excuse as with communism, but simply a factual statement. The current system is not capitalism for the reasons cited above. We have had a mixed market since 1913, and have had steadily more government interference in the markets since that time until now we have only a thin veneer of free enterprise over a socialist kludge of centrally planned insanity.

In my opinion people who never gamble can't be trusted for the same reason people who hate capitalism can't be. Being able to take a risk is the sign of a brave man, and people reveal their true nature at the poker table.

It requires things they don't like.

These things include:

Basically most millennials would be r's, and a minority, like myself, K's.

Both "Capitalists" and "Marxist-Communists" are Marx-cucks, because Mr Karl Marx is the one who invented the terminology in the 19th Century.

Psychopath detected.

Nuh uh! When I say capitalism, I mean simply a free market. The free market is separate from immigration. I agree with your sentiment fully. Illegals and third worlders create a higher supply of unskilled workers and drive wages down or stagnate them. Controlling your borders is key.

Yes, but market economy(which is the foundation of capitalism) has been a thing since before written history, and its theory is based on Adam Smith's works which were written decades before Marx became influential. Shit, market forces even influence stuff like MMORPG trading, which have nothing to do with any economical ideology, because they're such all-encompassing principles of human interaction. Market forces are simply a reality, much like the maxim "might makes right", and there's nothing that can change that.

However, capitalism is a purely materialistic ideology, and it is in itself not enough to create a successful society. I believe the main tenets of capitalism(trade, property, contracts) are the key element to economic success, but there is more to society than just economy. A successful society must also protect its culture and its demographic make-up.

fuck you hotwheels let me post

So I couldn't post this yesterday because of the cripple.

...

No, the reason they dislike anything Western is because half of those dimwits aren't even white. I am a M. and I know how god damn hard it is to not be a complete idiot about anything these days. And a third of those under 30 in Western Europe are from abroad or not from the spot they live, their parents from somewhere else and sometime else.
Here a little list of info to contemplate:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Government-owned_companies_of_Italy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_transition_to_democracy in fucking 1975
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metapolitefsi also in about those times

Millenials aren't lazy in a conventional sense. Their parents who still earn decent wage are directly dependent on QE-indefinite, working mostly at state owned or state directed enterprises. If capitalism or even only efficiency would be introduced there, their parents and probably their pampered degrees owning offspring (aka Millenials) would be kicked onto the street. As the school robbed them off their logic and reason, they just feel that something isn't right and pure markets are against their immediate selfish interests.

Yes it does, it's called liberalism : global derregulation/unification of rules for all worldwide markets. Look it up.
It implies dragging USA down to India/China level, and making the whole world just a big slave factory.

You seem to be unaware of what would have happened to the economy if nobody bailed out the banks in 2008. Hint: worldwide economic collapse, SHTF. That's what hegemonic global capitalism tends towards.

So what is USA?

Switzerland has Novartis, 45 hour week and pure water coming out of tubes.

Where is your mammon now?

A response to this is:

America and Trump are losing the global capitalistic game, so no, he doesn't want to end capitalism, and it's precisely my point: he is slowing it down and literally stopping capitalistic progress.
Trump crystallizes the votes of the struggling middle-class which is about to fall into the lower-end of the employment/revenue charts. Last time it happened it was before WW2, in Germany, after the inflation crisis of 1929.

The northern part of the Americas is way big enough to be a policy-membraned system. Possibly even a closed system in certain circumstances. If there is money going round and somebody owns building, the owner will be filthy rich relative to the whole continent. I think that is enough.

Just take care not to grow to 400 Million… oh who am I kidding, US and Canada will be 600 Million spics and the environment will be fucked, so the riches of a Trump won't buy him peace of mind, just a square of dirt somewhere and tainted water.

[cont because hotwheels retarded site]

People who vote for him are losing the globalist game (the false song of globalism) and the Don is supposedly working for his electorate, so he would need to contain and restrict the market towards a nation-wide scale.
You think Goldmann Sachs and co are happy about that? Think again.
, you probably vote for Hillary.

actually, real capitalism has been tried many times and it worked so well at creating wealth it always lead to the emergence of spoiled little shits who voted increasingly big governments into power which in turn lead to crony capitalism and the welfare state.

no they dont like it because they want to sit on their asses all day and bitch on the internet.
they want to be free riders

...

Where do you draw that line? If the major differences between races and sexes (not genders you fucking cuck) are irrelevant, then how about the differences between species or the differences between living and non-living and so on. How can these things that have real effect be irrelevant? Only because you believe a nonsensical ideology.

