Albert Einstein argues for Socialism, and my response
Post: 73
Visitata da: 80 users
Il post originale
Postato da KYBL, 21.01.2014 - 07:42
For his argument, see here: http://www.exponentialimprovement.com/cms/uploads/Einstein%20on%20Why%20Socialism.pdf
My argument:
First of all, Einstein comes in with an argument based on a previous conclusion that competition is bad. He says that the goal of companies is to destroy each other through legal means and that this is inherently evil. He declares that the sole goal of these corporations is to create profit and destroy other companies. One fundamental flaw is that he ignores the consumer and only talks about the capitalists. While companies try to harm each other, one must realize that at the end of the day, whichever company survives is based off of two factors: Asset management and the consumer. If a company does not manage it's assets properly, the company will fail. This doesn't just apply to a company, but it also applies to governments. The difference is, if one company, unless it has a monopoly which would be unlawful in a capitalist society anyways, goes under, there are numerous other companies to choose from. If a government goes under, one does not simply leave the country. The second factor is the consumer. At the end of the day, it is the consumer who decides which company lives and which one goes bankrupt. Companies compete for the goal of making profit, something they can only get if the consumer feels that the company's product benefits them. If the consumer does not like a product, they have numerous other companies to buy from. In a socialist economy, if they don't like the product, they are still forced to buy it along with everyone else. So while companies may be harmed, ultimately, it is the consumer, the majority, which is benefitted.
Secondly, Einstein gets his argument completely wrong on wages. According to Einstein, workers are not payed based on how much work they do and how much they contribute (their worth), but rather get payed the bare minimum. If this argument were true, you would see 99% of Americans on minimum wage. However, this is not the case. Rather, only about 5-10% of Americans are payed minimum wage. The other 90-95% get payed above the minimum wage plus benefits because that is how much they are worth. A lawyer does not get payed minimum wage because he does a ton of work. A cashier gets payed minimum wage because he just stands there and says "fries with that?" while taking people's orders. These people can easily be replaced, therefore, they are not worth more than minimum wage. In a socialist society, however, this would not be any better. In fact, wages would be even more disproportionate based on work. In a socialist society, a cashier and the president of McDonalds gets the same pay, even though the president of McDonalds, despite popular belief among socialists who think running companies are easy, is much more work and is much more important than a simple, replaceable, cashier. Minimum wage has just created a long line of unemployed people who are worth less than minimum wage.
Next, Einstein discusses the flow of capital and how it generally ends up in the hands of a small few. While this may be true to an extent, this doesn't make it unjustified. Capitalism provides everyone the chance for everyone to become rich. Some succeed, others fail. Not everyone needs to be rich though. Capitalism gave rise to the middle class, a class between the rich and the poor. People in the middle class generally live comfortably without having millions, if not, billions of dollars to their expense. If all capital truly went into the hands of a small few, there would not be any middle class. Also, remember in the first paragraph where I discussed how companies succeed or fail based on consumer needs. The rich generally get rich off of those willing to buy their products. If these people become rich, it is solely because people not as rich as them are willing to buy their products. They got rich off of other people allowing them to.
Fourthly, Einstein discusses labor. He states that no way to ensure that everyone willing to work will get a job. However, there really is no alternative to this. In a socialist economy, jobs do not come out of nowhere and are not created for no reason, just the same as a capitalist economy. If a person is only skilled in one area of which there is no demand for more workers, neither a capitalist nor socialist economy will be providing him with a job in that field. Einstein also mentions that the free market brings forth technology that causes unemployment. The only reason such technology exists to put others out of a job is because it is simply cheaper for companies to use technology rather than actual people. This brings us back to the economic worth of an individual. For example, a fast food restaurant decides it can no longer continue paying it's employees minimum wage because it is causing them to raise their prices and lose business. For this reason, they replace the employees with self check-outs. This is not a product of capitalism, this is a product of social programs destroying the lower income earners. There is no reason to pay someone more than they are worth. Remember that when these employees are replaced by cheaper machines, prices go down and the consumers benefit. Einstein states that unlimited competition leads to a waste of labor, but the truth is, that is the only way to keep so many people employed. The more competition there is, the more companies there are, the more people are employed. If there was no competition, there would simply not be enough areas to keep the majority employed since you only need enough employees to create one company. Only with competition can you keep so many people employed.
Lastly, Einstein states that only a planned economy can possibly work for everyone. Every country in history with a completely planned economy has failed. The USSR had the lowest GDP per capita in the world in 1989. North Korea is in famine. East German vs West German development shows how poorly the planned economy turned out for East Germany. A centrally planned economy is based on the assumption that government will always be in your best interest. Even if it is, one single organization cannot address the needs of every individual. Hundreds of thousands of companies, large and small, are what can provide for every individual need because they need to in order to turn a profit. Einstein continues by saying that education should be based more around social goals than competition. This only works as long as people do not realize that they can essentially do nothing and still be winners. The idea is simple. If there are too many people on the wagon and too few pulling it, you will not progress anywhere. Humans are not stupid creatures and they realize that if they can do nothing and still do as well as everyone else, they will do it. Humans are not ants and bees. Humans do not act purely based on instinct. Humans can think for themselves and for that reason, humans cannot conform to socialism.
I will finish this off by saying that Einstein got it completely wrong on his economic ideology.
First of all, this is an image from a libertarian group. Libertarians advocate for capitalism generally. Second of all, this image is about politics, not about companies.
I do not eat from McDonalds because of their food. That doesn't mean other people should be prevented. People can decide for themselves how bad it is that these companies use child labour. I do not buy from nike because I think they are unethical. I boycott Apple for ethical reasons now. I have my own ethics, other people have theirs. I refuse to force my ethical ideas upon another man, just I do not want them to force theirs upon me.
