/biz/ - Business & Finance

cunts gay

>>11291345

Benjamin Franklin?

So did Hitler and shakazulu

I find it funny how /pol/ hates Marx, but he was about as anti jew as they are

Keks

>>11291345
Once scarcity is gone, then yes. Until then, communism and humanity is not compatible.

>>11291388
Marx was a jew

>>11291408

No shit

We're unsustainably consuming resources to generate wealth that all goes into the hands of a tiny minority. In other words we're destroying the future habitability and productivity and beauty of Earth for the benefit of people that aren't us.
But hey we get iPods so yaaaaay.

>>11291345
He seems to make good points, but that's on paper. The same that a dictatorship can be viewed as good on paper. But practically it all falls apart, so it really isn't.

>>11291345
>/biz
>>>/reddit/

>>11291388
A broken clock is right twice a day, but is still a broken clock.

>>11291426
>muh iPods
Is that still even a thing? I haven't heard the word "iPod" in years. I had assumed that most people just put music on their phones now.

>>11291426
I'm so sick of this fucking meme. Do you think Marxist governments had ANY respect for the environment? The USSR was a heavy polluter, just look at what they did to the Aral Sea.

Just consider how public roads have fragmented the landscape, how fiat currency has pumped up industries, or how regulations make it almost impossible for the public to buy and control natural land.

Idiot

He was good at starving commies

>>11291718
Well thank god neoliberalism has a deep sense of sustainability and conservation built into it.

>>11291345
I use to agree with this, still kind of do in a way, but while Jews have their dirty hands all over Marxism it will turn out nothing but misery for the majority because the majority will never be jew. We are nothing but cattle to the Jews op

I would only like communism if I'm one of the leaders.

>>11291345
Why do old photos always have that same pose for men where they are really bad at hiding a handgun

>>11291345
Wtf, OP? Almost any educated person in Europe would say that Marx had positive and innovative intentions, but that no large scale community has ever succeeded implementing them with a positive long term outcome.

If you are really thinking that most people hate Marx and his ideas, then you are retarded. The world isn't black and white.

>>11291731
Nice argument you fucking idiot

Do you even realize how much money the environment rakes in? Tourism, parks, trails, bird watching... It's a lucrative industry with the governments boot on it's neck.

It's literally not possible for someone to buy a plot of land and restore it without intense paperwork and cooperation with local authorities, thus you are left waiting decades to get their thumb out of their arse.

I have a degree in conservation so I gave first hand accounts of this shit. Want to reintroduce a species? You'll have more than a decade of regulations to fight through. Want to manage your woodland? You'll need a licence to cut trees. Want to sell charcoal from your sustainable woodland? Too much paperwork.

You're another smug idiot

he has distinctive look and his logo is distinctive. that's all it takes for faggots to build a cult of personality around someone. of course his ideas are shit.

>>11291811
>introduce a species
I'll introduce a species of semen to your mouth u pretty faggot

His ideas led to the death of millions of people.
The fact that he's still taken seriously in academia still baffles me.

>>11291722

Marx lived before the USSR/Communist China. He literally had nothing to do with them, Lenin and Mao "adopted" and applied his ideas about proletarian revolution in countries where most people were still living in villages.

You have to view Marx ideas in historical perspective.
The Communist Manifesto was written in 1848, back when child labor was legal, when workers in Europe had to live and work in terrible conditions, worse than people in Bangladeshi sweatshops today.

Back then the words "workers have nothing to lose but his chains" actually made a lot of sense.
Workers were paid just enough to rent a room in an overcrowded house without utilities and buy the cheapest food, hardly anyone of them lived past 45.
Workers didn't have paid vacations.
Workers had no pensions.
Worker had no sick leave or unemployment benefits.
Workers didn't have health insurance or medical care.
Workers didn't have any work safety regulations and no 8-hour work day with mandatory extra payment for OT work.

ALL these perks and benefits came as the result of struggle and concessions. They had to fight for it.

One of the reasons why an American/western European worker could afford middle class lifestyle after WW2 was EXACTLY because Marxist ideas gained more and more popularity after WW1, the great Depression and WW2, so capitalists and Western governments agreed improve the living standards of the masses by paying generous wages and levying bigger taxes on corporate profits (up to 80-90% in the US under FDR, Truman and Eisenhover).

