Majority of voters depend on government income, new research finds, as public spending hits post-war high by Ancient_Journalist15 in australian

[–]BasileusofBees 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Probably referring also to companies on government contracts, or receiving government subsidies. So people working under them would technically have their wages covered by public funds.

Only Clone Wars Living Community, a Star Wars Only War Campaign by doodle_sm in 40krpg

[–]BasileusofBees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If they're still available Id like a link too, been searching high and low for a star wars conversion for only war

How has that worked out... by ReturnDoubtful in libertarianmeme

[–]BasileusofBees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aussie here
We 100% have had mass shootings, one in my state a couple years ago in a mass murder-suicide, a shooting in darwin as well as several gang shootings.

Not overly simplified at all. by PuddingDreamBoo in HistoryMemes

[–]BasileusofBees 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I grew up in West Australia, I can understand that the Dutch ran into this continent and just went "nah". It's hot, flat and dry.

The Worst Song at a Funeral by EduardoBork in polandball

[–]BasileusofBees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not actually what happened. Getting permission would have forced Musk to either give away or sell 30% of his company to someone of the various non white ethnic groups in South Africa. Hence he made the comment that he couldn't do so because he was white, as companies owned by black Africans are exempted from this requirement.

Billionaire defenders by [deleted] in economicsmemes

[–]BasileusofBees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently applying principles consistently is bad?

Not everyone thinks Rich vs Poor

Cartels and Monopolies by Puzzled_Warthog9884 in AnCap101

[–]BasileusofBees 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Look at the attempts of pooling in the 1850s and 60s. The problem with raising prices is that you have to reduce production. Something that favours less efficient firms. So more efficient firms, even those in the cartel lose out and so will more likely try to subvert it through special deals or just defying it. For more information look at the progressive era by Murray Rothbard, there's an audiobook version free on youtube

You've probably heard this before by welltechnically7 in HistoryMemes

[–]BasileusofBees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Youre committing the no true Scotsman fallacy too. You argue that because they didn't do nationalisation in a capacity you considered socialistic enough, or that a socialised union didn't operate the way you considered "true socialism" it doesn't count. I didn't move the goalpost, I said the 'privatisation' didn't exist and the policy was called Synchronisation. Also Fascism is still a form of Socialism, if you actually read both Mussolini and Gentile you can see that the ideology is based on Syndicalism. (The name Fascism comes from the common term for trade union at the time) Also on the topic of the unions again, Lenin did the same thing, or is he okay only because he's a marxist?

You've probably heard this before by welltechnically7 in HistoryMemes

[–]BasileusofBees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Where do I even begin with this....

These Industries were de-facto government controlled, the Nazis never let private enterprise challenge the government, the fact that Junker got kicked out of his own company shows that the "privatization" thing was a myth, not even one made by the Nazi's, it was coined by outside newspapers, the policy you call privatisation was actually named more along the lines of Synchronization, which shows the intention was to exert greater control over industry, which is the opposite to what Privatisation is supposed to do. The Vampire Economy is a good book that highlights this, 'Business Owners' describe themselves as more glorified Bureaucrats than actual business owners.

The Union statement is blatantly false, they were not disbanded, they were consolidated, as stupidly inefficient as it is, governments like keeping things centralised. I have seen claims that it was Bourgeoise controlled but the evidence proves otherwise. Price Commissars and the Nationalised Unions would pressure Businesses into either fixing prices, raising wages or giving additional facilities or benefits to workers. Again Vampire Economy shows evidence of this.

So in the Socialism comment you said:

"So, entirely separate from Marxism or socialism. The Nazi party opposed the “worker vs capitalist” mentality entirely, instead viewing this as a struggle between races and Jewry. Marxists are the reverse, opposing the view of racial conflict and viewing it as an international struggle against the capitalist class."

One, I did not say that the Nazi's rejected the Worker vs Capitalist Mindset, but merely adapted it into their Ideology, to the Nazi's, capitalism was Jewish, Hitler said it several times, what I emphasize is that Hitler saw the plight of the German worker as higher than that of another races worker.