And is the United States capitalist? No. It is crony capitalism and corporatist. Also, income inequality is not a bad thing as long as everyone has a chance to make a living. Not everyone is created equal, so not everyone should be equal. For example, the Middle East has more oil than Australia. Not everything is equal.
Socialism works until you run out of other people's money. That is why the USSR collapsed. You can implement socialist policies that will make people equal until all the higher earners leave or stop working once they realize they are being cheated of their money. It is simple physics. If there are too many people on the wagon and too few people pulling it, it will not move. Same for economics.
----  
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
@Learster I have read your argument and I will reply when I have time. Don't think I am ignoring it.
----
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 4103 Account eliminato |
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
Can I ask you self-proclaimed intelectual to use words when trying to communicate with me? @Kentucky: alright
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
The image itself doesn't matter, try to understand the concept and what I told you. There's only a false sense of choice, you will be exploited anyway. Think!
Yeah, USA is not capitalist, my bad. Burma is...
How can you say income inequality is not a bad thing when the media keeps spreding the message that if you can't buy/consume more and more you will be a worse person than those who can afford that life style? The result: increase in violence rates, wild competition for money and work places, social segmentation and prejudice, cultural alienation and the list goes on... By the way, I bet you don't see many thieves stealing food, but instead they're looking for tennis, cars or smartphones. Can you tell me why do they do that?
Yeah, good phrase, could you explain it more deeply or you just thought it had some impact? Or do you really think socialism is all about taking everyone earnings and splitting their income amongst everyone in the country? . No, that wasn't the reason USSR collapsed. You could say it collapsed because it had an economy mainly based on the agriculture and lacked the estructure for the true socialist scenario to take place. You could say it's ideals, as planned by Lenin, were severely messed up after Stalin took power. You could say it spent a lot more than it should on the defense industry due to cold war, while disregarding it's internal economy. "Higher earners" produce little to nothing, they are what you said: earners. A countries production and it's wealth are sustained by the worker masses, those who, in a socialist scenario, would at least have access to a public healthcare system, a good educational system and the tools to give him and his family a reasonable life.
---- "Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms".
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 4103 Account eliminato |
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
Affirmative action. The erasure of meritocracy in Education. Fair Housing Policy, huge mass funding of ghettos. It gave Blacks access to Welfare which they had never had before. Crime was another issue swept under the rug. Civil Rights were a turning point as was Immigration policy. The USA was no longer meritocratic and it began spending vast amounts of its resources restoring areas of deprivation which failed. The welfare and changes in Education taught Black populations that they were entitled to government aid and sympathy. This killed the work ethic of black populations, it created sky rocketing crime rates and separated men and women to the point where single motherhood which was almost unknown in the 1950s was slowly becoming the norm in the 1960s/70s. this created a whole new generation of boys and girls without fathers who would perpetuate and extend the growing criminality of these populations and areas. Affirmative action also led to Blacks being given positions in the top schools they weren't capable of so they inevitably failed. The irony being that they would have succeeded if they went to different colleges. It also forced blacks to compare themselves to whites when before they only compared their status to themselves, this created discontent. They were taught they are just as capable, they have been force fed nonsense for decades. The civil rights act was the turning point and it was Lyndon B Johnson who setup the first stage of government intervention that would kill the social cohesion of America. Here is Thomas Sowell on the subject. Excellent speaker and thinker.
Wrong. They increased. Tax avoidance was far easier before this, taxes lowered by avoidance loopholes were also lowered. Despite the 90% tax bracket, almost no one ever paid that. Regulations actually increased, mostly to hurt small businesses. Consumer protections and health and safety issues were created to kill mom and pop stores which is why so many died out due to globalization and an ever increasing burden to tick boxes they couldn't afford to tick. Can you imagine how expensive it is to created a fire sprinkler system for a start up store? Its simple for a large retails tore but near impossible for a small store.
It was never valuable to begin with. The US dollar went from Gold backed to Petrol backed.
Inequality came from entitlement. I cant even stand the word inequality. It's a ridiculous term when equality has never existed and can be given any realistic notion. Even now, after all the welfare programs and investment, Bankers get richer while average families have been getting poorer for decades but they are disillusioned by technology. I pads don't make you rich, Land does. Almost no one owns their own land or business and everything is more expensive, especially land.
No. The taxes have remained largely the same. Look up the amount of income the US has gained from taxation. Its remained the same average since then. Raising and lowering taxes doesn't increase income. No one paid the 90% tax bracket, they avoided it through legal means. Taxation as lowered but avoidance was closed better. There is a limit how much people will pay in tax, if there was a concrete unavoidable 90% tax bracket. Businesses would only be open until the first million or two and would close down. 
There was barely any deregulation. I may not sympathize with Libertarianism as much but they made most of their arguments correct. Deregulation is a myth with the growth of the Federal Government.