Free market cannot exist with borders. That is why capitalism is inherently globalist. Borders are an infringement upon personal property rights (ability to sell your property to foreigners) and a barrier to free exchange between individuals.

As another user wrote, you are confusing commerce with capitalism. Commerce has always existed. Capitalism has not. The attempt to conflate the two is a Jewish tactic, to justify their ideology of capitalism (and yeah, the ideology was in part British, but the British were already fully owned by Jews at the time).

They don't like it because they have been raised by useless parents and educated by marxists.

They are doomed to be forever poor, in debt renters who are completely dependent on The State. And thus completely controlled by The State.

Your historical reference points are false. Capitalists lobby and vote for all of these things, not "spoiled little shits." The spoiled little shits just vote for what the talking heads and newspapers tell them to vote for.

What if I told you that capitalists actually like welfare. It's true. They like it because it shores up demand and becomes a direct subsidy to them at the expense of taxpayers (after the recipients spend it in their goods and services). This ensures growth in the stock market. The capitalist can then pay lower wages without worrying about a resultant drop in demand, and the worker ends up eating the worst of it though income taxation that the capitalist does not need to pay.

To clarify, welfare is actually a wealth transfer from the middle class to the upper class.

Not saying socialism is any better, but that's where we're at as a culture. And how sad it is.

Not to mention the white picket fence culture enjoyed by previous generations of Middle Class Americans is being trampled upon by the media and their jealous followers.

I'm beginning to doubt that a 'middle class' will even exist in a little over ten year's time.

Those of us who had the luxury of growing up in a stable two-parent household will probably not see a fraction of the wealth we grew up with.

Not to mention the sexual revolution horseshit pushed by the degenerate fucking boomers has effectively eroded the purpose of monogamous marriage.

Woodstock was a fucking mistake.

White picket fence culture was literally created by a Jew, though. It was an advertising scheme to promote suburban consumerist lifestyle.

that can't be any worse than the "being a jobless neet who posts in the same thread 23 times over 2 days" lifestyle (if you can even call that a life)

Capitalism has been running rampant without adequate regulations, which has resulted in the recession of 2008 and a lot of people are still hurting from that crash.

Capitalism without regulation is corporate tyranny. Socialism without capitalism is governmental tyranny. It's best when they work together. Check out this list below. The U.S. is pretty high up but notice what all the top ten countries have in common: adequate socialist programs to balance the capitalism that takes place there.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report

I'm not your enemy, socialism is not the enemy, it's the jelly to your peanut butter. It's the alkaline to your acid. It's the part of civilization that makes people more than consumers, but citizens with a choice.

The bank bailouts were anti-capitalist.

Give me one reason why worldwide economic collapse wouldn't be great. The ((( financial system ))) is a big kike control mechanism. A collapse instantly, at the drop of a hat, ends a lot of manipulation in the world… including the genetic manipulation of dysgenic weaklings being allowed to suckle off the tit of western civilization's prosperity.

It basically speaks to the OP, why some people don't like capitalism. Capitalism means personal accountability and that scares the fuck out of most NEETs, which means you get punished for your dumb ass decisions instead of supported and coddled like a faggot. If you make uneducated decisions, then you get punished for that too… and you should be severely punished for it. You'll either stop making shitty decisions or you'll stay garbage.

2009 should have been the year of ((( central banker ))) suicides, but because we've abandoned Capitalism, our ZOG government decided to throw money at kikes to keep it a float. Which has done nothing but hurt us, Europe, and Japan. Europe without the Euro is a Europe with a government that can't ((( accommodate ))) refugees or fund ((( diversity initiatives ))). A Europe without an EU is a Freer Europe, and the EU hinges on the Euro… which would be gone.

In 2009 all the ((( sub-prime loans ))) given to worthless niggers who can't and shouldn't own homes would have gone under. All the ((( crafty ))) people taking out multiple mortgages to flip houses and game the system selling ((( securities ))) to Fannie and Freddie would have been punished.

Capitalism is simply surrendering to Natures Fascism.

Welfare state is not socialism, nimrod.

Capitalism has nothing to do with nature. Property laws are not nature. Contracts are not nature. Finance instruments are not nature. Joint-stock companies and corporate law are not nature. These are all products of the state, so as the source of all of these tools of capitalism, the state can change any of them to best suit it's needs. Rather than somehow hindering capitalism, the state actually creates it through law.

