"Karl Marx Was Right" 

correct

Yes, Marx would agree with that. But Marxists disagree because Marxists lie.

Gotcha, Steve, thanks,. Youre a better Marxist than !

Steve Marangos . Start a business Steve. Secure capital and hire good help. Compete in the open market. Try hard to succeed and succeed or perish. Become a big business Steve. Not just a big mouth.

Ugadda Sediss Wouldn’t this be ironic if I owned a business and pay more in taxes than you make in a year? It would...

Bernie reiterated it and Martin Luther King said it originally

@Marie so much irrelevant points and pivots. You're argument is terrible. Try staying relative to the topic lmao. Just spouting a bunch of points doesn't mean you're correct.

@@KevinWildes2024 Okay but capitalism has caused enough suffering to the point where you can't really defend it anymore, try watching a pro-communist video, the same reason communism failed was because of Mikhail Gorbachev and his awful policies, ironically the same person who SAVED THE WORLD FROM COMMUNISM. Just watch this, the entirety of it: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MjwL1mSrPLA.html I'll know if you watched the video or not, I can tell by the amount of bullshit you'll spew. I don't even know why I"m trying, you're just gonna open up the video and then go to the comments and type "STALIN HOLDOMORE VENEZUALA 20 QUADRILLION PEOPLE PIZZA HUT"

I would suggest the opposite is true. Why large corrupt companies push socialist agendas it to get bloated tax payer funded projects because they are far more profitable than anything in the competitive private sector. The Clintons were playing this game. Hillary would ensure a company got a bloated tax payer funded contract and a month later the company would pay Bill millions to give a speech. Both parties have been playing this game for years. Unfortunately this is totally legal uless you can prove intent.

@@xxxfaze_cumshotxxx7946 you absolute moron. The person I attacked was for capitalism. You dumb turd. You're reading comprehension skills suck. You don't even know what side I'm on. Wow you're trash.

And yet the people in the audience were convinced by that debate that Marx was not right, in other words that the system of Capitalism is not in need of reform. That was the most disappointing part of the whole hour and three-quarters for me.

@@kiwitrainguy They vote rationally: for whatever they suppose will bring _them_ more money. When that is all that matters, you have ultimate alienation -- and ultimate instability. Be ready for a wild ride.

I don't buy Marx's solution though. The problem is not capitalism, the problem is corruption. Which is a problem under any economic system, socialism or capitalism. If we actually had capitalism the situation would have been solved by insolvancy of these transnational corporations, with the ones taking their place learning lessons, at least for a time. The question should be, how do we overcome the actual problem, which is Corporatocracy. How do we move from corporatocracy to an actual liberal democracy.

@@mornnb boooo wrong

@@kiwitrainguy failures of capitalism don't prove Marx was right

Hi I'm from the future. The financial disaster is here and we are fucked. Figure I let you know.

Why don't we wait until all Marxists grow out of their short trousers? Would be good to hear the confessions of pseudo-religious fanatics.

@@damianbylightning6823 The number of disagreements within the left, and even between Marxists should be enough to tell you that Marxists are not pseudo-religious fanatics who unquestionably obey the words of Marx.

@@TheButterMinecart1 Clearly, you know nothing about the history or religion. I would, if I were you, pick up a book on the Protestant religion. I would pay particular attention to the paragraphs dealing with puritanism. Your naivete, willful ignorance and lack of insight made me smile. Are you an academic, by any chance?

@Whizper2me Dear touchy ad hom man, Marxism, my dear impressionable little boy, is not philosophy. It is a weirdo cult which worships history and 'morality' and uses mumbo-jumbo to deny doing this. It is and remains a reactionary revolt against the Judaeo-Christian tradition, from which it came. You can attach philosophy to any number of things - it doesn't make them philosophical or philosophy itself. It is as philosophical as Mormonism, Wiccanism or Scientology. It is a moral duty to point these things out. Also, offending Marxists is fun - not as much fun as annoying modern feminists, but modern feminists are not quite as dangerous or deluded. Like anarchism, it prefigured much of the political psychopathy which distorians label as 'fascist' and 'Nazi'. The ideas of modern political antisemitism, the Holocaust and other morally wretched and lunatic ramblings, can be traced to cults like Marxism and abarchism. Distorians don't talk about this - and use devices such as the 'left-right spectrum' and acts of omission to prove it. Grown-up morons and those whose balls haven't dropped, tend to be very convinced by such reasoning. Basic Marxist tenets such as its view of history have been falsified in recent decades and its absurd take on the labour theory of value is only believed by hard core people who show how clever they are by making a good case for manifest nonsense. Proving day is night is not something the intellectually normal do. Defending a tradition that helped mould modern political antisemitism, the Holocaust and 100 million deaths, is not something the morally normal do. Clearly, you have not engaged in any ad hom arguments and stuck doggedly to arguing for absurd propositions such as two named idiocies or the equally stupid notion that human nature doesn't exist, 'species being' exists - which is human nature, but only in a magical sense. No religion has asked its followers to believe anything quite that absurd. Ad hom and very touchy. Are you an academic and a very short male?

Only vote for candidate s that don't take corporate money, or billionaire money

victoria ann zabaras *that do

@@joeldwest and after being elected, they will

Every so often the elites (the biggest psychopaths usually) of a culture being slaughtered en masse seems to be one of the few things that stave off an even bigger die-off of the population.

@@VocalBear213 Then we tell each other and vote them out. I read the Chinese apply the death penalty for official corruption.I think it's a great idea. Maybe being forced to live a modest life must be part of the bargain when people elect to serve the public.

Great question. The propertied class had a great "coping" mechanism in 2008. Let the government bail them out. I'm sure they will come up with other coping mechanisms in the future when capitalism hits the fan again.

I guess the first thing besides replacing propaganda with the truth would help. A second thought would be to educate the masses starting with teaching the humanities,and civics would help The removal of the private central banks cartel of crooks conmen and theives and reeztablishment of economic soverinity

I see part of the solution as being carried over from the Environmental movement: "Think Globally, Act Locally". Avoid as much as possible buying things on credit, only update appliances (and that includes electronic devices) when necessary (I replaced my fridge-freezer in 2020 when it expired after its life of 36 years).

