Capitalism good or bad?

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

I have made some relatively long arguments before. Also feudalism is an awful system, but it is better than capitalism seeing that there was relative economic prosperity under that system, capitalism has bombed horibly.

You don't think there has been economic prosperity with capitalism?

Really?

There is always some prosperity with every system, capitalism hasnt had a lot of prosperity but some at least.

[Ostroeuropa]

Some what?

Governements.

How do you define prosperity exactly.

As in where the people have jobs, starvation isnt amok, and people can make a living.

Ah, so clearly slavery is very prosperous.
Also, starvation was amok dude...
"Make a living." = Have a hut, clothes, and food.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

I have made some relatively long arguments before. Also feudalism is an awful system, but it is better than capitalism seeing that there was relative economic prosperity under that system, capitalism has bombed horibly.

There is no prosperity in capitalism. No, no, no!

This dude with a tyrant dictator on his flag said so. It must be true!

Can you think of no argument other than " he has a tyrant dictator communist guy on his flag!"? You know NOTHING about Lenin or Leninism it seems, and did I say capitlism could have no prosperity? Hmm?

[Sibirsky]

Sure, the benefits will seize. That does not make the fact that it would be more financial beneficial to make less money, in the present day, any less true.

We're talking financial benefits. Obviously there are other factors at play. But, you're being obtuse. You are ignoring the point.

No I am pointing out you are trying to use one small portion of the entire curve as representative of the entire curve.

No, I'm not.

I did not propose anything. I merely pointed out how certain things may have bad incentives.

and you are wrong, taxation is not a disincentive, the net incentive is clearly positive, the effect in the economy is also very positive since a wage of 26,000 is not going to support the woman and her children, and a live laborer is more productive than a dead one.
The graph leaves out most of the benefits of taxation, as if it is cost without profit.

True. But those benefits are small, compared to the costs. IOW. the graph is closer to reality than fiction.

[Sibirsky]

Some what?

Governements.

Name one. Pretend internet nation do not count.

[Sibirsky]

Fair enough.

That's...that's it? No insults? No rage? No telling me I'm wrong? Just a "fair enough", an implicit acceptance of my position as equally valid compared to your own?

Everyone, look outside your windows! Make sure it's not raining fire! Two people on NSG just agreed to disagree!

I've always liked you.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

Governements.

Name one. Pretend internet nation do not count.

Japan cares.
Zimbabwe does not.

[Sibirsky]

What?

what part did you not understand?

The entire thing.

[Sibirsky]

You don't think there has been economic prosperity with capitalism?

Really?

There is always some prosperity with every system, capitalism hasnt had a lot of prosperity but some at least.

Right. The most prosperous system has had only some prosperity.

[Socialdemokraterne]

That's...that's it? No insults? No rage? No telling me I'm wrong? Just a "fair enough", an implicit acceptance of my position as equally valid compared to your own?

Everyone, look outside your windows! Make sure it's not raining fire! Two people on NSG just agreed to disagree!

I've always liked you.

You're pretty cool yourself.

[Death Metal]

You don't think there has been economic prosperity with capitalism?

Really?

There is always some prosperity with every system, capitalism hasnt had a lot of prosperity but some at least.

Fair enough, but let's be honest here: But standard of living is much better as a 9-to-5 minimum wage worker than it is as a medieval serf. And I'm saying that's before you factor in the centuries of technological and medical advances, mind you.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

There is always some prosperity with every system, capitalism hasnt had a lot of prosperity but some at least.

Right. The most prosperous system has had only some prosperity.

1:1930 recession. 1980 Recession. 2008 recession. For a "Most prosperous system" it sure is pretty unstable.
2:Source on it being the most prosperous?

[Sibirsky]

There is no prosperity in capitalism. No, no, no!

This dude with a tyrant dictator on his flag said so. It must be true!

Can you think of no argument other than " he has a tyrant dictator communist guy on his flag!"? You know NOTHING about Lenin or Leninism it seems, and did I say capitlism could have no prosperity? Hmm?

Please.

I know more about Lenin and Leninism than you ever will.

Lenin was a coward. He was a liar. He was a tyrant. Any self respecting communist, would not look up to that piece of shit of a human being. Lenin was a failure.