Except that central banking control of interest rates caused 2008, not the narrative you've heard on MSNBC and CNN… the "deregulation" of

…oh you were shocked that what you were told by the ((( media ))) was wrong yet again? This is what happened, in as little as 4 steps!

1. The Federal Reserve (Allen ((( Greenspan )))) cut interest rates to as low as 1% so that after inflation we had negative interest rates.

2. As a result, mortgage rates fell to an all time low.

3. Low rates caused borrowing and lending to explode, particularly in real estate. For example, commercial banks more than doubled the amount of real-estate loans they made.

4. All these low interest loans had to be extended to people with worse credit ratings (read: Niggers) and this increased the demand for homes and other real-estate assets. It should not be surprising that home prices skyrocketed. Click on the link below to the Real Estate Roller Coaster:

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, mortgage-backed securities, and credit derivatives were simply the conduit that made all these bad loans and investments seem less risky than they really were. In this manner the Federal Reserve can fool the market, at least temporarily. In the end the market always reasserts itself.

Interest rates are simply the cost of money, and artificially lowering them CAUSES people to make irrational decisions and shorten their time preferences. I.e., instead of saving while in an apartment you rush out and get ((( home loan ))) because its 0% ARP ((( financing ))) is just too good to pass up. Thus central government control over interest rates caused the financial crisis.

tl:dr it was the kikes at the FED and you're a dumbass know-nothing and should stop posting.

What this means, pleb faggot, is that it actually costs you money to save and invest. Real negative interest rates incentivizes people to go out and shop and spend immediately based on a flawed Keynesian idea of ((( aggregate demand ))).

You see, simpleton pleb faggot, the conceptual flaw is the idea that our economy should always grow, whereas all other concepts in economics tend toward equilibrium. So, economists that can't into consistency look at a 0% GDP growth as a bad thing, when the reality is that based on stable population, stable technology, etc.. .etc… it should tend toward 0% over time (this is why China is like 20% gdp and we're at like 1%, because we've been developed for a lot longer).

Using the justification of low gdp and poor aggregate demand, ((( central bankers ))) attempt to justify all kinds of shit, like low interest rates to provoke increased spending… by penalizing savings. Politicians jump on board as well and import third world shitskins who want gibs… they then give the shitskins ebt cards and they go buy whatever gibs they want (this is exactly what is happening in Germany right now).

So basically you know nothing and you're a fucking nigger please be quiet.

Nobody is conflating them, they are on different hierarchical orders conceptually.

Commerce is merely activity, where as capitalism is a set of principles. Commerce has no principles… it happens… and this is what classical liberals studied… the activity of markets… i.e., commerce. Capitalism gets at what makes them work and how, what are the impacts of certain ideas (individualism, property rights, etc… ) on commerce.

You can have commerce without capitalism, it's just severely distorted and dysfunctional… you cannot have capitalism without commerce (the activities on a micro-scale).

Kek.

Incorrect.

And regarding your picture, Americans love Jews and capitalists most. Pretty funny.

Funny how random criticisms of capitalism are so contradictory. The truth is "Capitalism" is just a conceptual boogeyman catch-all for all of the following types of loser:

- Fascist larpers that like the fashy dresscode but don't really understand much else
- Reactionaries who are still too pissed off to think long range (we call you "newfags" around here).
- communists and ex-communists (you've been poisoned for life unfortunately, and the rope is your only hope)
- NatSoc Hitlerists that think you can base a monetary system on "the german worker"
- Neets
- R-selected pussies

…and a lot more. Learning principled economics, as well as the philosophical groundwork upon which it depends is a tough task, and you're not up to it. You're simply not up to it. You aren't even up to offering valid critiques of capitalism outside of "you're a marxist" which gets a chuckle each and every time.

Already btfo this critique in my first reply.

lmao

No you didn't. You wrote a spiel on the false and completely debunked Austrian Business Cycle Theory. There is a reason no real economists take Austrian theory seriously, and that is because it is nonsense.

A quick debunk:
socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2013/08/why-austrian-business-cycle-theory-is.html?m=1

Hitler dubs of truth? Anyway -

HEIL HITLER

All central bankers have been Keynesians. They're looking out for your best interest goy. Keynes was very ((( progressive ))) for his time.

Sounds legit

The reason is because it would require the government to significantly restrain its spending, which would cut off lobbyists, and prevent politicians from funding their bullshit programs. This would significantly decrease the power of government, and since we know government power only grows, this will never happen.