@@kiwitrainguy as good as that advice is for reducing personal excess, the "think globally, act locally" and other associated catchphrases are regarded by people I've heard as oil company propaganda, more failed "personal responsibility" talking points. It's also a clever way to offload their need to change to accompany climate change onto consumers, as well as being an even more clever way of pretending they are changing because they can put their money into eco-friendly ads and it counts as a contribution, lessening their carbon taxes and such. The fact remains that no matter how much we attempt to change our consumption habits, if oil companies can just keep shoving their product into stores and out-lobbying or out-competing ethical products and companies, little will change fast enough. Idk, it's still a good thing to think globally, but honestly thinking locally in the sense of getting together with your community and acting together as best as you are able is a much more achievable thing for the average person, and change is more evident. You can theoretically get together with your town and source local and import ethical products into your community, and can, if you live in an involved enough community, move to ban more harmful imported products from being sold there.

Deep thinking going here! 5 years later, where do you stand with Wokism? Dying to know.

That's exactly why they didn't have him on...it's part of the agenda.

These public-school swine!

@@mjohnson1741 Or they didn't select him like the plethora of Marxist scholars they could have chosen, you are aware they're a lot of Marxist scholars they could have chosen but decided not, right? You are aware that there isn't grand conspiracy they just wanted the two scholars they decided because they were clearly qualified for the debate. There isn't a secret agenda against your heroes hiding under every rock.

Or maybe he wouldn't. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HTj17c4N9vI.html

@@marhobane3040 No Jordan Peterson and his little fan boy didn't come close to refuting let alone addressing Marxism's fundamental principles, nice try though buddy.

How is it falling apart? We are still back to being the strongest nation on earth once we got that America hating commie Muslim Obama out of office, What a stupid ass video. WTF "Karl Marx was right" the stupid ass lowlife philosophizing son of a bitch never worked a day in his life (was always supported by his friend, Engels) The application of Marxist ideology resulted in hundred and 20,000,000 people slaughtered in starved to death in the 20th century and these dumb son of a bitches say that Marx was right ?????????????????

Ask people who were forced to live under communism what they think of communism.! These people are idiots.

Only in the third volume of Das Kapital does Marx come close to a more complete analysis of how socio-political arrangements and institutions secured entrenched, monopolistic privilege. Powerful, monopolistic interests have seen to it that they are the beneficiaries of systems of property law and taxation. The resulting concentration of income and wealth is, in fact, the result of laws that prevented the operation of competitive forces to the benefit of what the political economists identified as “rentier interests.” The “fair field with no favors” called for by Adam Smith as the essential basis for the operation of markets has been undermined by powerful elites. The system we call “capitalism” is really built on centuries-old “landlordism.” Landlordism arose when laws were changed to permit the purchase, sale and mortgaging of land. Agrarian landlordism expanded when peasants were removed from land in order to raise sheep and cattle, and the land was commercially exploited to meet the demand for minerals and other natural resources. Agrarian landlordism did not disappear; it merely evolved. Rich landlords acquired business interests. Rich owners of businesses acquired vast land holdings. Landed wealth, capital-owning wealth penetrated the financial and insurance sectors of economies.

@@nthperson I don't get it. Are you whining with all this gobbledygook that you didn't get and on the early early on and become a big rich capitalist? What your point? Are you having a problem with the fact that there are winners and losers in capitalism and the fact that you're a loser is making you a malcontent? The Commies have no right to take away God's gift to me of free will to make what I will out of my own life through my incentive, hard work and talent. It's best to not have a big bureaucracy taking their cut to run things with people that don't know what they're doing and would not have chosen what they do for their life's work. There is no system other than capitalism that has lifted so many people out of poverty and squalor. Marxism makes everyone equal all right, equally poor. (Unless you're a party member of the court) The only thing that is falling apart in capitalism is too much Marxism being injected into it. (And too much corporate conglomerates and their merging with government and that's a very definition of fascism) we don't want your God damn Fundamental Transformation to take us away from what the founding fathers envisioned and set into place by immersing us into Marxism. You know full well that the application of Marxist ideology has resulted in the slaughter and starvation 120,000,000 people during the 20th century. How lamebrain stupid you have to be to want to bring it here ??????????????????

You need to head back to remedial summer school for English.

@JaneFonda1942 that's why all these bankers should be hung

@JaneFonda1942 an inteligent person, finally

That’s what annoyed me the most there needs to be a delimitation between capitalism as a free market system and the fractionalised reserve bank system that has polluted western civilisations bring back a hard money and watch capitalism flourish

@@Hamsterbtconly capitalism regularly crashed and saw crisis under gold standards, in fact the procurement of gold itself was rather bloody.

That's not capitalism. It's wholesale theft.

social policies is what's keeping capitalism alive. It would destroy itself in a decade without such corrections.

Tell that to norway, curently the best place to live in the world.

Andreas Andersen Absolute rubbish, you're confusing the antics of the banks with collusion by politicians (who've let them do whatever they want with their depositers money) and an economic system

gespilk Piketty is wrong - all over the newspapers in the UK. The independent ONS, office of national statistics is right.

Dont be fucking stupid there is no socialism in the US or anywhere else, there is no such thing as a socialist policy the problem is most men are babies and can't stand being wrong and the whole world will go down the toilet because childish stupidity, explain which policies are socialist. 76 posts two days ago about Marx, ,when asked to prove what they were saying, not one could do it, no one

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rfYvLlbXj_8.html

Agree... capitalism is an idea, not a reality. As an idea, it is quite a persistent one... but just as persistent as socialism I might add..

@Ronald Reagan Capitalism keeps you poor because big companies are incentives to pay their employees less to maximize profits. In a lot of ways, Marx has predicted the future stating that capitalism is a self-defeating model and we are seeing that in the form of economic crashes every 10 years or so.

@@equinox2584 there is no point arguing with a neoliberal.

Capitalism was very good in theory, just not in reality.

it is socialist interventions which caused them in the fist place with their bankrupt Keynesian concepts & interference in the market

@@guyvert49 What about the crisis of 1929 which caused the emergence of Keynesian thought in the firs place?

@@guyvert49 how did Keynesian economics cause the Great Recession or the coronavirus recession?

@@CHBMovies These idiots are usually referring to the government bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks. They see the federal interference as a distortion of the free market. If the enterprises were going to fail, and we bail them out, the only thing we've done is helped a failing enterprise continue to fail. Same story for government lockdown of private businesses. What they can't (or, as I suspect, won't) see is that these measures were taken in order to prevent an even larger economic meltdown. And the only reason they think any of this is because they believe that capitalism works in a vacuum and therefor it compels businesses to act in the best interest of society. Also that the government is greedy and oppressive, and that the only reason we don't live in a capitalist utopia is because the government regulates and taxes private businesses and citizens. The real reason they think these things is because private interests control the media they consume under capitalism, and said private interests benefit from having an army of lemmings voting for deregulation and less taxes. Because Daddy Elon Musk is going to send them all to paradise on mars. They are, metaphorically speaking, bleeding out in the back of an ambulance and whining about the driver going too fast because it makes them feel sickly.