It was a result of terrible housing policy which forced companies to give people loans for housing they couldn't afford. These banks were more than happy to do so and they were forced by law to do it. It meant that when the people couldn't afford to pay back the loan, the banks took the house and when everything went to shit due to enormous debts created by bubbles and costly land. They were bailed out which gave them enormous amounts of land, free of charge and risk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1968
They wrote legislation which forced banks by law to loan to people who couldn't afford it and then ''de regulated'' allowing them to legally give out larger loans to people who certainly couldn't afford it... meaning they HAD to lend it. And they were more than happy to because in the end, they won and still are winning. Look at Obama's new legislation. http://www.huduser.org/portal/affht_pt.html Affirmative action in housing, creating another giant bubble and destroying communities for the sake of ''diversity'' which is code for, white communities need to be less white.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
It's OK, Gard. Everything's OK. You just have to take your medication, we do this everyday, it's fine. Just calm down, breeeathe... beathe in... and out... slowly.. that's it. Now be a good boy, that's right. Drink the water, make sure it goes all the way down. There we go. Good boy! GOOD BOY! You are doing so well, like usual. Now relax on your bed and breathe deeply.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 4103 Account eliminato |
Not sure if rape joke or schizo joke. Either way, there's no way in hell you absolutely believe I'm being serious with any of my posts.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
This is the moment where you should stop reading. Right here, is quite possibly (and im serious when I say this) the most stupid and ill conceived sentence I have ever read. I can't even begin to imagine how someone could some to this conclusion. It doesn't claim ''crony capitalism'' or ''modern age capitalism.'' It doesn't specify a time period. It simply says a blanket, general statement that there is no competition in Capitalism.
Russia didn't even have food, let alone cars.
This was explained in in the discussion between Lear and I. Globalization and Lobbying lead to unfair regulations upon small businesses which put them out of business and allowed the lobbyists to buy up the failing businesses. Previously,before the 1920s-30s, the majority of the British and American population were self employed. In the 1960s, things went downhill.
I dont even know what this means.
Crony capitalism is the influence of Neo Liberalism which comes from the influence of socialism.
Yes. How is that the definition of capitalism?
I get a headache when reading Andartes. How do you communicate with someone who says it costs ''nothing'' to build 100,000 tanks. You cant argue with this kind of economic illiteracy.
Russia has much, much higher crime than the USA. Its crime rates are shockingly close to African levels.
Most crime in the USA is committed by Black and Hispanic populations. Crime would drop by around 50-75% if the US only had European and minority East Asian populations.
Again, the health system was fine pre 1960s and 70s. Russia currently has much worse healthcare than the USA. We've been over this. And no, statistics taken by independent sources are not ''WESTERN PROPAGANDA'' especially when it places Hong Kong and Singapore above most Western countries.
Yes, post 60s. Most of these legislation's and regulations were created by Democrats and Ex Democrat Republicans who were heavily Marxist or Socialist leaning. They are Neo Liberals. Russia is Diverse? Which part, the heavily segregated areas of Western Russia or East Russia? Russia, especially the Western part is very racially homogeneous and protects it. How is Diversity a strength? A diversity of what? There is nothing diverse if the state just builds bland concrete jungles.
Americans have access to emergency healthcare at any time. The 50 million don't have ''private'' healthcare. They CHOOSE to be uninsured usually because they are unemployed. I told you to stop watching that fat american progressive who doesn't know what hes talking about.
Yes, that 50% is sadly having to support the other 50% who don't work and get free food, housing and healthcare. The entire US system benefits the most lazy and punishes those who work hardest. Guess which ethnic group makes up the majority of that 50% that works?
Yes, they did.
It wont. Their GDP is at its lowest in 14 years. The Chinese machine is slowing just like I and others predicted. Its running out of steam due to its AWFUL SOCIAL POLICIES. I cannot say it enough. Social Policies are vitally important. China cannot replace its workers, it doesn't have the manpower it needs to continue such growth, it is urbanizing which is bastardizing its language and the influx of wealth is creating a very selfish middle class that has the first stems of feminism taking root. In many places, there are ten men for every woman. In many of its largest urban cities, the pollution is on a scale unseen before since Paris before its revolution. These areas are poisonous and they are FORCING its rural populations to move to there. This is an environment of single, young, working class men with no future and very short lifespans with a low quality of life. If China doesn't resolve these growing crisis, it will fall apart in a bloody revolt and warlords will likely take over again. So China has two options. War or Colonization. As of right now its colonizing Africa... but the war drums are pounding away for the the South Asian Seas. It plans to colonize Africa by sending off its men and some women while it most certainly wants to dominate Japan and Korea.
You poor naive boy. If you really believe they are as benevolent as this, then you are in for a horrific shock. It isnt EVIL WESTERN CAPITALISTS exploiting workers. It is that magnificent seven who are happy to throw half starved children into chemical ridden factories to keep up the GDP which lines their rich MULTI BILLION DOLLAR pockets.
As usual. This lack of objective thought is embarrassing to read. It's laced with naive thought. China and Russia are arguably one of the most corrupt places on Earth. The West is also very corrupt but its more secretive about it. China, Russia and other African or Latin communist countries are openly corrupt.
A product that would never have been made in the Soivet Union.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
I don't agree with several things that were said here - the private sector can't promote workers - socialism would provide best education - high classes would do better for sure. my dad left religious school when he was 16 and started working in private company, and as a truck driver he drove to the other side of the country four times at day (though it's Israel, driving to the other side of the country takes 2-3 hours) and after ten years the company subsidized to him studying for business administration (i still remember the day that he came back happy and told us he got a job in tel aviv), 17-18 years later he is CEO of similar company, today i'm learning in school that includes few of "high classes" towns of south Israel, and it does'nt matter if their kibutz or town are rich, cus most of them are stupid, however that's not the point. my point is education and skills would be a key tools in the devolped world, and even if there are high classes, socialist or capitalist policy, it could still work. as for USA - i don't know alot about their education, but by taking their TV shows as derivative, you can see most of those TV shows are only about how cool are criminals, and people that despise education and any human moral legaal and intellectual value, i assume that at some point it affects some people.
