You talk a lot about resource allocation and distribution and the intricacies of how businesses should be run within a market socialist framework, but all of that means absolutely nothing when it comes to negating the byproducts of capitalism. All you're doing is upholding the system that's causing all the pain and suffering in the world, you're not actually solving any real problems other than wage equality.
You fail to realize that your currency is still backed by the US dollar. You're still slaves to the international bankers and they can buy your whole country up and make the people do whatever they want. They WILL start endless wars in your country and make business out of your suffering. Why do you rather to see so many innocent people die instead of just breaking free from the banks? I suggest you all take a look at what the international bankers did the last time someone stopped using their dollars. They started ww2 and killed millions of innocent people. For what reason? Because the bankers didn't want to lose their powers. That war should never have happened, but it did, because the bankers felt like they were losing their powers over Europe. How can you feel comfortable knowing that those same people OWN you and everything else in the world? They're intentionally perpetuating all the bad things that's going on in the world because their misery benefits them. Do you think the UN exists to help the poor? HAHA. It exists only to make local farming unprofitable and unsustainable so that they can keep people dependent on hand-outs. Where do you think all the food comes from? It's bought from the capitalists using YOUR tax dollars. They never want Africa to be independent because that would ruin their perfect business.
lol, okay, but I've got a better idea. How about we abolish banks and money altogether and eliminate commodity production.
Tell me about how they made the Nazis invade Poland.
Oh look, it's another "Holla Forumsyp confusing leftists and liberals" episode.
Sebastian Price
The value was determined by the value of the labor produced, which was determined by how much people were willing to spend for the product. But nobody bought their products using money, because after the Jews around the world declared war against Germany in 1933 and boycotted all German goods, Germany was forced to start using a barter system.
You can't abolish money. Trade will always exist in one way or another and for as long as trade exists, value will exist.
You can't blame Germany for saving all the innocent people who were getting slaughtered on the streets in Poland. You would do the same thing if you were as strong and virtuous as the Germans were.
You're upholding the system, so you're pretty much as responsible as the perpetrators.
Kevin Ortiz
let me clarify this. Even if you're a real socialist you still don't have any realistic plan to fix the world, so there's no difference between you and liberals in terms of who's upholding the system
Jeremiah Foster
Not only is that bullshit, it's also contradictory.
Money is abstract exchange-value. It can be accumulated whether you do an ounce of labor ever (and this is very frequently the case) Oh, but it's easy. Abolish private property and commodity production.
[THIS IS WHAT NAZIS ACTUALLY BELIEVE]
Oh, so even though we want to abolish private property, capital and commodity production (and thus banks in the process) we're upholding the system because we're not NatCuck "if only I could be exploited by someone vaguely the same ethnicity as me instead of getting exploited by a person of another ethnicity" retards?
John Campbell
This only applies to currencies backed by the US dollar. If you make your own currency backed by labor you can avoid most of the problems that comes with capitalism. For example. There won't be any inflation so there wouldn't be any capital flight going on. Nobody would be forced to invest all of their savings in bonds or housing bubbles and stuff like that (which inflates it even more). People would save their money in their piggy bank and then invest what they can in things that creates jobs and benefits the nation. The party would issue out tons of information to help people invest in the right things
You have absolutely no realistic plan to ever achieve that even though you and your people control all media and academia in the whole world. You've tried your shitty theories a billion times. You fail because you never take banking into account in your equation. You always create a system that works together with the international bankers. You refuse to turn your back against them. Also the Not Socialist economic policies have absolutely nothing to do with race or anything like that so you can put away your straw man now.
Andrew Bailey
You obviously have no idea what Marxism actually entails.
Jason Wilson
I do. Trading will always occur, so a value of goods will always exist and therefore a monetary system will always be in demand. Real communism is impossible.
Charles Jenkins
We know: reenforcing private capital accumulation in tight codependence with the state, supported by huge military interventions to support economic imperialism worked quite well.
Kevin Thomas
Communism does not mean the abolition of trade you dumb fuck.
Monetary exchange shifts from money to resource based economy in a hypothetical global communist society.
Ethan Smith
No, this is how all currencies work. That's what currencies are, mediums of exchange. They're based on exchange value as a rule. Being outside of some scary international banking system doesn't change that. Money doesn't stop being money because it's being handled by Nazis.
There must be a small library of books written on how we should overthrow capitalism and implement socialism. In fact, most ideological divides in the Left revolve around that question. If anything, we're guilty of having too many plans.
There you go conflating us with liberals again.
Actually, only a handful of times, with only the USSR and affiliates being the ones that managed to avoid being violently crushed.