I feel pretty good.

This is how completely delusional and brainwashed most baby boomers and capitalists are. I completely agree with you.

She'll a shill for establishment

Also dodged the question, wether or not what we are living under, can be called capitalism?

She looks stupid now, with the criticism of the Chinese model. "So something needs to be done" but she asked people to vote against the motion.

@Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics helps those at the bottom, right Ronald?

@Ronald Reagan You are seriously deinformed.

Or it's just a pretty clear outline of an assumption she's working from; the USSR was Marxist.

@@kingofbadgers3019 Soviets were still a form of Capitalism, they continued to use money as Rubles.....Marx was not in favor of discontinuing the use of money, simply some control of the distribution......Communalism would be an action that abandoned that habit.....

Like I said in an above post. Under the right circumstances anyone can stand up at some moment in time and shout, "See, I told you so!". Proves nothing except opportunism.

word salads never make sense. Financial audits do.

Automation will kill capitalism cause it will put millions out of work

There never will be solid solutions produced by human ever. Capitalism was a solution to feudalism, does it looked solid? Human can only replace one shitty system with another hopefully less shitty system.

The problems under capitalism would be way worse under any system based on Marxism

There will be slavery until we are all masters of Love.

@@paperfart3988 I disagree

Labour and use value are not able to determine the price of a good because they don't explain the demand for a good.

@@miwi9883 indeed. Demand dictates the very conditions of one's labouring existence.

@@zergnub7426 Only in capitalism, in East Germany for example much useless work was carried out because nobody was allowed to be unemployed or because of misplanning of the central committee.

@@miwi9883 That's true. When I lived in Moscow, they were still employing four people to stand in an empty shop with no customers :)

Mwo is epic

Weapons are a funny thing. Things are most peaceful when everyone has the same weapon.

American troops do have and use foreign weapon. They use the 9mm Beretta M9. It’s made in Italy. How about that for free market

So let’s think about this for a second. A country decides to utilize weapon systems from outside their country. In turn a conflict emerges for which a war occurs. That countries supply line is shut off. Doesn’t seem to be so wise. There are very reasonable justifications why, for the interest of national defence, nations prefer to not be reliant upon outside nations for the very supplies necessary in times of war.

bcshu2 you clearly don’t understand why and how the US got and bought the 9mm Beretta from Italy

Every time you buy something because it is cheap, you lower the value of the poor sod who made it! He might as well be a slave. the solution is to value each other and each other's labor! That is more expensive. Yet, none of the "activists" speak of this. Too busy exploiting through propaganda I think!

N S - at least ur honest.

@CWW Like, Manifesto was pretty much written to be easily digestable and dumbed down as much as possible, but that's the book they know the name of so that's the book they pretend they've read.

@CWW Historical Materialism? Uh... you can't mine history or build things with it... history isn't a material... dumbass communists... 🤤

The left claim Marx and don’t ‘cancel’ him for his rampant racism, sexism and all since without him they’d be aimless, degenerates of nothingness; simply bitching about gender pronouns, polygamy, open borders/muh diversity and all. In leftist terms, here’s some takes from Marx to which if he existed today, he would be deemed a muh far-right fascist/nazi: marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.htm + ‘On The Jewish Question’ - Karl Marx

Megan Axelía Carrington-Ráðvarðardóttir doesn’t look like you read Marx and just chose to believe some quotes from rightist sources, and on the Jewish question is a criticism of studies which ignore the material conditions of certain groups of people. Even if Marx was a racist or antisemite, none of this is reflective in any of his important work or has anything to do with the ideology of Marxism.

the difference perhaps, is whether you think revolution and the delivery of all aspects of social undertaking to state administration is the pathway or not. I do not. The cultural imperialism and the violent confiscation of property and life that socialists/communists espouse, the banning or outright extermination of people on the basis of their opinions and beliefs... this does not change the problems engendered by authoritarian rule, only the names of the oppressors.

@@freyfaust6218 this is exactly my problem with these shortsighted criticisms of socialism. You can't generalize every leftist as having the same bloodthirst as the people who have led past Soviet countries. You just can't. There are many denominations of socialism which want to get there in many different ways, which depart from the dominant Marxist-Leninist tendencies (single-party "democracies") of the Soviet Union and other socialist states. Some are reformists (democratic soc), but others are revolutionary (rev. soc). Some reformists emphasize party politics and acknowledge the heavy role of the government (state socialists/democratic soc), while some think that unions and syndicates are an adequate third-party to effect change (anti-statist socialists: anarcho-syndicalists or libertarian soc). Some want to dismantle the government entirely for more democratic institutions (libsoc/anarchists/ansynd), some want to preserve markets (market socialists/market anarchists/mutualist), and yet others want to do both (libmarksoc). And it's clear that some statists and MLs permit the state to own the means of production, but ansynds, market socialists, mutualists, etc (left-libertarians more generally) think that power is the problem (gathering from anarchist/left-Marxist theorists) and prefer decentralized/worker/community ownership of the means of production. Socialism isn't a monolith. A lot of us at this point recognize that the Soviet Union was a despotic failure. Other theorists and leftist activists have devised their own ideas of organizing society while still upholding main socialist principles of worker ownership. You can't even begin to criticize them without actually being specific on the type of leftist ideas that you criticize.

everyone who are in either intellectual sectors of the u.s or europeans

mee

Long live revolution....

Long live communism.

Who else is here in 2021?

***** Indeed. It's a balancing act, isn't it? Too much capitalism and it's dog-eat-dog, and too much socialism and there's nothing for the dog to eat.

+Scott Wallace While it is certainly true that Marx was right about a tiny fraction of what he said as Smith was wrong about a similarly tiny fraction, I am curious as to what aspects of capitalism do not work well or make things too "dog-eat-dog".

FletchforFreedom That's a complex question to answer, of course. If I had a comprehensive understanding of exactly what the problems of capitalism are, I would probably be writing my own sequal to _The Wealth of Nations_. But what seems to me to be a problem with capitalism as practiced in the US today is that too little money is going into infrastructure: roads, schools, police, health, basic research- all the stuff that a society needs to keep functioning healthily. Capitalism could and does support infrastructure voluntarily- to some extent, but not enough, in the States, to prevent all kinds of social ills that are not as big a problem in more socialized countries, such as Austria where I live. For instance, if you think homelessness is a problem for society, and not just a responsibility of the homeless, then you will have to admit that American capitalism is not doing a very good job, compared to, say, Austria. Public health and public transportation are also vastly better in the EU than in the States. That's why I think capitalism needs to be tempered with socialism, if you value living in a society where you can, say, walk through a park at 3 AM and not have to give a thought about your safety.