Only when the USSR started to crumble, only then Reagan, Thatcher and other "based [neo]conservatives" started to ship jobs to China and de-industrialize their countries. And paid shills like Neill Ferguson and others saw that as a blessing and triumph of "free market".

But of course reading and analyzing actual history is difficult, it's way easier to just post "commie ball" memes from /pol/ and screech about bread lines and gulags.

>>11291718
>how public roads have fragmented the landscape

because corporations who will build and maintain private roads will always put the environment first, right? fucking /ancap/tards

>>11291395
Soon, my brothers. Soon.
>>11291761
>communism
>leaders
try again anon

>>11291345
>From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
Makes sense until you realize it is other humans deciding what are everyone else's abilities and needs

>>11291811
Wait are you actually arguing that environmental sustainability would be better managed in a completely free market?

>>11291345
No. No he does not lmao

>>11291811
>I have a degree in conservation and I think it should be easier for humans to manage woodlands and reintroduce species
Doubt.

>>11291426
>he says this posting on a fucking computer
What a complete fuck up you are

>>11292135
>a meme sentence is dumb
Wow. Now try reading what he actually wrote

Anyone who doesn't realize how spot-on Marx's analysis of capitalism was really doesn't have any business on this board.

t. not a communist, just someone who actually studies real economic theory and not some libertarian bullshit

>>11292020
Marx was the most influential economist of the modern era.
For better and worse.

>>11292509
yeah he made some good criticisms just like T.Kasisinsky.

But it turns out fixing problems is several orders of magnitude harder than pointing them out. Both had valid points but I'm not buying their solutions.

>>11291718
>implying communists have brains
The Winston Churchill meme is real. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 30 you have no brain.
These fucking idiots don't understand what happens when you take away market forces. They are so fucking stupid that they haven't worked out that in action market forces means you have the ability to buy, the ability to spend and the ability to demand. In a communist government where there are no market forces you don't have any of these things and the state rations everything. Communists will still read that last sentence and won't put 2 and 2 together as to what that actually entails because they are so fucking dumb.
Like look at this asshole right here >>11291426 He has the ability to take action and guide his life in the direction of "less of an environmental impact", which would mean ditching the electronics. But he won't do it because he's fucking pathetic.

>>11292148
ikr lmfao

>>11292509
>spot on analysis
>Marx
You're a special kind of stupid.
Let me guess. When he said money was going to flow into the hands of a few, you thought that was a really profound thing to say?
Because it really isn't. In fact it wasn't a very profound thing to say at all.

>>11292567
>>11291718
>"Marxist" GOVERNMENTS
>The STATE
LOL. At least fucking read Marx you retards

>>11292626
>haha you're not using the precise terminology therefore your entire point about market forces is wrong
Kys

>>11292636
Nah, they're not even close to the right concepts. They heard some shit about communism growing up, have never actually studied the actual philosophy

>>11292623
It's not my fault you haven't bothered to read the theories you're attacking with strawmans and adhoms. I wish the libertards could realize how completely ignorant they come across when they talk about this shit. Let me guess, you like Thomas Sowell?

Stop embarrassing yourself. It's okay to not have anything to contribute to a discussion. You should read this anon's post for the briefest of overviews so you won't look so silly.
>>11292020

>>11292642
Please tell me about all the successful countries that have taken away market forces.
God you are such a deluded asshole.

>>11292678
stay ignorant. It would crush you to learn you've been making straw men your entire life

>>11292668
When you implement communism, you will be the guy that gets it right.

>>11292691
>asks for successful countries that don't have market forces
>get accused of strawmanning
Imbecile

>>11292707
>>11292693
>>11292678
>>11292636
>>11292623
Memey braindead teenager, please read
>>11292020
And learn something

Some of my favorites include
>only the factory workers will rise
Even at the time of his birth factories weren't as abundant thanks to the industrial revolution
>some magical force will cause all factory workers to rebel
His biggest claim, even if some unnamed hive mind-like force did this, at the time of his birth no less, it would be so little people they'd have just slammed into a brick wall
>humans don't need a profit incentive to progress
This is his best point imo because it flat out ignores thousands of years of history, psychology and simple logic chains
>the Jews were evil and must be dealt with
Honestly? Yea probably.