----  
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 278994 Account eliminato |
I think both your problems is that you both appear to see blacks and whites as separate entities, you both seem to fail to grasp that we're all humans with the same desires, needs and hopes and all with our own talents and abilities. Black people in the past were victims of circumstance, products of the environment they were born into. there is no genetic disposition that inclines them more to crime, poverty, rapping or sport or any other stereotypical notions you may have. the only difference in fact, is the amount of a certain skin pigment present. anyone with half a logical brain and having gone out in the world and met people could tell you that. im surprised that someone like tiktok, who is clearly intelligent, and who speaks a lot of hard truths and facts draws what i feel are such odd conclusions. perhaps this is due to some inherent prejudices of his own. anyway funny thread, and in some cases interesting. do continue
---- 
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
Incorrect. As usual. I'd also like to point out that this very statement could get you banned. It's on par with ''racial hatred.'' But it's Ok for you to blatantly point out superiority but its apparently not Ok for me to simply imply difference. As someone pointed out, you preach equality and have just blown that out the water. How can we all be equal if one is better at a specific field? Are you therefore admitting to genetic difference? Why do Russians hate Blacks so much? I seem to recall the ''bigotry'' towards them being quite high in Russia and Eastern Europe? I thought Russia was so tolerant, peaceful and diverse... what with its completely homogeneous communities with anti Homosexuality laws, its batterings of immigrants and its astounding numbers of people involved in ''pro-white Russian'' Fascist, Nationalist and proto Soviet groups. I really can't stand hypocrites. It's a major pet peeve of mine. I don't mind a persons point of view but when they play the moral high ground and point the finger but then ignore themselves doing the exact same thing. But I digress, I'd rather do what I do best other than pointing out your hypocrisy and ill conceived ''facts.'' Firstly, Blacks, as in the Sub Saharan African group are not superior to the ''White'' group at ALL sports and fitness. African groups tend to be quite different and you'll find their runners to be found in East Africa, not West Africa. This is due to the muscles in their legs and a history of running which they have adapted to. When it comes to Weight Lifting and other upper body mass driven athletics, Europeans almost always win. When it comes to Swimming, Africans will always come last due to their Bone Density. African Americans are a hodge podge and were selectively bred. This has had an impact of the Black populations of America on a genetic level. They are quite different from Sub Saharan Africans.
Pointless statement as I never said anything different.
Deaths at what? Why cant you explain yourself? Murders? Gun crime? Per capita? Do you understand the different variants of these statistics and their meaning? Russia has much higher violent crime than the USA. Eastern Europe has much higher crime rates than Europe. Don't preach a stat without context or even a source. If you have a claim then back it up.
Soviet Union fell. I'd say they were bested.
It did compete and it lost.
Yes it is, partly. It's down to incentives and economic as well as social policy. It's also down to different ethnic groups doing things very differently. You deny this despite all the evidence presented to you.
Its a giant police state with the worlds largest number of prisoners with a three strikes policy that gives you life imprisonment for committing any three felonies. The three strikes policy was a direct result of black crime which peaked in the 90s at such a level never seen before in any advanced society of any period. If not for the three strikes law and literally throwing them in prison by the truckload, the US would need a Robocop in every city and a Judge Dredd on every block. It would be Detroit on a country wide scale with riots occurring monthly. Why don't you actually grow the balls and LOOK at the statics of crime split apart at ethnic grouping rates and verify them by capita. I really dislike people who live in Homogeneous communities preaching Diversity. YOU DON'T LIVE NEAR DIVERSITY. To you, Diversity is a Pole or a Finn.
It as a Federally regulated and funded Education system which is on of the top expenditures of the US government. Throwing money doesn't work. The problem is deeper as I explained earlier but you failed to read or give rebuttal to because you prefer the sound of your own voice.
As always, its all about the GOOD GUYS AND THE BAD GUYS. RUSSIA=GOOD, USA=BAD. IM RIGHT, YOU ARE WRONG. PUTIN IS A WHITE KNIGHT SPRAYING RAINBOWS OUT OF HIS NIPPLES! It's OK for the Soviets to invade Afghanistan and Eastern Europe. Its OK for them to fund communist occupations across the world. Its fine for them to execute the entire Polish government to setup a 30 billion dollar gas deal. That is fine, it's not warlike or forceful. It's peaceful. It's those evil capitalists who do evil things.
It wasn't able to compete on the most basic levels of Western domestic tech let alone build cell phones.
Need it? You bought it. All of that space tech was stolen from the Germans and the tech that stolen was enhanced by the Yugoslavs who the Russians bought it from. The Soviets spent most of their time stealing tech than inventing it and they almost never built anything that could come close to competing with western domestic driven tech. Russians wanted Western Jeans, they didn't want Soviet pants. As a conclusion. I took apart each and every sentence of yours. You summed up much of my very well pieced arguments into a Strawman of ''racial superiority'' without reading the context at all. Argue actual points rather than creating strawmen to beat. becuase it makes you look ridiculous and its embarassing for all parties involved. This quote is insane.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
They are. We adapted and developed on completely different continents, ate different foods and developed different civilizations over tens of thousands of years. We are utterly different.
No we aren't. We have primal desires like resources, territory and mates. But other than that, we have very separate desires based on our environment.
Nope.
So you admit we aren't equal. We have different capabilities. This statement destroys any Egalitarian notions you claim to have. If we are all truly equal and capable, we would all be Tesla, we could all play football equally. You know we aren't. To claim that we have different capabilities on an individual level would be to claim that every single human being has developed a completely different set of genetic coding when in actual fact, we can be grouped.
Every ethnic group has been. Slavs have suffered far worse than almost any group on Earth with a never ending continual brutalization placed upon them from Turkics, Vikings, Arabs, Mongols, Turkmen and other European powers. They don't cry about it. Serbians have suffered more so in the last century than any other ethnic group and how are they treated? Victims of circumstance? Please. Victim of circumstance is horse manure. Each civilization had more than long enough to develop, the ones that failed to compete have their own failings.