+Scott Wallace This, good sir, is why I asked. So frequently, as in this case, the so-called "problems" with capitalism are either nit capitalism, not problems or not either. Your list is almost exclusively a list of items that have been largely monopolized by government and, thus, have nothing whatsoever to do with capitalism. Beyond that, on what basis do you argue that "not enough" is being spent on these things or, for that matter, that anyone has either the authority or wherewithal to make such an argument. In fact, it is easily arguable that too much money, particularly public money, is being spent on those things. Private roads have been particularly successful and were the historical norm. Public schools have been literally awash in money and that's a big part of the problem. Private education, which, BTW, made England the most literate nation on the planet entirely without government help. has always been hugely more successful than public schooling ... and less expensive. Whether or not police forces are underfunded is a matter of debate. As to whether or not it is the chief problem facing police forces today is not (not a chance). The relative effectiveness of policing (and the safety at 3 AM is completely unrelated to capitalism vs. socialism and no correlation between such effectiveness and the economic system exists, so that comment is but a non sequitur). Health care in this country, largely due to government interference with the private system is hugely overfunded in areas where the finding isn't needed. Basic research, thanks to capitalism, is the most robust on the planet ... in the private sector where it belongs. The private sector has always more than made enough resources available (including in charity, for that matter) than government ever has. So why is this a problem with capitalism? Again, the case of homelessness is one of the absolute success of capitalism and the failure of government. It must be remembered that capitalism was solely responsible for the massive improvement in worker pay, working conditions and prosperity (including the effective end of child labor) over the last three centuries. It has proved to be the most effective and enduring anti-poverty program ever conceived by the mind of man, effectively eliminating poverty as it was understood just half a dozen generations ago. Homelessness in the US (massively overestimated as it is) is not the result of a problem with capitalism (or poverty) but is related overwhelmingly to mental illness and addiction and stems largely from the poor treatment of US veterans by the government and the government's role (beginning about 50 years ago) in making it ever more difficult to get people the treatment they need (think mainstreaming that put so many with mental problems out on the street even from private facilities). and don't kid yourself that Austria (or any other country) has solved the homelessness problem because it isn't close to being reality. That "public transportation" is better is based on the (indefensible) premise that transportation is necessarily separable and that "public" systems are worthwhile. The latest private sector solution (Uber and similar services) could well spell its death knell to the benefit of everyone. As for health care, the US, despite the enormous hit it has taken from Obamacare, is still the finest in the world (regardless of your income status - long discredited WHO rankings notwithstanding). If you get diagnosed with a serious illness (or need access to diagnostic equipment or treatments) you'd better pray with everything you have that you're in the US - you;ll live a lot longer. Adjusted for instant deaths from murder/accident (which say nothing about the health care system) Americans have the longest life expectancy on the planet. So far your list is a great beginning on why capitalism should be embraced and socialism, completely abandoned. So, do you have any ... valid .,.. criticisms of capitalism?

+Scott Wallace This is so obvious you shouldn't have to say it. Unfortunately, the world is FULL of people who see only in black and white. When belief strides onto the stage, rational argument might as well take a day off.

Just wait, 2020 still ain’t over.

@@ryanhendricks426 lmao

2021, inequality is even more.

@@megasalexander927 yes, YOU are NOT equal to ME . Do you have any problem with it ??

you were wrong, my portfolio up 500% lmao.

Qamar Khan Jordan Peterson would wreck him.

@@antipositivism3128 No way. Petersen doesn't have the intellectual qualifications in the subject to even come to the table. His expertise is elsewhere.

@@antipositivism3128 when Wolff and Peterson were both invited to talk at the same university, Peterson dropped out by massively upping his fee when he found out that he would be debating against Wolff.

Andrew Farrell That’s utterly speculation. You can talk about what he did but assume intent is usually a losing battle.

to be fair If R Wolff could go on the panel then I wouldn't have said lets get Thomas Sowell on the other side. Jordan P is great, but he addresses the issues from of a a social perspective. Wolff, correct me if I am wrong is an Economist and most of the argument being about capitalism etc, I think having another Economist would make for better opposition. Thomas Sowell or Milton Friedman... then lets see the outcome. : )

Foolishness you dont have to be any of those things and still provide for your family and yourself. Of course people are free to be like that but under communism you are not free at all so ill settle for the occaisonal ass hat that a group of supposedly smarter people telling me how and where to live thank you very much

we are in it till our necks now! and it got to stop!

Human reality is not going to just go away because you have a government managing the means of production. You will just give those people even more power.

I’ll take a bit of greed over losing all incentive to do anything all day

Giving power to those who have not earned it will be the wasted potential in your vision. The co-op boards you are talking about are already in place with any company with stock options. Money and power are correlated to adding value in capitalism. Also dividends and interest are not wasted or excess in capitalism because with interest you are loaning money to somebody to fund them adding value and with dividends from stocks you are partial owner in a business so adding a partial amount of value that the business is producing.

@@kickasskdf what you wrote is true but what I wrote is also true. Excess value causes inflation. Inflation leads to debt. Debt leads to capital accumulation and inequality. Excess debt can crush capitalism. Stock holders are not co-op boards. They have essentially no say on how a company is run.

@@andrewx7806 too much debt can definitely cause recessions and depressions in capitalism and is a problem but also is a needed balance to the growth capitalism drives. Kind of like a reset button. The wealth inequality is less of an issue for me because not all people add the same value. Imbalances definitely occur though. Good points overall, just a tough discussion to have on chat rather than over some beers haha.

I will not lower myself to watching this. In 72 years on the planet none of the rivals to capitalism has given any power to people in general. My conclusion is all the other "ism"s have caused more deaths that are in effect wholesale in large numbers. Most particularly they crush emotionally and physically any resistance to their inefficiency. Truth be told no one on this debate can solve how to fairly have a system of work that benefits benefits people equally. It is beyond the ability of with man. History is replete

Brilliant! Justicenow999. Merry Xmas to you and yours.

She teaches at LSE! But I guess her students get to sharpen their thoughts thanks to hers.

I wanted to challenge this point too. I think value is based on many things. Their is a difference between value and price and cost. Economists often see value in monetary terms.

OPEC play this game as well. They reduce production of oil so as to increase the price of it.

Well, your example is one in which we have given a company a legal monopoly over a drug, see for a market to function there needs to be competition. If you outlaw competition a market doesn't work. I'd argue it is not so much a criticism of the idea of demand as value as it is a criticism of the idea of intellectual property.