It's the same reason the UN will never get rid of the IPCC, no matter how much bullshit it is… it's there to stay.

So the two theories for 2008, in summary:

Keynsians:
- Umm, well capitalism clearly caused this. Even though Glass-Stegal didn't even pertain to banks abilities to buy and sell securitized loans, lets blame that anyway because people are stupid and won't know… we don't know but if you print a lot of money we can generate so much economic activity that eventually we'll reach "escape velocity" and it'll be normal again. If not who cares, niggers will get lots of free gibs and savers and earners will be fucked … but we're all dead in the end anyway way so

dude print lmao

Austrians:
- Umm, actually the government caused this, and here is exactly how: This is directly comparable to the great depression in a number of ways pertaining to interest rate manipulation. Therefore, the fed is the root cause of the problem and we should get rid of it.

Yea, its "debunked" because that is your only way to dismiss it after getting fucking smashed all thread.

Nice ad hominem bro.

False. There are real economists (not Austrian Mises institute shills) who advocate reduced government spending. They don't believe ABCT because it is wrong. Unlike Austrian shills who see economics as only a tool to back up their Jewish ideology, real economists make observations based on data and facts. They use these facts to create theories. When their theories fail, they get new data and modify the theory. You know, science.

Keynesians generally support capitalism, retard. Your strawman exposes your lack of understanding of even economic basics.

Millenials dislike capitalism because they have never worked a day in their lives. Never. Thereby, though have no idea of the value of working for one's day's keep. Because of that, they have zero empathy with the people who earn their living that they expect to pay for theirs.

nice source bro
nice cop out link spam bro
nice "I can't argue my position so here is a link" bro

fuck outta here with that shit.

I think in their minds they think they do, and are perfectly well intentioned (most of them, aside from every single kike central banker who is as I mentioned earlier… a Keynesian.)… but that is the subversion of Keynesianism.

Consider the contradiction:
A) I am supportive of Capitalism
B) Capitalism entails economic non-interventionism.
C) The government should intervene when it wants.

Obviously, if you believe the government should intervene when it wants, whether through management of interest rates, or management of money supply, then how can you convince yourself that you are even supportive of Capitalism?

It doesn't follow, which is why Keynes was such a success. It undermines capitalism. He gave the government the framework it needed to justify interventions (power grabs) and unrestrained spending (via deficits). Now politicians can actually claim to offer "shovel ready jobs" when they have nothing to do with job creation. He was lavished with praise because he too thought of himself as a Capitalist… but he was clearly not. The elite were more than happy to parade this "Capitalist" as a "great thinker" because his ideas undermine the thing they hate… non-interventionism.

You might think, "Oh, but just like Keynes I only think the government should intervene temporarily when Capitalism breaks" but then you've confessed outright that you believe Capitalism can possibly fail… i.e., a market can somehow stop functioning. You've also admitted naively that you believe any government power grab can be temporary, it would be the exception… not the rule.

This speaks back to the OP again… in that you believe all market interactions should be pain free, and that nobody should be held accountable for bad decisions. You believe the government should swoop in and save them! Functioning markets are not always pain free, because they are composed of the cumulative decision making of millions of fallible people… The safeguard of which is at least inherently they're all looking out for what is in their best interest, which helps to keep it to a minimum.

- Stagflation of the 70s
- Paul Volker's %20+ interest rates to save the dollar after it failed
- After the DotCom bubble was inflated and burst by government
- After the Housing bubble was inflated and burst by government
- After three rounds of quantitative easing has done nothing

Meanwhile we've had 1 interest rate hike in 10+ years, and ((( Yellen ))) is rolling over maturing bond purchases as they expire… Keynsianism hasn't been significantly revised since "General Theory" was published guy… All that we've done to "overcome" is blow the shit out of other countries, build bases, and construct a police state. The internet innovations helped quite a bit to mask the problem too.

The day of reckoning is fast approaching and Keynesians aren't predicting it, the Austrians are. Austrian Economics has been growing since White Europeans in the 1700s began writing about Commerce.

mises.org/library

Which of the central ideas of capitalism do you find offense with? Private property, contract law, or free trade? I hate to go full Stephan Moneyjew on you, but if you don't support the ideals that market economy is based on, then what do you support?

