Other people's money is too easy to waste, which is why the grandchildren of the wealthy always squander it. With socialism you are handing over all the resources of an entire nation to people whose greatest talent is reading speeches. This is why we vote every few years, because these people cannot be entrusted with 20% of our resources. The only way to allocate resources even close to effectively is the market, because historically you needed a range of skills to generate revenue year on year and those are the only people who should be breeding. With socialism you have people like josh surviving childhood and tainting the gene pool until the nation collapses. Whence upon you return to eat what you kill.
what the fuck is a work week? is that where you sign on every week? fuck that, get on disability bennies
John Barnes
he bought 59 shitty ready meals hahaha
Easton Kelly
corr who should she do a scene with?
Christopher Ward
3 deaths at the TT this year already
Brody King
socialism isn't bad, nor is capitalism, and neither one is better or worse than the other the fundamental problem is people's perception of what socialism is its not a political ideology its a facet of the only true political ideology that exists which is national socialism the principle of ebb and flow applies to civilisations civilisations have their seasons just like everything else everything that rises must fall everything that lives must die everything that grows must decline capitalism creates growth, it creates excess, it unlocks human potential through creativity and uses that creativity to create advancements that make life more bearable, safer, more comfortable, and more enjoyable the problem is that eventually when we reach peak inventiveness, we become too comfortable, that inventiveness stagnates, this is a natural occurance and tends to coincide with other elements that cause a generic stagnation in every facet of society this is where socialism comes in it takes the excess wealth accumulated from the period of growth in question and reinvests it into the nation in question so the stagnation doesn't cause an all out collapse and then gradually over time things will get worse, society will decline and eventually new generations will begin to see this and pursue capitalistic modes of thought once again to allow for much needed growth to once again raise the nation in question to its height of greatness capitalism = growth period socialism = rest period like the breath of brahma himself, it is a cyclical rhythm that cannot be avoided
>Socialism is unstainable and is incompatible with human nature >In these types of systems any incentive to excel is lost - both economic through loss of entrepreneurship, and personal via egalitarianism So you think human nature is a selfish one that doesn't strive to make a success for humanity and not one's self? Maybe for lower IQ high impulsive individuals but how many scientists for example do you know of that didn't patent their work, didn't financially benefit for the sake of humanity. Huge amounts, many Jewish too. On a more realistic attainable level, it's definately more relevant as competition is important. Nationalized services are generally worse off than private, generally though. But if everyone pulls in the same direction why does that need to be the case? This is of course assuming we have a single minded, intelligent and success focused society which we don't. As you say it's a balance but decentralisation could potentially be a step toward this goal.
