Is this true? Are the results of publicly-funded scientific research frequently used to enrich private corporations?

>anarcho-communism
How can you enforce no private property without a government as well as a police force? What's to stop me from extracting all the money from a workers labor?

even invent*

I never said he did coin the term capitalism. He only redefined it like a typical commie.

>The issue is that jewish people are greedy and enrich themselves off of the hard work of others.
Ok, looking at your namefagging you are probably la not looking for an actual discussion. But again, they ARE contributing to society. It doesn't matter if a publicly funded scientist "invents" the idea of the "smartphone" (whatever that means) if there's no apple to actually engineer and produce the actual commodity.

>What's to stop me from extracting all the money from a workers labor?
The rest of the community, with their guns. Also, I hope you understand the difference between private property on the industrial scale and personal property on the individual scale.
No, he literally didn't use it. It's not mentioned in Capital at all.
Apple's a great example. There were lots of engineers doing work to innovate; Steve Jobs was not one of them. Woz would have done what he did with or without that kike-hearted faggot stealing his work.

>socialism (which was first defined by marx)
Historylet confirmed. Didn’t read the rest.

>CLASS WAR NOW
Yes its true you're a cringy kike.

>call for the genocide of jews
>y-you're a jew!
nice try, shlomo

ask yourself this
if this is true, is it really capitalism?
if the government is involved in creating incentives and constraints, or even outright funding or bailing out some industries - is it really capitalism?
what is capitalism?

here ya go buddy

Attached: capitalism2.png (1136x114, 34.56K)

wealthy elite use influence and power to cheat the system, capitalists, communists, libertarians, etc. the system of exchanging goods and services you own is capitalism. intentionally fucking people over isn't an original part of any of these systems, its just something humans do.
the real issues come when power and influence are used to protect people from prosecution for the rules that were set and broken in our capitalist society.

>see pic related

Attached: 1636484575352.jpg (1024x783, 191.15K)

>the system of exchanging goods and services you own is capitalism
No, that's trade or commerce. Also, I never mentioned the term "capitalism" and I would appreciate if we could just stop using it. Whatever word you wanna use for it, this thread is about the mode of production which sees economic power consolidated among a class of wealthy capitalists rather than that economic power being distributed among the people who use their work to turn capital into profit, which is what our current system is.

Yes, it’s true. It’s parasitism at its finest. Look at he airlines, the energy sector, the weapons industry, all of it is heavily subsidized by states. We’re in formal capitalism as defined by Marx. Bankers and their executive politicians preying on the middle class, with the help of ransacking savages they import in droves. Only a revolution will put an end to this.

What happens after the revolution? How do you prevent another Napoleon?

>socialism (which was first defined by marx)
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Marx is the father of hegelian materialist socialism but there were idealist socialists before him
I'm not here to argue about the specifics of what a particular person did or didn't do, but without the capitalist to guide production into maximal utility according to his self-interest, efficiency would be lost. You think those engineers know how to manage a company? There always needs to be a leader. and democracy in the workplace is just as bad if not worse than democracy in the political sphere.

>The rest of the community, with their guns.

What if i can hire a private military? I have all the money after all.

>Also, I hope you understand the difference between private property on the industrial scale and personal property on the individual scale.

Personal property does not include land or buildings of any kind and never has.

>No, he literally didn't use it. It's not mentioned in Capital at all.

It is.

>Historylet confirmed. Didn’t read the rest.
>projection
>no argument
Who was first to define socialism then?

Truth is capitalism is regressive and repressive.
Let's take pliers as a random example.
They still produce identical garbage pliers from 150 years ago from meme metal that is basically trash for stone age people. Yet this is normal and what is most commonly sold:
>cheap
>barely functional
>breaks easily and must be replaced often
In other words capitalism does nothing for innovation. On the contrary, ideally you brainwash everybody into buying the same obsolete shit garbage every year.

Meanwhile there are a few firms who develop and produce advanced pliers, for instances, improved or updated designs. Thing is, they already did this 200 years ago, but that is not the point..
Point is: according to capitalism meme ideology these verifiably improved pliers should replace all inferior models rapidly and give them a market lead, because muh free market.
Yet this does not happen. Literally never.

tl;dr Capitalism cannot work lmao

The conflict of interest simply is too strong. There is no correlation between innovation and capitalism at all; literally no single valid example. It's ideological, brainwashed belief.
Capitalism is about making retards buy them same overpriced trash again and again. The market puts no premium on innovation. In fact if you innovate the risk is very high you are bought out by a firm more established in the market and shut down.
Go look up advanced plier designs from the late 1800s.

>Marx is the father of hegelian materialist socialism but there were idealist socialists before him

Intellectually dishonest. We are clearly discussing economic materialist socialism. Who defined it before Marx?

so this thread is about corrupt powerful individuals whether they be capitalists or not? what your describing is not unique at all to capitalism and your conflating the two ideas. i think that better describes an authoritarian system.

>Historylet confirmed. Didn’t read the rest.
>projection
>no argument
Who was first to define socialism then?