​@@kiwitrainguy I very much agree with the comment in the debate that capitalism is a system of cooperation. OPEC knows that if they push the price too high they will destroy demand. OPEC's survival hence depends on their customers survival, so they have to carefully select a price that is a balance of their concerns that also doesn't financially destroy their customers.

Thank God you have that drug cost example from one mixed economy country.

That is simply untrue. Most business is pacific. Someone does a service for you that they themselves price... construction, repair, maintenance, transport. You agree to pay them what they ask or you look for someone who offers the service at a price you can afford or think is fair. Its called VOLUNTARISM, and it is the only modern barometer for morality.

he was incredibly wrong about capitalism, wages for workers dramatically increased instead of stagnating

top wow uhhh, the last 40 years prove you point wrong and Marx’s point right

coliv2: The inequality between the CEO's and the workers, between the first half of the 20th century and today has risen exponentially. Maybe 10,000%? top wow is probably reading critiques of Marx rather than Marx. The post WW2 boom might have caused Karl to write another chapter? But who would expect an 19th century economist to be able to teach 21st century economists the correct lense for understanding capitalism and the culture it has created for humanity. Not bad!

But Marx said that the working class will be richer but so will be the 1% and the inequality between the two will rise dramatically.

Ian Standio: Marx preached that the only way the workers have a decent life is for them to organize and fight the bosses. When an economy is run by the workers, inequality will all but disappear. There has never been a economy run by workers.

kurono1822

@minecraft creeper Enjoy all those right-wing problematics increasing.

@minecraft creeper Libertarian socialism has entered the chat

Communist advocates: "The bourgeoisie are all dicks and we want the communists to give us freedom! Actual communists: Alright everyone! No freedom of religion! No free speech! No rights outside the right to follow your totalitarian overlords or that'll be another mass genocidal, frenzied display of power and mass starvation to keep you all in line! Eh, fuck it. If you're a physically healthy political dissident we'll forcibly harvest your organs from you while you're still alive because honest, hard working slaves need your heart and liver more than you do!

The Wildest part was watching the 300 people vote "Against". The ones for the motion gave very detailed explanations with examples while the ones against the motion could never grab on to anything concrete. But I guess that's what you should expect from a room full of wealth and privilege.

The 4th speaker really made little sense. Marx did not belive that wages would fall. He believed they would rise only at a slower rate then the prodit on capital as he states in wage elabor and capital. He misrepresented the labor theory of value, which surprised me since he is part of the Adam Smith institute who himself was an adherent of the ltv. Marx very clearly states that use value exists and that it must be different in order for trade to accure as well as that only labor that contributes to use value is productive.

@@sirherbert6953 I have recently started to study Das Kapital and the one thing that I am noticing is that all the criticism against Marxism are all fallacious arguments. but hey what can we do right?

Raggle Daggle ...but Feudalism is engraved in human nature, we are naturally inclined to have a leader under which we shall serve, like a tribe chieftain who in return to us serving him will defend and guide us! Yeah, all I did is adapt the capitalist human nature argument to Feudalism and here we are! Simply shows how the argument is bullshit in the first place and capitalists are just lazy in their method of discussion.

whahahah, good job;)

Gothicfan51 Yes! Good job! Much better than the pie-in-the-sky assumption that somehow magically everybody will be inclined to work for the "common good" and laziness, selfishness, and ambition will evaporate along with disparate abilities from the communal minds of mankind!

prosperomage Why on earth do you think that under communism people will work for wages of 'common good' as if they'll be working for a notion, and not real things? That's just a crazy, crazy misunderstanding. People will work for very real wages. Imagine coming home to a nice house, full of nice things, with a reliable car, heating, water, electricity, good TV, wine, kids are in a great school, free medical care, and a social existence full to the brim with amazing, fulfilling things. And of course, a range of consumer goods suited to your own interests. And now know that everyone lives like this, there is no war, starvation, disease, immigration issues - nothing. Yes, there's still some crimes, but there's a democratic political system organising this lifestyle, and you are part of it. All you have to do is go to work, do a good job - as judged by the social standards of the people you work with, and as you learned at school and from your parents and peers. Now, are you going to work or not?

FamilyQuan I would. But I personally know others who would not. Please see my last post on the other thread, including my examples

yes definitely, I don't quite understand why they haven't yet paid back the trillions we have given them. If you or I ever went bust, would the gov't just give us money? nope. It's a real scandal and it's causing so much trouble in the world. Outrageous.

@@PrimusPete agree it should be paid back!!

@Vexalord you souds like Spanish vocabulary in regards of Marxism .the day this country becomes Socialist Marxism I'M GOING TO STOP WORK SO YOU COULD TAKE CARE OF ME AND MY HOLE FAMILY, and going to call all my relatives that still lives in my original country to vome over the border so you could take csre of them too

@Vexalord that is right we should all be free to work for whom ever we want the state country should not dictate my life that should be my decision.and if you want to slave your self for the community other people that should be your decision but it should not be imposed up on any one freedom over anything

@Vexalordanthropology is the study of human behavior has nothing to do with decision of human, some people are responsible other irresponsibly some are industrious ,others their priority is trying to blame other for their lazy behavior and try to get others to take care of them, that is the reason their is no equally of out come. think everyone is responsible for the life they want for them self and their family( of course as human we have the responsibility to care for the sick ,handicap, ..) but all of us work and should buy our health insurance through work place not the government , because then we loose freedom .the government took over to much power in one place no balance , it life have to balance and the direction of our lives should be our

Very well put!

Not profits, people.

We can only hope

Capitalists will call this Communism. And use all there money and power to prevent this from happening.

the problem is... who will hold them for us? Administrators? Centralized power always resolves as unaccountable.

It's actually a simple law during the Reagan area that made that possible. Republicans don't wanna repeal the law for obvious reasons, yet there is a majority of them who also think it should be fixed is some 'conservative' way. So they can sell it to the people. So what they're now thinking about is giving tax cuts when the company does not transfer x amount of percent to their shareholders. All of this is a futile exercise ofcourse since capitalism is doomed.

@@SalmonFume They hoard everything they overproduce, and still wonder why poverty and hunger are things that exist.

Capialism is. By by.

@@leonardmoriarity3612 Simply let's see...

more useless blather

@@leonardmoriarity3612 Whatever WEF is in charge

Iits a very old video 1O years ago. Dec. 2022

Wake up

The same people sabotaged capitalism. I wouldn't trust them either way.