But evolving different in different environments and we're all the same, right? Are you a creationist?
Higher testosterone at different ages. Different brain sizes as babies. Discontent at the inability to compete combined with hatred taught by an education system that teaches them a specific ethnic group is the problem of all their ills.
Caused by an inability to adapt or compete with the dominant ethnic cultural group.
They do tend to have very good rhythm.
Different racial groups compete better at different sports and athletics.
Like the ones you convey when you give special guilt treatment to one ethnic group but ignore the same treatment on others but ignore it to suit your own political ideals. I'm astounded that people who claim to understand evolution or nature have the nerve to preach an ideal of Equality. The animal kingdom isn't equal. Nature rewards its most adaptive and savage, the weaker are discarded unless they can breed quicker.
Holy shit. This lie has got to stop. It's one thing to claim we are equal, it's another to claim we are EXACTLY THE same except for skin pigmentation. It's so ignorant of basic biological facts. Here's a basic example. http://news.softpedia.com/news/Different-Races-Are-Genetically-Prone-to-Different-Diseases-44056.shtml
Gene expression is one of the key factors in why we are so different. We can have a similar genetic coding but the way we express them is almost very, very different. This fallacy of ''ITS ONLY SKIN COLOUR'' is mind numbing. Please stop saying it and use that ''logical'' brain of yours.
If you have one, why did you just make such a ridiculous and clearly false claim?
This is a meaningless statement. Trips to some China to visit some fake Buddhist temple that sells plastic, over priced souvenirs to stupid foreigners doesn't make you more enlightened. It means you have a lighter pocket.
You MET people? OH WOW. I've never done that before. Neither has Tito or Learster. What's that like? Does it give you omnipotent powers?
Or maybe I know about it than you do because I had the courage to investigate areas I was told not to touch. People like you hold your ideals because you are taught them, if you actually looked at the facts with an objective mind instead of depending on politically bias sociology to make excuses for the lack of equalness among groups, then maybe you'd come to similar conclusions.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
And you are economically illiterate and yet I still try my best to communicate with you. When needed, I have backed up what I have said with pictures, videos, statistics and sources. You made numerous claims without any backing. Tanks don't pop out of thin air, mate. Nor do significant social issues. They have a cause, they have a reason, they have developments and they have costs. I address these issues while you prefer to hide them. As I said, it's easy for someone who lives in his homogeneous high tower to tell others how good diversity is when they themselves refuse to live in it. You are just too cowardly to debate, usually because every occasion ends up with you having egg on your face. Remember when you claimed Russia had better healthcare than the USA? You even claim Russia has lower crime. I actually address the hows, whens and whys of crime rates. When I pull out a source with statistical backing, you call it western capitalist propaganda. HA HA. You just generalize them and can't even define their context. What the hell did you even mean by 100,000 deaths and 50%? Back up your claim.
So Learster wont be returning to the debate? How unfortunate. I waste my time giving a cohesive and respectful rebuttal to Lears presentation and in return I get the same old avoidance tactics. Was Thomas Sowell too much for him? He's a real knockout to newbies. Sowell beats people with knowledge they don't want to hear.
If worded differntly, this could be very offensive. So much for your claims of Equality.
Heres some examples using your exact terminology.
Why is it Ok to claim one group is better at a physical challenge and yet mental capabilities are considered sacred? How ridiculous.
And yet every time, you are cornered on key issues. Every time you make unobjective claims without backing and when you are called out on it, you change the subject or create a straw man to beat. I understand. You want to run. Why? Because I am better at this. I have debated issues like this for years. I am an expert at it. I have heard every argument, every conclusion. I rarely hear anything new and when I do, it's like a well cooked steak. You cannot compete, you know it. You are arguments are not coherent, they are messy and jumbled. If I truly were as stupid as you claim, you'd write me off like a car crash within minutes. And yet each time we talk, you are cornered. You make it so easy when you make emotionally driven statements. Your anger is obvious to anyone, your frustration bleeds out with every post until you finally give in. And to save whats left of your pride after a clear cut knockout within the first 3 rounds, you claim I'm a fool, I'm some knuckle dragging, skinhead ape who is so easily bested that there is no point continuing while you shyly hide the metaphorical bruises covering your face. I made you bleed, profusely, like always... and like Grendel, you slink off into the darkness in defeat.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Do like me and save your time and your sanity: just put him on ignore list 
---- "Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms".
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 278994 Account eliminato |
Lol... you know i was reluctant to contradict you, simply because i was afraid that id receive some massive essay full of statements and views that id have to discuss on contradict, and yup here we are. i come to atwar to play a game in my spare time for fun, not to engage in arduous political debates. but this once, i am going to indulge since you have went to the effort of breaking down my post. it would be lazy of me not to. on my tiktok is intelligent comment, well hes well written and presumably spoken, and he can structure paragraphs. and love him or hate him hes made some decent maps.
i agree and disagree, we're different but not all that different. i'll elaborate further later.
its the primal desires that matter, if by other desires youre referring to mundane desires like how a hungry child in ireland might desire a bowl of mashed potato where a hungry child in asia might want a kebab, well these are not really relevant.
for whatever reason you didnt elaborate here. but you're wrong. human beings all share the same physical spiritual and emotional needs and are equal in that sense, be you whatever colour or race. For some reason it seems to be hard for some people to realise this.
i never claimed to have egalitarian notions but theres a line here, when it comes down to the line some abilities, skills and talents are valued more by society its an unfortunate reality of the world we live in. but this is the thing, heres where me and you differ fundamentally tik-tok. you're determined to see and highlight the differences between people . you instead fail to see how similar we all are, and how connected we are on a deep level. attitudes like yours are responsible for so many of the atrocities of human history, one nation/empire/country thinking it is/knows better than everyone else, it would be a little extreme to say the least to liken you to hitler, but i dont think im wrong in feeling that you would have something in common.