This is basically all they're bitching about. They equate "free trade" necessarily with "internationalism" and they won't hear anything else. They thing capitalism = globalism, despite me spelling it out clearly already here

Point is that government has to intervene to prevent bank runs on retail savings banks. And they were exposed, eg WaMu. If the intent behind Glass-Stegall had been respected, you could have let investment banks fail without ever affecting a FDIC-insured institution

Doesn't really matter exactly who you want to blame, bubbles and busts are a systemic problem. The issue is the way the rescue/stimulus was conducted; more banks should have been wiped out and nationalized, original ARRA stimulus should have been 33% bigger to close the output gap.

This is an idiot-tier meme. Point is, long-run predictions are not worthless when short-term predictions are necessary to make practical decisions. For example, predicting that someone will definitely die within the next century is easy, but doesn't help you make an actuarial table; for that you need more specific predictions.

Are you anti-white or something, user.?

Well, guess what, anyone respoding with positivity, carte blanche to the, O.P. is getting called out because of one very certain anti-white found in the O.P…. If you apologise for bad reading comprehension, user., then we can discuss the next point.

Exactly why white males are cucked and white countries are being flooded with shitskins. Both the extreme right and left are wary of capitalism, but for different reasons.

The author is a cuckservative pycho. He gets to experience his cuckold fetish in publish because he hasn't been fined repeatedly for his participation in pushing the crime of genocide against the white race.

archive.is/M6UJ5
"Reparations, NOT “Tribunals”

No, and there is a lot of wrong shit in your reply.

Glass-Steagall was Irrelevant to the Financial Crisis and here is why. Originally it separated commercial from investment banking. The “repeal” involved only one provision of the Act, the one preventing the same holding company from controlling both a commercial bank and an investment bank. Nothing relevant was touched in 2009.

Example:
ParentCompany owns Investment Bank A, and Commercial Bank B.

The only thing repealed from Glass-Stegal was the ability for ParentCompany to own both Bank A and Bank B, the actions of those individual banks… whether underwriting or dealing in securities wasn't touched at all.

Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, and Meryl Lynch… were pure investment banks that had never crossed the line between commercial and investment banking… and who were not holding companies… but who were at the center of the crisis when it began. AIG was an insurance firm… New Century Financial was a real estate investment trust… no glass-steagall you can point to… Wachovia and WaMu were just btfo making risky home loans to niggers (i.e., they didn't securitize them and sell them, which they should have).

tl:dr you don't know what the fuck you are talking about and should shut the fuck up until you know more (or traditionally "lurk more newfag")

Yea, makes a lot of sense when you unpack what the "system" is, but until you can unpack that and have a look under the hood you're going to remain a clueless fuck.

Nationalizing WaMu wouldn't have saved it. It just transfers the losses from the company and its customers, to all tax payers. like Freddie and Fannie, it just pisses right in the face of self-ownership when the government can saddle you with debts that are not yours to pay.

Also, that's a simplistic "33% is the exact figure that would have made the difference" you got there.

CANCER

ancaps actually tend to be pretty redpilled on immigration (Hoppe is the most famous example of this, but even (((Rothbard))) figured it out in his later days)

I'm shocked.

My position relies on real economic evidence, which is given in the link provides. That is how science works and how you build upon prior knowledge. You cite sources.

Because, as I wrote above, capitalism is a product of government. There is no capitalism without government intervention because government creates capitalism through law. And again, capitalism is not trading goods. It is not commerce. When you try to label any sort of marker activity as capitalism, you are providing an insufficient definition.

The irony of that image posted by a Mises stooge is too much to bear.

No, they don't. Ancap implies free exchange of property, thus open immigration. At best, they posit completely unrealistic large-scale voluntary contracts that would have a similar effect to having a border and immigration law.

It's not true.
Study anthropology and tribes from Siberia (Dayaks, aleuts, thinklets, etc.), Australia, amerindians, eskimos, even the Germans and actually every of our human ancestors before we had the ability to write (before 5000 BC).
You should read: P. Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (which is not a political book *at all* but a very detailed description of mutual aid among animal and human communities and human societies).

Most of modern human history (200000) was not written and was not capitalistic. The first writing we found were sumerians tablets writing down in order to do accounting, think about that. We're basically living in a bubble that will burst one day or another.

Well, that's my point, I think that's great that capitalism is essentially self-destructive.
The quicker we let the free market talk control, the quicker it will destroy itself.
So in one sense (like Marx actually), I'm definitely an accelerationnist.