What is sorely lacking in debates of this sort, is a true definition of capitalism. Bailing out massive financial entities is not capitalism. That's closer to fasicsm - government control of private entities. Socialism and communism are state control of private resources. Another way to put that is force. Force of some collective against the free will of individuals. Capitalism in its simplest guise is absence of collective force. I am free to engage my resources in any non-forceful manner that I see fit provided I do not aggress against another. I am free to engage in any exchange that I wish, provided that my counterpart is also not forced to participate, but in turn engages out of his free will. All you who agree with "Marx is right" would unwittingly usher in a new totalitarian regime and squash human freedom, innovation and joy.

Happy you been to China ? Korea ? Russia ? Socialism is being a slave there’s a reason they want the system to change we will be total slaves and have no freedom.

@@aswidener You unironically did the “Socialism is when the government does stuff." meme.

Its easy to 'misunderstand' something when it is the only segment of that thing (ie authoritarian communism) being expressed In other words, give me a real life alternative to top down socialism (one that has actually been implemented)

Marxism is evil.

​@@CjLegend yep, for all the talk about how previous attempts werent "real" communists, they were in fact the most real communists, the ones who actually existed.

***** Stupid idea of you to criticize Marx without reading him. Neither in Russia nor in China was imposed Communism. Only socialism - intermediate society between Communism and socialism. It's the only way to criticize Marx: you hang the lable "Marx" on the shit of your invention and criticize it.

***** If English is too difficult for you, you may switch to your native language. I never called YOU stupid, only your idea, which remains stupid. To criticize Marx you must know him at least. What have all these mountains of bullshit to do with Marx?

Iwan Straszny actually it's you that's spouting BS - capitalism per current definition excludes the state, It's the state control of the economy which is failing, their own policies. Marx produced a theory which says 'capitalism will fail' having been able to read books which covered the mississipi and tulips bubbles of the previous century, and concluded 'capitalism will fail', what a brain !. Everything goes in cycles, The scandinavians countries banking systems failed in the nineties, they reformed ther banking systems and had very little if any impact from the 2008-9 banking crisis. Why is that? capitalism 'works in some countries and not in others? because there's a difference in policy of the people controlling it, that is why. Idiots who would have humanity return to tribalism without industrialisation at all, no culture, no health support, no food security? and you call that a movement forward? My friend your ideas are a joke

Secrets of Antiaging Are you crazy? Where state control is failing? Just the opposite state controls everyone and everything in US American economy - the biggest capitalist country. In the China - most successful socialist state - state controls most of industry.

Iwan Straszny I'm not crazy you just agreed with me - state controls everything so when there's a problem with policy the source of the problem is the state

Yo I think you missed the point I am fully down with anything that gets the damn Capitalists outa our world. Their Cabal has stripped 100,oo0 pensions and homes and all the cash pushed it right on up to the oligarchs and the plutocrats and any of the really large zoonist conglomerates. Hell he didn't even give any to msnafactures so Yeah I am down I do not give a shit just want to get rid of wall street and central banks but there is no money left our debt is incredible and so is their con man. Marx Plato Me I do not care but this system dont work pal

You have no idea what you are talking about... Good luck with your thimble mindedness

You make judgments about Dr. Fromm as if you know better than him and that your truth is absolute. Dr. Fromm has a lot to say about that. Unfortunately, your mind is made up and therefore you will never know the depth in which you are manipulated by delusions as anyone else. i.e. you don't have delusions. They have you and you don't even know it.

Go fuck yourself, marshal. And if i get another comment from you, I'll deleted it before I read it.

+GnosisMan50 All I had noted was Fromm’s reliance on straw men. No doubt some tiny fraction of Marx’s detractors have argued that Marx’s notion of “materialism” meant that “striving for maximum profit constitutes the main incentive in [man’s] personal life and in the life of the human race” or that he “had neither respect nor understanding for the spiritual needs of man” (and I don’t even disagree with him that those are incorrect characterizations), but it represents such a microscopic percentage of the criticisms of Marxism … well, that’s why it is a complete straw man. I made no judgments about Fromm beyond what was directly discernible (and absurd) from the passage provided. The vast majority of critiques (and the substantive ones) involve economics (the debunked labor theory of value, the non-viability of an economy absent prices, the erroneous attribution of the boom-and-bust cycle to capitalism, the empirical disproof of the compression of wages, etc.) or history (the shredding of historical materialism). I have no idea why you felt it necessary to go off on a discussion of “absolutes” (apparently a straw man on your part). Of course, not everything is absolute, and there may be no “absolute truth” (a philosophical construct) that covers everything, but if you (or Fromm) wish to argue that anyone is manipulated by delusions, perhaps that assessment is most appropriately self-directed. I live in a world where there are some certainties and a great number of uncertainties. The credibility of Marxism (or, more correctly, its complete lack) falls firmly in the former category.

No l, it's historical materialism

OK then...give us a really, really funny comment on the topic.

The two fundamental classes of our society are called the Big Club, and the You Ain't In It.

Christopher hi. I think by your title self given name. You are a self delusional narcissus. Trust george carlin? Yep heres your sign.

Carlin was smarter than Marx, and it wasn't even close.

@@theaubad1006 you aren't even able to spell narcissist correctly, so I don't even want to hear from you. As to the name, it was bestowed upon me, not self-given. I simply had no problem accepting it. That, I'm afraid, does NOT define me as narcissistic any more than accepting a nickname. Try again.

so whats Communism gonna do?

gerardo araya You dont seem to get it. Communism is what could emerge after capitalims fucks everything up. From the enviroment to a massive crisis.

No dude I get it, its all over history, you're the one who doesn't seem to get it

gerardo araya The funny thing is that HALF the fucking world lived in communism. And China is about to become the leading contry in the world. And history tends to repeat itself. Specially when you keep doing everything exatcly the same.

Thank you for saying what you said. You seem to be one of the few decent people on the internet who acknowledges that capitalism screws over hard workers and rewards lazy managers who sit on their asses all day.

And communist based societies don't have war? Even the native Americans fought against each other.

@@ilovetech8341 they don't? a communist society wouldn't even need an army, what you saw in the USSR was a struggle to stay alive after what America tried to do. War goes on to this day and had communism taken the world by storm we would actually fucking CARE instead of just saying that this is rEaLiTy and hUmAn nAtUrE.

@Ronald Reagan We as humans haven't reached a successful social system yet. All what we know have it's pros and cons. Recently though, communist China is winning against capitalist US.

@Ronald Reagan Trump supporters were the smart ones? Biden is insane? Biden is currently passing a plan that will give hundreds of thousands of jobs while also fixing the infrastructure in America that has long since needed fixing. Trump wanted to protect us from space isis, Trump wanted to well actually I am not sure what he wanted to do because he didn't really do anything during his 4 years other than kill over 200k people will corona.