my knowlege on balkan and slav history is limited, so im not going to argue with you there. i am however going to say that there are many variables that could hinder the growth or developement of a people or civilisation, ie terrain resources, culture. not all of these however can be classed as failings. well depending on your perspective in some cases the japaneese for example, due to their isolation they developed a very unique culture, however a disadvantage of this was that they were playing with samurai swords while the rest of the world ha gunpower, sucked when they were invaded. a failing on their part you say? arguably, but theres reasons for this failure. i am going to ignore your comment after that and asking whether im a creationalist. interesting though how you feel we're products of our environment, yet only in global a few weeks ago you were espousing how children from the middle ages were more intelligent than the children of today, children who arent exposd to the problem solving and education we are exposed to in our youths in this more developed world. a quick google search exposed me to a plethora of articles contradicting your statements, one of which i posted to you. which you immediately dismissed as being wrote by a socialist with an agenda. given the merit of all this perhaps it would be safe to say that indeed children back then may well be more intelligent than some adults of today.
now youve begun preaching to the choir, ive touched quite heavily on genetics and the theories of evolution in my studies. there are many stimuli which can affect testosterone levels in the human body, very few genetic or race related. to your different brain sizes comment i direct you to this article. http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/brain-size-and-intelligence/ yes theres again is another difference i see with your views tik, the why of a certain peoples or races' ills is of little consequence to you unless it supports your "whites are superior" agenda. with each race ethnic group or people theres a reason behind their so called failings to develope or whatever as ive alreay explained, its a matter of perspective on whether its a failing.
i retched at the first comment, lol'd at the second, agree with the third. although i would say they tend too due to their genes and the environment they come from, there are successful athletes amongst your beloved race too.
i never said exactly, but the differenes arent all that significant, and are predominantly the result of a harsher climate. as for your comment relating to learstear and tito, i dont have an issue with anything they posted. and ive a feeling explaining my views to you is along the same line as attempting to convince the pope the bible is a fairytale. From what i can tell we just have very different ways of thinking. you consider yourself a brave and daring thinker and consider me an idealistic idiot, i consider you to be someone who embodies views that create many of the problems in our world, so determined to separate and classify people rather than bring us all together.
----
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
See Kentuckian. Watch how they pick their battles. They are more than happy to contradict those who are unsure but their entire response to me is the same. ''He's a nazi, racist, anti semite.'' Why? Because they can't think of anything to say. They claim taxation was higher and fairer? I point out this is wrong and give a picture representing taxation and tax income showing that revenue didnt increase or decrease. Did I get a response to this? No. Because they do not hold objective opinions. Especially Pin. Lear claims we are all having a friendly debate and then after presented with a long comment picking apart what he says, his reaction is to mock me behind my back to Tito and like usual, pretend he isn't wounded by what was said and simply doesn't reply. Tito, talks the worst balderdash. He makes the biggest, broadest and least intelligent points in a messy jumbled manner. When this is picked apart, what does he do? ''Hes a nazi, racist.'' When i show why China wont be this proud, communist eutopia in 50 years, he gets mad. He's emotionally invested in this happening. He claims their Hospitals are better, their crime is lower. Crime lower in Russia than in the US? He gives a statistic with no concext then refuses to show it. Not once, do any of them, back up what they say. Instead of doing what I do, which is giving a respectful rebuttal taking issue with key points, Pin just gets mad because I shove the opposition in his face. He blames capitalism for labor made by third worlders and yet ignores the fact these third worlders are ruled by the Socialists he claims are so good and loving. I KNEW his response would be to say, ''that isn't socialism'' and so, in preparation, I called him out on it before he could say it. They don't like that. They blame capitalism for all the worlds ills and yet ignore much of what they dislike about it has been influenced by their socialist ideals. When this is pointed out, their concrete views, like Pins, especially, are deeply wounded. They don't like facts, they don't like difference. These people preach freedom, love and tolerance but they circlejerk and push out those who disagree. They don't want Diversity, they don't want Freedom or Social Cohesion. They are deeply indebted to their views and if the slightest thing dents it, they shatter into pieces. And of course, above all thing things they hold dear, the one true area they place on their pedastal of ill concieved unity, is ''Open Mindedness.'' And here, I put out my hand in common approach and it is slapped away each time. Out of all those here, I would boldly claim I have a far more open mind. I don't shatter when someone confronts my logic, I welcome it. ''Just ignore him, he's crazy'' or ''Its normal people vs tik-tok'' is code for, don't debate, he says things I dont like that I cant compete with. Next time, tell me you are too much of a coward to dicuss before I waste my time talking to you. And no, Im not talking AT you, Im talking WITH you. If you can't take a debate, then don't get involved.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Please, quote me where I said that in our debate. I didn't even imply superiority. I implied difference and friction caused by our differences. I don't believe in superiority. Some groups adapt better to certain environments than others. Some cultures create environments more difficult for others to adapt to. I never said the White Man is superior. I am very careful with my words and you are using cowardly straw man tactics to walk out of a discussion where you have been countered on every every single point you made. Everyone can see that even if they prefer to deny it.
Again, this is your childish mind at work summing up a World War. You sum it up like a 12 year old. As if one man came along, spoke a statement (that he never stated at any moment in his entire life) and suddenly 80 million died from the reaction to it. Don't bring up the war, you aren't even worthy of such an argument. You really aren't. Every discussion about this ends up the same with you walking away with wounds and crying at me from the distance that you'll get me next time. It will end with me posting a dozen sources with photographs, videos and quotes and you'll scream MUH 6 MILLION and claim victory covering up more metaphorical bruises. WW2 was a war of power like all wars. Hitler could have been a Slavic Nationalist and it would have ended up the same.