Confirmed for never having read any Leftist literature of any type.
Yes, the ideology that wants to destroy banks and money loves bankers. Great logic boyo.
The only thing that separates them from mild SocDems is the race and nation shit.
Luis Wright
Again. You don't have any realistic solutions to any problems whatsoever, but you still buy into the cultural aspects of marxism, so you're basically indistinguishable from a liberal. You're the ones upholding the system.
Wyatt Baker
And the banking system. And all the actually good policies
Jason James
Whatever you say, friendo. Once again, mild SocDem crap, if that. The Nazis actually privatized a lot of the functions of the Weimar Republic, far more than they nationalized.
Cooper Lee
And you're calling us liberals. Top kek, m8.
Cameron Lopez
Nazi Germany economy was a meme.
Hitler employed millions in the arms industry and army, and subsidized the economy with a massive debt, which led to Germany exhausting its gold reserves and facing a new crisis by the late 1930s (50% yearly deficit by 1939 and goods being rationed)
He was warned by his own finance minister that Germany would be bankrupt again by the 1940s if Hitler continued that way. That is why he needed to invade countries and steal their resources and their gold reserves to stay afloat.
Jacob Russell
Why do Nazis insist on using that 1933 "Judea Declares War on Germany" headline as a proof of the war being some sort of conspiratorial Jewish initiative?
It merely discusses a (largely symbolic and ineffective) attempt at exerting pressures on the German economy in a way not unsimilar to the contemporary BDS movement.
It's been unambiguously stated many times over and over again that the so-called "war" was nothing but a series of small boycotts, but Stormniggers are selectively hard of hearing.
Apparently it's okay for Germans to fucking INVADE Poland and slaughter thousands of civilians on the ground that their peers over there are being persecuted, but not for Jews to merely boycott German goods for the exact same reason.
Holocaust deniers' blatant double standards never fail to amaze me.
Aiden Green
That's a lie. They had a self-sustaining economy, so a bankruptcy wouldn't matter.
Why exactly would they not steal gold? Gold had no bearing on their own currency. They moved away from gold and they only ever used gold to trade in the global market. If you had a bunch of marshmallows in your cabinet and your neighbors were willing to trade their cars for a marshmallow, wouldn't you go down to the store and steal all the marshmallows they had? They didn't HAVE to steal anything. They did it because why not? Gold had no value in their own economy but to everybody else it was worth everything
You can't compare nazis to Jews. A nazi punching a Jew is not the same as a Jew punching a nazi because the Jews probably deserved it. It has to do with good vs evil
Jose Perry
Do you mean that a bankruptcy wouldn't matter as long as people kept working? If so then I guess your right about that
Isaac Lewis
Yes it does, you dumb fuck.
Anthony Turner
Again, it's impossible to ban trade. If everybody are entitled to 5 oranges and 5 apples. Then the people who don't like oranges are going to trade their oranges for apples.
Austin Cooper
Hitler didn't abandon any banking system. He kept trading with other countries, imported tons of material and adjusted his gold standard along with Britain and France. Germany was quite the opposite of self-sustainable, it was very short on resources and hard currency.
Jaxon James
You have to understand that Germany was working with 2 currencies at the same time. 1 currency was to trade with the rest of the world and the other currency was to trade within Germany. You get the illusion that their currency might be failing because their economy was dependent on the constant production from labor at the time, so if everybody suddenly stopped buying their goods then the Germans wouldn't have anything to lean on and invest their money in, like the rest of the world have with their bonds and shit. But then again, the German currency couldn't inflate so they didn't even have to invest their savings in anything. They could just put it all in a piggy bank until a new industry was invented and then they'd invest in that and start selling goods again.
The fact that they traded gold and traded with the US dollar had absolutely no bearing on their own stable currency
Connor Lee
If you are talking about the MEFO bills, first off it was a form of credit solely created for financing the German rearmament while hiding it from the allies. It was made to run an unsustainable military budget for longer than reasonably possible. The way those loans were inflating the actual German currency would've made it impossible for the state to pay them back, which is why Hitler had to seize the treasuries of Austria, Czechoslovakia and later Poland.
Angel Hughes
It probably wouldn't be that specific.
Take the labor voucher system for example.
You'd be given certificate or similar certifying that you had completed such and such an amount of labor and would then be able to claim that amount of labor's worth from the distribution center.
Ethan Brooks
Exactly, and then if the distribution center only have eggs but no milk, you can choose to trade your eggs with someone else for their milk. People will always trade with each other, no matter what. Even if they don't own anything, they'll steal stuff and trade it for something else