>>11292693
>when you unironically derive your political, social, and economic worldview from .jpg memes posted on a racist bangladeshi flea market forum and you call other people stupid

>>11292720
What a truly pathetic creature you are, to write out all that and forget that you accused me of strawmanning above.
Or is it another case of, do what I say but now what I do? Once again, the stupidity of the Marxist strikes. Seldom does he rise above the level of pond scum.

>>11291345
Thinking anything written political/economical/societal in 1848 is related or relevant to the (((current year))) other than (((them)))

>>11291345
>All wage labour is exploitative
No
>The rich will get richer
Maybe
>There will be fewer rich people
No
>The poor will get poorer
No
>There will be more poor people
No

Sorry, Marx you were wrong

>>11292762
Not even the same fucking poster you special, special person
When you are older, you are going to realize what a cunt you were all those years

>>11292762
You're a walking strawman anon. You've posted nothing which can be responded to with anything other than insults, just sperging out with your memes and acting like they qualify you to talk about a hugely influential economic thinker whose works you haven't even read.

You have to go back.

>>11292771
The rich did get richer, there are fewer rich people, there are more poor people, and the poor did get poorer
>One rich guy and ten poor guys
>Ten rich guys and a thousand poor guys
Which example has fewer rich people?

Another example of their nepotism
IQ90 theories what you can hear in any shithole pub
> Rich get richer, workers get poorer
WOW GENIUS most influential in history, goy !!!

>>11292623
>>>11292509
>>spot on analysis
>>Marx
>Let me guess. When he said money was going to flow into the hands of a few.
>the hands of a few
>few

>>11291345
>>11291345
Literally invented capitalism

>>11291345
>good points
As in the labor theory of value?
Disprove
As in the ideals of equality?
Immoral
As in the subsequent success of all states that follow his theory?
Disavowed
The fact that he's ideology is solely materialistic and ignores blood and spirit.
This man has little to nothing to offer when it comes to the economic, political, and spiritual implications of being. read something that is actually relevant instead of wasting your time with a materialist Hegelian.
t. former commie.

>>11292813
The "poor" are better off now than in Marx's time. Living standards for everyone has increased.
The poor have not got poorer.
The middle class has increased, not the lower/working class.
Why are commies incapable of being honest?

>>11293200
That's true, but the whole destroying the planet thing is a bummer

>>11291345
>the rich extort the people
>the countries with the most rich people have the highest living standards

>>11293200
>The middle class has increased, not the lower/working class.
The middle class are the working class too. It's not about how payment, but where one is inserted in the productive system.
>>11293229
This is inevitable. Civilisations are destructive by nature

>>11293242
Muh means of production.
We're not playing your definition game.

>>11291345
Marx was pretty based desu, he was overall a idiot tho.

>>11293273
Braindead memelord teenager

>>11293344
Sorry that you can't argue without using your own specific definitions, sophist

Economic calculus destroy the Marx. The bright of the libertarians destroyed the pseudo-intelectualism of socialism. You unironically need an IQ above 130 to grasp the concept of the Austrians. That's why the pleb got stuck with Marx.

>>11291426
This will motivate us to invent better stuff, maybe learn how to mine resources in space. People find answers better when everything is on the line

>>11292567
Fuck off. Marxism is inevitable With Technology. Accept it morons. We are doomed to slave for the turdbrains as we bribe them and pray to not get eaten.

Sure, some. His conclusions are nonsense though

>>11293596
Would actually agree, there's a good Hoppe presentation about this

>>11292567
>. In a communist government where there are no market forces you don't have any of these things and the state rations everything.
you know kid, most commies aim for communities without a government/state, in fact thats the goal for almost all commies. so you got a horrible misunderstanding about communism here. demand and supply will still be forces, also trading and privileges. Communism is about freeing humanity from slavery, exploitation and oppression - so every human can live his life under the mantra "to everybody according to his needs, from everybody according to his abilites". culture will bloom again. with modern technology there will be no shortage of whatsoever.

>>11293735
This is why I get angry when people misinterpret communism.
Communism is bad enough when explained properly.

You forgot to mention the abolition of private property, and how personal property is totally different. Let us know more about communism