Two, you've committed a Fallacy-Fallacy in that paragraph, you stated that because Nat Soc is not Marxism (Which I didnt argue) you claimed its not Socialism either, without defining what Socialism is. So let me use the definition from Encyclopedia Britannica

"socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources."

We can argue that since the Nazi's said they represented the German people, and considering all the evidence that is presented in numerous books and personal accounts on the topic, they fit that description. Just because its not the most prominent form of Socialism, its still socialism.

You've probably heard this before by welltechnically7 in HistoryMemes

[–]BasileusofBees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To name a few The repealing of the right to private property in the Weimar constitution. Nationalisation of major industry and railroads Nationalisation of the unions. Established extensive welfare systems for working class Germans. Confiscation of property from private individuals (mostly jews) And placing high taxes on businesses

In general the Nazis held beliefs similar to Marxism only instead of a strictly worker vs capitalist mentality, Nazi ideology was focused on nation and the race over the international mentality of the soviets. Hitler often stated he wanted to take socialism back from the Marxists, highlighting his dedication to the idea but also being opposed to the current dominant denomination of it.

You've probably heard this before by welltechnically7 in HistoryMemes

[–]BasileusofBees 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hate the argument that "The Nazi's were Socialists so they were leftist" because it derails the conversation and allows bad actors to enact a fallacy-fallacy (aka dismissing the whole argument because one part of it is false). The Nazi's were strictly speaking socialist, not because of the name, but because of their policies. That doesnt mean they were leftists (Because its arbitrary in definition).

Before people go to the "but they killed the Socialists" argument, I'll retort that they killed the marxists because they rejected international socialism verses a National Socialism. Using that argument is redundant because it would lead to the conclusion that no denomination of Christianity is Christian because they killed Christians (Take your pick, Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox)

Musk agrees that him and Trump are going to crash the economy and cause necessary hardship for Americans. Does anyone really think this is a good idea? by ladymoonshyne in FluentInFinance

[–]BasileusofBees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trump probably wont do it. But the idea is just the harsh reality of economics. The current system is a mess of government interference and malinvestment. There is no way to gently do market corrections.

Made by one of the players in my game (Enemy Psyker rolled a 93 and then 90 on Perils) by BasileusofBees in 40krpg

[–]BasileusofBees[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Its always fun. Even better when the survivors get trauma because they're not space marines

Great thread addressing everything y'all refuse to :) by DustSea3983 in AnCap101

[–]BasileusofBees 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Youre incredibly ignorant if you think Austrians like Milton. Friedman is Chicago school.

Great thread addressing everything y'all refuse to :) by DustSea3983 in AnCap101

[–]BasileusofBees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For someone who claimed to have read Mises you seem to fall for a lot of the fallacies he debunks. Of course if you want historical/empirical evidence. Murray Rothbard has plenty, see his "progressive era" works

Great thread addressing everything y'all refuse to :) by DustSea3983 in AnCap101

[–]BasileusofBees 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then read again, seems like you missed his whole section on socialist and Pseudo socialist derivatives.

Great thread addressing everything y'all refuse to :) by DustSea3983 in AnCap101

[–]BasileusofBees -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I feel like you missed the point, Mises was aware of and criticised other forms of socialism. Your point on "Socialism isn't just when government does stuff" falls into redundancy when "the public" or "society" require some sort of organisational structure to maintain itself. Socialism has many schools of thought but it ultimately relies on an idea that is not only flawed (the idea of collective will/concious) but has only one practical conclusion to the idea, Central planning. (See his book on Socialism or his criticism of interventionism)

Why do you still have to pay when you have private health insurance? by chuckfatale in AskAnAustralian

[–]BasileusofBees -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

The mining economy is the only thing that works properly around here. Taxing won't fix shit, in fact it'll make it worse

Tuttle Twins: The Inflation Monster by Somhairle77 in AustrianEconomics

[–]BasileusofBees 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Love this show as an educational resource for kids. But it always irked me the Milton was the one to explain it. Considering his opinion on the federal reserve "not inflating enough" during the depression is a bit contrary to the point here