[Ostroeuropa]

Right. The most prosperous system has had only some prosperity.

1:1930 recession. 1980 Recession. 2008 recession. For a "Most prosperous system" it sure is pretty unstable.
2:Source on it being the most prosperous?

1. Because harvest failures never happened in feudalism to cripple the economy for decades.
2. Human development index.

[Shining Ys]

My system exists. Yours doesn't.
It follows from there that my system outperforms yours in every category of positive achievement.
Check of proof: This would even hold true for any tribal society in the Amazonas without money.
QED.

That doesn't make sense. It totally ignores the existence of power. Human societies are not produced by natural selection. Memetics is pseudoscience.

[Death Metal]

Japan cares.

Japan the capitalist democracy, or Japan the feudal empire who didn't even consider the lower castes to be human beings?

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

Can you think of no argument other than " he has a tyrant dictator communist guy on his flag!"? You know NOTHING about Lenin or Leninism it seems, and did I say capitlism could have no prosperity? Hmm?

Please.

I know more about Lenin and Leninism than you ever will.

Lenin was a coward. He was a liar. He was a tyrant. Any self respecting communist, would not look up to that piece of shit of a human being. Lenin was a failure.

And because he didnt allow elections he was a tyrant? Hmm? He didnt genocide his own people like Stalin, he was liked by his people, and yet because he was state capitalist not free market capitalist he was a tyrant? Yeah riiiiggggghhhhhhttttt. Are ya gonna say every monarch in history was a tyrant to now?

[Sibirsky]

Name one. Pretend internet nation do not count.

Japan cares.
Zimbabwe does not.

Of course!

Borrowing, basically unlimited amounts of money, and enslaving future (declining at that) generations of Japanese is "caring."

[Ostroeuropa]

Please.

I know more about Lenin and Leninism than you ever will.

Lenin was a coward. He was a liar. He was a tyrant. Any self respecting communist, would not look up to that piece of shit of a human being. Lenin was a failure.

And because he didnt allow elections he was a tyrant? Hmm? He didnt genocide his own people like Stalin, he was liked by his people, and yet because he was state capitalist not free market capitalist he was a tyrant? Yeah riiiiggggghhhhhhttttt. Are ya gonna say every monarch in history was a tyrant to now?

Yes, yes he was.
Yes, yes they were.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

1:1930 recession. 1980 Recession. 2008 recession. For a "Most prosperous system" it sure is pretty unstable.
2:Source on it being the most prosperous?

1. Because harvest failures never happened in feudalism to cripple the economy for decades.
2. Human development index.

1:Fair enough.
2: It was invented by capitalists!

Japan cares.

Japan the capitalist democracy, or Japan the feudal empire who didn't even consider the lower castes to be human beings?

The former.

[Sibirsky]

I've always liked you.

You're pretty cool yourself.

Thank you.

[Ostroeuropa]

1. Because harvest failures never happened in feudalism to cripple the economy for decades.
2. Human development index.

1:Fair enough.
2: It was invented by capitalists!

Japan the capitalist democracy, or Japan the feudal empire who didn't even consider the lower castes to be human beings?

The former.

So you want a source on prosperity invented by someone who agrees with YOUR definition of prosperity, as opposed to everyone elses.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

1:Fair enough.
2: It was invented by capitalists!


The former.

So you want a source on prosperity invented by someone who agrees with YOUR definition of prosperity, as opposed to everyone elses.

I will not exept any source invented by capitalists, like GDP's.

[Belvadaire]

i think it just become bad when a cancerous mind get's into power, a system can be legit when a trustworthy mind get intio power, But i truly think that a system must be examined and at least give the public a chance to have an opinion about any pending system of Goverment, when a system trys to be lawful and try to strong hold the people rights, it becomes a police state/fascism country. I say be careful who gets into power, pay close attention to possible dark agendas that try to creep it's way into office.

[Death Metal]

1:1930 recession. 1980 Recession. 2008 recession. For a "Most prosperous system" it sure is pretty unstable.
2:Source on it being the most prosperous?

1. Because harvest failures never happened in feudalism to cripple the economy for decades.
2. Human development index.

Also, didn't an overabundance of gold cripple the value of coinage in medieval Europe?

All systems boom and bust.