But they don't. Don't preach Diversity. I know the demographics of Russia and it is segregated. A few Russians were killed by some Southern Russian Muslims and the community retaliated by battering immigrants by the busload. There are more Fascist and Racialist groups in Russia than the entire Western world combined. Currently, the Russian government is giving away $8,000 for Europeans to settle in the Jewish autonomous region. This offer is solely given to Europeans, of European origin. No one else. Putin might be a Eurasianist but the government and the people are very much a tribal community. How often do Black Men have Russian wives and how long is it tolerated for? The statistics of racial hatred towards foreigners far outnumbers the stats in any Western or Eastern country. Look at your own statistics and look at the problems Russia has with its tensions caused by Western Russians not accepting any non European foreign groups. Don't preach some utopia to me, I speak to many Russians and I've seen the statistics photos and websites. I've seen the police reports and statistics and the videos. Don't lie to me and pretend Western Russians are content with foreigners because that is a lie. Look at how the Football Associations avoid Eastern European countries due to the racial abuse that Black players get. Serbia is practically infamous for their monkey impressions. I'm not drawing any conclusions from this nor giving any positive or negative opinion. I'm dishing out the facts and you are dishing out unbacked opinion. And you KNOW Russia has a better immigration policy than Europe. You KNOW how it deals with foreigners. It deals with them like the Americans, British, French and Germans use to do before progressives and socialists spread their propaganda. If you want to come to Russia, learn Russian, act Russian, BE Russian. Its tribal to its core. So dont preach Diversity. Stop playing the anti-racist card because it doesn't suit you and it certainly doesn't suit your country.
Read above.
Actually, you've changed the story here. I'm not sure why seeing as the evidence is right here. I said you use emotions AFTER you fled the discussion and called me your funny little buzzwords. Again, quote me.
And yet you slink away in agony from stinging beatings you get when we discuss. I'm still waiting for your static of the 100,000 deaths and 50%. Third time I've asked and you still haven't provided any context or source.
Never said that. Not in this discussion. In the past I said foreign works care for patients less than native ethnic workers and its a fact. I don't see them volunteering to help the flood victims in Norfolk. That is all locals.
It is. They weren't ghettos before. And I never specified minorities because East Asians didn't create ghettos or other issues. Specific groups cause specific problems. It isn't a coincidence.
Provide a single unbias source for this. Go on. Define the country, area and hospital that has done this. Convicted rapists and pedophiles get better healthcare than the majority of people. To deny healthcare based solely on race would land you a major lawsuit and there is no point. Patients equal profit for the Hospital.
When did I say this? Quote me.
Yours? You are creating the straw man and running from the debate in such a cowardly manner only returning for another beating.
My private messages fill up once a month from people talking to me. I've noticed many people go from liberals to conservatives and even nationalists from these discussions. I've seen people practically spit venom at me who a few months later say they were wrong. They don't need to back me up and they know it. I do a damn fine job myself and people like you with your poor arguments give me living, breathing straw man to beat. I don't seek to convert people like you. You are a tool. A boxer in the ring I beat within an inch of its life to show the up and coming boxers how to fight. And each time, you and others look like idiots with messy arguments while my cool, calm and collected points hit home home harder to the small people who sit back in the distance. Look at the people who visited this page and how few speak. Some of them can mock but there are those who will read quietly and come to their own conclusions. The circle jerk doesn't allow them to agree vocally but they are there and Ive spoken to them. I don't care if you mock, I know how you think. It's like a child mocking an adult for working. Why would it offend me? You'll come crawling back like always, ready to get beaten in the ring.
No one here has ever proven me wrong. They either don't know how to reply or have a very different conclusion on the solution. There is only one occasion where I have been bested and utterly to the point where I didn't know how to respond. That was in a topic on Free Speech with CD. A far better intellectual opponent than you and far more interesting to discuss with. One day Ill pay that thread a visit when I can hit back with a proper and dignified response.
With what? I never replied and I'm not going to unless they agree to actually have this conversation and the mods wont ban me for having it. That discussion can only be done if I am allowed to bring out actual conclusions but moderation wont let me. And yes, it is a fact. It is gene expression. They claimed there were no differences except skin pigmentation which is completely false. I specified that there are different levels of testosterone at DIFFERENT ages and that brain sizes are different at BIRTH. This is gene expression. How genes express themselves differ due to environments, racial genetics and the very food they eat. What you eat will change how your genes express. You have set of foundations which set boundaries and precepts. The environment and food that person lives in will then push what precepts and boundaries people have. These differences ahve only ever been justified by sociology which is a pseudo science purely based on speculation.
You didn't. Lear never replied, Pin has me ignored and you ignored all my points and just said I'm a racist for telling you why China wasn't going to be a Communist, Utopian, Superpower in 50 years run by 7 Gods of ethereal and loving power. I dealt you the facts which I can back in an objective and respectful manner. You responded with disrespect and straw man. You were bested yet again because like usual, you have no idea what you are talking about. Tanks, Airplanes and Rifles are not FREE.
Anecdotal. Discussion isn't a democracy. It's an exchange of information which is laid out. The fact that you can get 3 people to agree with you is meaningless. What matters is the presentation of information. You have yet to assess and reply to this information which countered your original post filled with ridiculous statements I called out on. Calling me a racist in counter to a discussion of Economics is not an argument. It's Ad Hominem.