@Ronald Reagan What massive inflation? The inflation that was originally caused by Trump's stimulus bills? But now lets look at what Biden is doing, he is passing an infrastructure bill that will create thousands of jobs and fix the long broken infrastructure in America. He is doing more in his first few months than Trump in his entire presidency.

In communism (from history) there are no boardrooms, only one person decides.

we mostly agree that they don't

The Divine Right of Shareholders

i agree with ya about capitalism is unstable!!!! I think at least it's better than the heaven of workers!!!!

@@nguyenhoanglong420 Explain how it is better than anything.

@@powrobe2 well i have studied communism and socialism in university!!! All of them are just talking about how a beauty is socialism and communism!!! And how beauty is that ideology of that socialism and communism!!! That's all i have learnt from university!!! And i feel like a something it doesnt exist!!!

@@nguyenhoanglong420 I feel like you are a liar. I never mentioned an ideology...just material fact. If you refer to Staliinism as socialism, you truly are a university idiot. Try reading. Try to challenge yourself or just be a malleable moron.

@@nguyenhoanglong420 I bet you used to pay your mother for her breast milk. You stay a capitalist puritan. Your education was worthless.

But what happen in the Great Depression that isn't happening now is the rise of the American Socialist, Communist and Labor parties. All which have pretty much vanish since the Cold War, when American wage war on Communism across the world. (hasn''t stop every since) Capitalism experiences some sort of collapse every 8-10 years. Marx will be right about it all "When there's not more bread to eat, eat the rich" Which is to say when inequality reaches its breaking point, people of all walks of life will organize, strategize and mobilize against the ruling class/corporations.

I agree , And national security doesn't mean going around the world murdering people in sovern countries installing puppet governments and stealing those countries wealth assets and resorces , The latest example after iraq ,afganistan and Syria being the Ukraine. It doesn't matter now how the war goes the central bank cartel of crooks conmen and theives have their foot in the door and the Ukraine will never get those bankers or the corporations that those bankers own out. The Ukraine didn't gain freedom ,they lost it to the central bank and their multinational corporations.

@@dashboardkid21 throwing the central banker's and their corporations that they own out of their high chair is long over due, And while we are at it nationalization of their businesses and removing their stolen assets from their posession and ownership including their bank accounts,would be a good start.

@@michaelbunner7387 Neoliberalism at it's finest! Not to mention that we'll probably have to go to war against them with the NeoFacist take control in Ukraine.

@@dashboardkid21 nato ie the central banker's cartel of crooks conmen and theives don't care how many ukanes Russian people Americans or Europeans die that is what the swinery that incited this whole mess think,the business community have a term for it extranalaties that is to say that the cost of the war in lives national debt destruction will be bore by the people internationally, the banker's and the corporations that are owned by the bank cartel will profit on both sides the national debt will go thru the roof in the United States while the bank cartel corporations rake in huge profits,the Ukrainians already owe so much money to the central bank cartel that they regardless of the outcome of the war will be under seasure debt pinage to the central banker's in perpetuity with predictable results loss of their lands, assets and resorces to private central bank corporations the Ukrainians have already lost their own intrests and sovernity of their country with no chance of ever getting it back . That is exactly what has happened here in the United States and any country anywhere the United States government of corporations has gone in the last 200 years. Freedom and democracy RIGHT

The points on the 3 pro-capitalists were laughable. Human nature, it will sort itself out, just let it roll. Pure status quo ideology!

You might have a good point if you checked your grammar better .. they (these wankers) you say "old fucking geezers that are so heavily invested and well of in the status quo, defending it. They haven't had a single unique thought in their lives" and add "any of them, on either side" (meaning they vacillate waffle on the issues?) where in their reformist bullshit as you say "[with] them are telling us that [when] the system that clearly works poorly, [as]is all we got to chose from [this and that to fix the whole mess as we did so many times before as if we should be so stupid to believe those well paid middle class apologist wankers for the establishment ..... Well friend comrade slash what ever if that is the case I agree with you for I too am sick and tired of my integrity infringed upon by the class biases of those held in esteem above me simply because they rest on the side of upper class prestige power money and privileges. So HEAR HEAR as in HERE HERE

Sorry about my grammar! I wasn't aware of any mistakes I did. Probably plenty though. English being my third language. My sentiment was. Isn't it high time now, that someone could come up with better and more modern economic ideas than the at least 150 year old ones we have today. It is as if those have become dogmas, no, even scientifically proven to be the only gigs in town, and that they all will be the only gig in town until the rapture or the heat death of the universe (whichever comes first). I kinda bet we could come up with systems that are better and way more fair.

Krappman please post on you tube for response

Krappman I understand you wish to replace our use of basic elements such as hydrogen and Oxygen simply because you wish to vary your privileged diets in what is afforded you with something other than the 15 basic food stuffs which invariably makes up your diet. Where if you listened it is capitalism which is at question not our terminology in examining it but you as many would wish us to stop our criticisms of capitalism for it as capitalism has been the problem not the solution for the last three hundred years.

If I understand you right, you didn't get me. I agree that capitalism isn't the cure. Nor is Marxist type capitalism the answer either. All those antiquated terms should have been put to rest by now. Why is there so hard to come up with a working common heritage model to superseed these ones?

Is that humour? Not very well executed if it is. Marx never saw a way to peace and prosperity. Marx could not conceive that market economies could engender compromises between the owners of capital and the labouring classes. Because their (him and Engels') historical context is that immutable forces drive history, now this is true to an extent, the Industrial Revolution did occur in Britain because as an island trade and empire came easier, etc., but they could not fathom of individuals driving history. All this lead to his spectacular failure to recognise Capitalism's dynamism, if it weren't for enterprising Germans, Capitalism, which floundered wouldn't have moved us to cars and we would be living in cities full of dead horses. Imposition of energy regulations will solve nothing. Marxist genocide actually exceeds the scale of the Second World War and speaking of militarism, the Soviet Union invaded Finland, the Baltic States, Poland and Afghanistan, built a wall in Berlin, tried to place nuclear weapons in Cuba and crushed dissent in Hungary.

Communism is fundamentally impossible. We are mammals with intrinsic individual agency. We are not a hive species. Marx’s communism is a utopian impossibility. After capitalism comes destruction... not the “utopian” prophecy of Communism.

