4 ms·

You say my iPhone example is nonsense yet you speak about wealth accumulation in a way that supports my example. You ignore other countries falling the exact s

by oDot 7y ago

You say my iPhone example is nonsense yet you speak about wealth accumulation in a way that supports my example. You ignore other countries falling the exact same faults as you say Capitalism You seem to support a democracy where a majority could vote to oppress a minority You blame me for suggesting a world "without government" which is extreme intellectual dishonesty, especially when I mention limited _government_. Then you, once again, point at the problems with the US that are Cronyism, not Capitalism. Living in the USSR is nothing more than an anecdote, the same way Mainland Chinese claim wrongs about China, probably without even knowing[0]. I'm sorry, but this is the point where I leave this discussion, as it seems to go nowhere. I suggest you read a little about the quality of life in the 1950s in the US, before Cronyism caught up to it, and compare it to the quality of life in the USSR at the time. [0]: Warning, difficult to watch. https://youtu.be/rbHxeOQA1Mc?t=933 https://youtu.be/rbHxeOQA1Mc?t=933

yogthos 7y ago
>You say my iPhone example is nonsense yet you speak about wealth accumulation in a way that supports my example. The concrete numbers do not support your example. You just keep repeating nonsense over and over, but it's still nonsense. 3 richest people own more wealth than bottom 50% of the population, while millenials own 3% of the overall wealth. If you don't understand that there's a vertical wealth transfer happening to the capital owner class, then I really don't know what else to tell you. >You ignore other countries falling the exact same faults as you say Capitalism Regardless of what faults other systems have, it's clear that capitalism causes the problems I've outlined. The discussion is about capitalism and its impact on society. >You seem to support a democracy where a majority could vote to oppress a minority That's literally how democracy works, people vote and then we enact policies that are in the interest of the majority. Sounds like you're promoting authoritarianism here. >You blame me for suggesting a world "without government" which is extreme intellectual dishonesty, especially when I mention limited _government_. I'm not blaming you, I'm pointing out the absurdity of your argument. >Then you, once again, point at the problems with the US that are Cronyism, not Capitalism. Once again I'll repeat that cronyism is a byproduct of capitalism. I've explained this to you repeatedly, yet you keep on ignoring that and pretending that these things are separate. Now that's what I call intellectual dishonesty. >Living in the USSR is nothing more than an anecdote, the same way Mainland Chinese claim wrongs about China, probably without even knowing[0]. Again, you ignore the concrete points I made about how USSR function. You're intellectually dishonest. >I'm sorry, but this is the point where I leave this discussion, as it seems to go nowhere. And here I thought I'd never see the end of your drivel. Meanwhile, you might want to watch some footage from Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. US killed over half a million people in Iraq alone buddy.
- Sowas 7y ago
  If you own the device where you read HN on: Would you say it is worth the money you paid for it? Why/ why not?
  - yogthos 7y ago
    It's worth the money I paid for because I use it to do things I'm interested in doing. However, if you're planning to argue that such a device would not exist without capitalism, then I'm going to disagree with you.
    - Sowas 7y ago
      No, I'm going to argue that you gained more through possessing the device than by having the money you spent. Unless your stance is that only money is wealth.
      - yogthos 7y ago
        Since money can be exchanged for goods and services, having more money directly translates into having more options to pursue your interests. If I had a bit more money, I could get an even better device, or if I was a billionaire I could pursue interests like making rockets, or any other fancy. So, my stance is that money directly translates into increased opportunity in a capitalist society. Meanwhile, the relationship between capital owners and works is asymmetric where the capital owner keeps majority of the profit from the value that the workers create.

by oDot 7y ago

yogthos 7y ago

>You say my iPhone example is nonsense yet you speak about wealth accumulation in a way that supports my example. The concrete numbers do not support your example. You just keep repeating nonsense over and over, but it's still nonsense. 3 richest people own more wealth than bottom 50% of the population, while millenials own 3% of the overall wealth. If you don't understand that there's a vertical wealth transfer happening to the capital owner class, then I really don't know what else to tell you. >You ignore other countries falling the exact same faults as you say Capitalism Regardless of what faults other systems have, it's clear that capitalism causes the problems I've outlined. The discussion is about capitalism and its impact on society. >You seem to support a democracy where a majority could vote to oppress a minority That's literally how democracy works, people vote and then we enact policies that are in the interest of the majority. Sounds like you're promoting authoritarianism here. >You blame me for suggesting a world "without government" which is extreme intellectual dishonesty, especially when I mention limited _government_. I'm not blaming you, I'm pointing out the absurdity of your argument. >Then you, once again, point at the problems with the US that are Cronyism, not Capitalism. Once again I'll repeat that cronyism is a byproduct of capitalism. I've explained this to you repeatedly, yet you keep on ignoring that and pretending that these things are separate. Now that's what I call intellectual dishonesty. >Living in the USSR is nothing more than an anecdote, the same way Mainland Chinese claim wrongs about China, probably without even knowing[0]. Again, you ignore the concrete points I made about how USSR function. You're intellectually dishonest. >I'm sorry, but this is the point where I leave this discussion, as it seems to go nowhere. And here I thought I'd never see the end of your drivel. Meanwhile, you might want to watch some footage from Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. US killed over half a million people in Iraq alone buddy.

Sowas 7y ago
If you own the device where you read HN on: Would you say it is worth the money you paid for it? Why/ why not?
- yogthos 7y ago
  It's worth the money I paid for because I use it to do things I'm interested in doing. However, if you're planning to argue that such a device would not exist without capitalism, then I'm going to disagree with you.
  - Sowas 7y ago
    No, I'm going to argue that you gained more through possessing the device than by having the money you spent. Unless your stance is that only money is wealth.
    - yogthos 7y ago
      Since money can be exchanged for goods and services, having more money directly translates into having more options to pursue your interests. If I had a bit more money, I could get an even better device, or if I was a billionaire I could pursue interests like making rockets, or any other fancy. So, my stance is that money directly translates into increased opportunity in a capitalist society. Meanwhile, the relationship between capital owners and works is asymmetric where the capital owner keeps majority of the profit from the value that the workers create.