"NEETs" as you describe them here are 90% of people. So what happens when a few people who totally lost touch with reality try to impose their shitty world views on the majority? At some point, the majority rebels, even if the modern life is trying to make this impossible. It includes you.
When SHTF, these corporate people, these traders, these executives, they will be deprived of all of their powers. They'll get slaughtered I fear, because all the things they know how to do are essentially the least useful ones.

millenials dislike capitalism because they cant get in on it
thats why more than half drift towards communism/marxism and the rest towards nationalist/fascist 'third alternative' ideologies
no economic boom of war for these young un's just debt slavery and soulless corporatism, sending out 100 resumes on sunday and getting 100 rejection letters by Saturday is soul destroying

Are you aware of the fact that the productive forces evolve and that they have an historic trajectory or are you just trying to pretend that capitalism is a fixed state just to fit your narrative?

Global capital will always be stronger than regional/national/local capital. And when a capital is stronger than another, it eats it, because they compete, they don't co-exist.
Why are markets globalized now? Because technology enabled it, whereas it was impossible before.

Facism just like economic (not "cultural") Marxism are a response to this.
But none of these two ways are truly anti-capitalistic.

No, no, you see you must always look at everything in a vacuum. Capitalism is simply the principles of commerce and these principles don't have any carryover to anything else.

Oh, and all principles of capitalism are the best and most efficient a priori. Any problems in the world are because the state interferes with these capitalist principles, which exist not because the state created them in law but because they are crystalized in the ether.

Then this user , I'm afraid, may not believe in history and in evolution, be it technological, political or economic.
It must truly be a cool world he lives in.

No thanks. And did you even read what I wrote?

They dislike capitalism for the same reasons that the baby boomers while they were hippie kids did.

When you're young, you got no money because you aren't deep into your career yet, much less started life in The Real World.

And then when you grow older, get a job, get in the real world, you become increasingly less leftist and angry with things like the government when you find out how much of your paycheck they're taking and spending on dumb shit for undeserving dindus and filth who have never worked a day in their lives. Your real life interactions as you grow older even change your social views, you even become more racist and more socially right-wing due to the fact you finally come to the realisation that those "traditional values" like family and such you were edgily against when you were younger are what kept society stable and successful and the overwhelming statistics and evidence of what happens when things like family begins to break down.

Also see:
washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2016/03/24/millennials-like-socialism-until-they-get-jobs/

But millennials are never entering "the real world." The majority do not have job prospects or stable careers (or any chance of ever having stable careers and the things that come with it, like family and so on).

So idealistic bullshit not rooted in reality but in the arrogant notion that man is above nature and should aspire to achieve some bullshit liberal imposibility?

True, not all of them are but the ones that do show the effects.

Keep in mind there are real issues millennials are facing that past generations never had to deal with and it's idiotic that the baby boomers aka The Real Worst Generation Ever are even insulting them for but the point doesn't change.

I want to add to this some more but I want to give everyone an example. Everyone knows what The Anarchist's Cookbook is, right? The author was a legend and hero to many and it was as edgy (edgy is supposed to mean being against traditional values like religion, family, even yourself like self-hatred in your identity like saying "fuck white people" while being white yourself and cutting yourself) and left wing as it gets with the book still being a bible of sorts to not just anarchists but leftists and general people who believe in some socialist or anarcho "revolution". Then what became of the author as he became older, you ask? He became an extremely devout Christian. Funny how life works out.

That isn't unbelievable. Anarchism and christcuckoldry both come from the same self-loathing masochistic mindset.

*Tips Dawkns' book

M'professor.

Well, he's more of the "traditionalist" rather than purely religious mindset, mind you. If you listened to him in his youth and compare them to what he says and believes in today, you'd think they're completely separate people, the complete opposite. Although I think some of us can understand where you're coming from regarding "christcuckholdry". But keep in mind, Christianity has functioned as a pillar of the traditional values that made the west and empires great and powerful for millennia. Remember, one of the important factors in The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival is a weakening of religion. Keep in mind, it isn't Christianity itself that made Western Civilisation great as we have seen with all of Western Civilisation being descended from Classical Ancient Greece and Rome being great before Christianity itself ever existed. It is merely just what functions as a pillar of the traditional great values now (which has sadly largely eroded). But for a great civilisation to survive, thrive, and maintain greatness, it'll require a new pillar to uphold traditional values if Christianity is not to be used. The question is, what would that be? Remember, without religion, the majority of people tend to wander, which is why they turn to things like worship of the state or becoming SJWs, something near identical to what religious fundamentalists were and they pretty much attempt to censor the same sorts things but without the stability of family and such.