​@@gopr3117 Capitalism is racing towards destruction on numerous levels. We're on the verge of a nuclear WWIII and extinction by climate catastrophe is racing at us at break neck speed.1% of the world owns almost all the wealth while ever greater numbers or the 99% are unable to even feed themselves adequately. The divide between politics and economics has been destroyed so politicians sell themselves to the highest bidders. What is needed is a socialist political system with a firm wall between it and a capitalist economic system. When capitalism bought the government there was nothing left to protect the people from unrestrained greed which is the predominant force driving capitalism.

The only problem with our capitalism is the all pervasive Marxism that is causing the fascist phenomenon of merging of corporate and government. Marxism destroys everything it touches. Just look at what Marxist propaganda has done to your pathetic excuse for a mind. You know full well that the application of Marxist ideology has resulted in 120,000,000 people slaughtered in starved to death in the 20th century, yet you think it a good idea to bring it here.

@@gopr3117 - Amish or and Hutterite type communities are a better answer. All a question of scale and living within our environmental limits.

the first guy is total moron

Not really. The first guy had to luxury to puke whatever he wanted because he never foresaw what could be coming next

@Ronald Reagan Oh geez do you post on /his/? Stop misusing hyphens.

While a direct-democratic economic and political reform is necessary for social stability, it remains systematically insufficient to alter the in in sustainability of a commoditized, monetized, and financialized free-market economy. At minimum, a direct-democratic monetary system would be necessary for economic stability; but also may be insufficient as a methodology of managing the social order towards the goal of sovereign self-governance.

Also this place with people in the middle class, of course their opinions would be skewed "Against" Had this place been filled with paupers or at least an equal amount of both classes, the results then may have been different.

It honestly just goes to show how far right america has become when even the position of reforming capitalism in the face of its collapse is a an extreme position.

@@loganmartin4435 Are you serious? What the hell do you mean “reforming capitalism”? A socialist president dishing money out to special interests is nothing to do with capitalism. Big banks too big to fail, decreed by government, is not capitalism at play. The federal reserve bank arbitrarily deciding how much money costs is not capitalism. You do know that socialism and communism is defined by government controlling the means of production, right? Just so you know, 2 + 2 still equals 4, but Jack Dorsey and Zuckerface, bezos and Pichai are doing everything they can to change that fact.

@@whatwhat678 America is very far right economically we take in lots of taxes and yet we do not have universal healthcare like the rest of the developed world, we may have lots of wealth but all our wealth lies at the top while the working class suffers for the gain of the one. And your definition of socialism and communism is wrong, socialism the definition is the workers owning the means of production and communism is an extension of that philosophy that also adds a stateless and classes society, communism is a perfect utopia it will never happen like that we will always require a state.

If the system was capitalism then yes it would be failing . The problem is that the government has so much of its dirty interfering paws all over it that it’s hardly capitalism that is failing. It’s the governments role that is failing. But of course the proletariat is too dim to recognise that.

@@whatwhat678 The proletariat is however enslaved by the individual because we have a system that prioritizes money over people, this is a core fault of capitalism that cannot be fixed by removing government, which would only make this worse. The government's role should be to protect the proletariat and they fail at this as well also a fault of capitalist lobbyist.

It's a philosophical debate

Bro just take a fucking look at the 20th century Moa and Stalin? Fascism and Socialism are terrible bro. Capitalism has made more people wealthy. People that are poor in America live better than moist people in all of history

@@caydcrow5161 brazil, congo, ghana, indonesia, india, south Africa, egypt, pakistan and majority of whole world is a proof that capitalism doesn't work. These countries are capitalist and their gdp/capita and human development index is such lower than almost all socialist countries like USSR, china, cuba. This is evidence. Capitalism created wealth only in the first world because of colonialism which looted and profited all money from whole world. Colonialism and imperialism were two wheels of capitalism used to generate wealth for the minority.

@@caydcrow5161 majority of capitalist countries are poorer and underdeveloped than socialist countries. Socialism made two super powers and economic giants like USSR and china.

Akshay attri it’s funny all th countries you named at the top have something in common besides what you call “capitalism”. If you can figure it out I’ll give you a cookie

@@caydcrow5161 sure. When something doesn't work label it socialism and when capitalism fails just that isn't capitalism. Hahaha you're great man

every technological advance has opened new markets, refuting the idea that technology will put millions on death row. The expanding population, decreasing prices, increasing food security and access to basics and luxuries for the global population throughout this century is a clear refutation of luddite intransigence.

@@freyfaust6218 Yeah the machine argument is pretty dumb the only one thing I can think that will really have an impact is self-driving trucks, they can drive all night perfectly without any stops this will remove truck stops business the truckers business, and many others which will probably result in a net negative but you never know with this stuff sometimes you think that will happen and then the opposite occurs. Though if we have all these recourses in such an abundant quantity why can we not share the love with everyone rather than locking in a pay wall?

@@equinox2584 Not necessary. Cars destroyed the horse-drawn industry. All the "stops and rests" for horses employed thousands of people to mantain the horses, feed them etc (not just drive the cart/horse). Those jobs disappeared with the car. New jobs appeared. Jobs are not limited as socialists think, jobs are the natural result of people having free time and needs to satisfy, you will always find a job as long as there's a good environment for it, the role of the state is to create the environment for jobs, jobs will come along. Socialists instead want to create artificial jobs that are not needed.

@@freedomordeath89 I never said I thought there wouldn't be jobs because of new tech I was just saying that I think the trucking industry as a whole is the thing most likely to cause problems in the future. We should not be manufacturing jobs and I am a socialist lol.

@@equinox2584 YOu are probably not a socialist. Most people use the word without knowing the meaning. You are probably a social democrat which is really different.

If you consider it unacceptable, you are not being forced to participate.

@@edwardheaney3641 but you are forced since we all live in the same sociaty. Refusing to go with the flow will mean you cant have a family or a regular life. Or worse to go starve to death. Your comment is stupid

@@yareyaredaz3522 You absolutely can, live off canned foods for 90% of your meals like they did. Don't use electronics, don't use modern cars which are safer and more reliable. Don't buy health insurance because you don't use modern medicine. You can live like them, but you won't because the modern standard of living is better.

@@edwardheaney3641 so the only way to avoid the system is to live like an animal.You just made my point for me sir

@@yareyaredaz3522 And you've made my point for me, the system is what stops us from living like animals. Don't blame the system for all the good its done.

tha1ne Why don't they read out the percentage points like all the other isquared debates? Gawd.

***** I did, I guess you didn't even read my comment. I said according to THIS debate, Marx was wrong.

Go watch South Park Biatch

Revolucion Social! I did, and according to this debate he's still wrong lol

tha1ne yeah YOUR WRONG GO WATCH YOUR IDIOTIC SHOWWS ;)