Another claim without backing. Ironic coming from a Russian whose country has more Fascists and White Nationalists than Europe combined.
I'll tell that to Putin after Southern Russian Islamic groups set off explosives at your Olympics like they did in Volgograd.. I just heard on the news today that Russian athletes have been told to not wear their uniforms outside the Olympics Village. It seems your government disagrees with you. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dfe71a8c-81b2-11e3-87d5-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rL5cZRYN
National Socialism is a political ideology. I could point out multiple political groups with racialist views. Even Anarchists. These areas are different and will always be different. They will never mix together. Look at Hispanic majority areas in America. Do you know why Hispanics are the majority? Because they beat and murder blacks when they move in. They intimidate until Blacks move away. Every ethnic group is tribal. Look at how America, Europe and even Russia segregates.
Im worse than a rapist and a pedophile for saying Chinese GDP is at its lowest in 14 years?
Did Elysium discuss Chinese GDP? Your entire argument is just constant fallacies. You think it makes you look smart when it just makes you look silly. Most arguments with people like you tend to begin, run and end the same way. I'll play along but its usually the same. It starts with Straw man
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man ''A straw man, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally,[1][2] is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[3] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having denied a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet inequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to deny it, without ever having actually denied the original position.[3][4] This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues. In those cases the false victory is often loudly or conspicuously celebrated.'' Then Ad hominem
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ''An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.'' And my favorite. Ad Populum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum ''An argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so." It's not even the third round yet and you cant see out of one eye from the pounding.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Stick to the topic. I'm tired of your rectal pain.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
Tik-Tok, you obviously have the luxury of enough time to be able to write one long post after another, but don't expect that to be the case for everyone else too. I will reply when I can, as I will take my time with looking into the videos you posted and all your other points. As for talking behind your back- you seem to have missed something there. What Tito refers to is public for everyone to read in some earlier post of mine in this very topic. Surely you would have been more of a man about it if you had known, as it's just a simple little mock into your direction which meant no harm.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
Sorry for the very late reply, I have been extremely busy lately.
Einstein is not an economist, he is a scientist. While I may be young, my opinion is just as valid as Einstein's is.
If I were an employer, I would treat my workers as ethically as possible because that is just my nature. However, I do not think that it should be mandatory to go further than what employees agreed to in a contract when they originally took the job. My ethics should not be forced on others.
First of all, I do not own a smartphone, but that is pretty irrelevant. This is not exactly Capitalism though. In a capitalist economy, companies would still be regulated. They couldn't kill each other and force people to work for them. In my ideal society, there would be militias, but strictly government regulated. Companies and militias would be separate. The German (that wouldn't exist in a capitalist society legally) and supporting terrorist groups.
The biggest problem is that the average person does not take interest in politics. Obviously, you cannot force people to, just as you cannot force people to practice ethical behaviour to an extent. Remember that capitalism allows you to be as individualistic as you want, so you can be a consumer if you want, or you do not have to be. I reject the idea of being a consumer (In relation to consumerism) because I do not think I need the latest product to be "cool". I prefer to learn. That, however, is my choice, and I do not think others can be forced into it.
Remember that capitalism is the voluntary exchange of labor and capital. I cannot see any exploitation when something is completely voluntary. Greed, however, is good. Greed is an incentive for people to work and make things that people want to buy, ultimately benefitting the consumer.
The system eventually collapsed on itself though. More money generally leads to better standards of living. The US had much higher standards of living than the USSR did. Maybe you were not starving in East Germany, but your quality of life was not as good as West Germany.
----
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
Tik Tok - one of the reasons your ideiology makes sense to you (except mental distrubtion and childhood traumas, but it's only my opinion) is websites like richard silverstien's blog seem like legitimic source and proof for you, all sources you'v brought in the agruments i'v seen are in the good case rumors and in the bad case bullcraft that its purpuse is politican, you'v never brought approved or trustworthy source, and when we are doubt what you are saying you are turning to childish arguments which are unrelated to what we talked about, but if you want us to belive in your ideiology, you should tell us, when and why did you adopt that idiology.
----
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
About USSR education - that's true, the israelie families and people that came from USSR during the eigthees and ninetees are really educated, though few (very few of them) resist democracy.
----
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 180291 Account eliminato |
Roaistyle debating top lel
---- The Most Feared Nazi Germany and SM Ukraine player in AW history. Retired    
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Children like yourself should not enter into the domain of adults, little one. Every argument with you ends up with some ridiculous promotion of Israel. If you have the balls to step into the ring and counter what I have said, you are more than welcome to but cowards don't don the gloves against opponents they know they'll lose to. They prefer to heckle from the sidelines.
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
From where to start we have here barselona fans and real fans and they fight each other which team is better. Its same with economy systems we have guys who think socialism is better system then capitalism,in my opinion both economy systems are bad but problem is in us humans ,we create systems we can make better system where all people will be equal there enough resource in earth for that but like i say problem is in humans.Evryone whant to be richer then other to drive better car to have better mobile phone to look better there lot of competition thats because our animal nature.This days humans care only for money and bigger profit.We are in situation one faggot to own 50 Billion dollars and in other side lot of poor hungry people without future.All economy systems have a negative form.Its hard sameone to create new perfect economy system,without poor people.
---- 
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
|
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
|
Deleted User 180291 Account eliminato |
This is your typical dumb american citizen who doesn't care about anything, then when he stumbles upon some problem wants to cry and complain about the unfair world. Ignorance is bliss but only temporarily, and one day you will pay the price of your indifference.
I would respond but tik already put you in your place better than I ever could.
---- The Most Feared Nazi Germany and SM Ukraine player in AW history. Retired
Caricamento...
Caricamento...
|
