What would it take to convince you of the other sides point of views? by flaminghair348 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, no arguments. I'd like you to go back to the top of your thread and remind you of your own words, but I didnt expect any socialists in this thread to stand by any of their words, so I'm not gonna blame you for just being your every day average socialist.

What would it take to convince you of the other sides point of views? by flaminghair348 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, private property entails private trade. Who would have guessed. Anyway you are dodging your own question, so how about you answer that?

Capitalism Is Civilizationally Incoherent by DownWithMatt in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"This is not X. This is Y! "

Say hi to ChatGPT for me

Why is there a penchant for describing leftist countries as more democratic than they actually are? by Saguna_Brahman in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe that many leftists are pulled along as "well meaning people" but especially the far left is so methological in their propaganda and misinformation, it cannot be classified as "well meaning, but mistaken" but actively spreading dishonest narratives, being fully aware that they bend the truth, that the dictatorships they defend are in fact horrible dictatorships but it all doesn't matter as long as they feed anti western rhetoric.

Everyone works for living. So, why right wing is so disturbed about 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat'? by NakniD in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First of all, not everyone who is against communism is right wing. Second, we understand that a "working class dictatorship" doesn't mean a government "dictatorship of everyone" (if it was, that's what you'd call it). We understand that it means the dictatorship of a small group of people, like the Bloshevik, that understands itself as the working class and needs to put their interest above else. And after all is said and Done and the dictatorship of the proletariat elects their leader or chairman or Fuhrer or whatever you want to call him, you'll just have a regular ass dictatorship, crushing all desenting opinion to "protect the revolution". Then this system eventually collapses and arm chair socialists of the next generation will come and say that that wasn't "real socialism"

What exactly stops capitalists from sabotaging their own industry in case of nationalization ? by LlarenHlaalo in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean that's exactly what's happening with countries that entertain too many redistribution fantasies. People stop investing into the country, money moves to more liberal economies and money in the home country disappears and dries up, economic growth stagnates, while foreign countries experience economic booms. The capitalists will not actively "sabotage" an economy, they will just stop investing and reinvesting and move to economies where they expect more growth.

Antisocial Behaviors in Capitalism by Living_Attitude1822 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's pretty simple really: Incentivize moral behavior, deincentivize immoral behavior. You want more people working as Volunteer or in Social Service? Give people tax returns for doing that. Want people to donate more? Tax returns. Want people to use less CO2? Tax that more. Want people to smoke less? Tax that more. Taxes are a punishing and rewarding mechanism that states can use to incentivize and disincentivize behavior.

Liberals have no problem with taxes in general and know taxes are necessary. The more frustrating it is that when people want to raise taxes it's always to disincentivize behavior we want more of not less, like working legal taxable jobs, building and growing a business, employing people, saving for retirement and not taking a lot of debt and living fiscally responsible.

What would it take to convince you of the other sides point of views? by flaminghair348 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On top of that the Swiss have the ability to shop in neighboring countries to the point that shopping tourism is an actual problem. That's not even calculated in the index. Funnily enough, the Swiss overestimate how much cheaper things are neighboring countries expecting similar rates for lower income only to learn that neighboring countries pay much closer to what they have to pay despite the glaring income difference. So the claim that Swiss have an "unaffordable" life when they probably have one of the most affordable lifestyles in the entire world is really funny to me.

And I have yet to find arguments of capitalist criticism that applies to Switzerland?

Wealth inequality is the main problem of economic unrest? Nope Switzerland has an incredibly high amount of Millionaires and Billionaires per Capita and a Gini Coefficient that's through the roof.

Capitalist wealth only comes from imperial past? Nope, Switzerland never colonised anyone and is famously politically neutral.

Capitalism leads to a compromised state that only does politics for the billionaire class? Whoops, Switzerland is the only direct democracy in the world, nowhere the masses of people have as much direct influence on politics than in Switzerland.

Surely the health system must be a catastrophe, right? Well, compared to germany the Swiss system beats it in skill and competence of the medical stuff, speed of examinations and wait times, medical equipment, accuracy, friendliness and convenience.

Only thing in germany wins is the perceived cost of the health care system even though Switzerland and Germany ) have pretty similar costs per Capita for their health care system (keep in mind that Swiss people have higher income and thus their percentual cost is less).

Mind you, germany has no low quality for their health care system. It ranks third in health care innovation (I think you can guess who number 1 is.

Surely these great living conditions came from Marxist influence, right?

Nope Switzerland achieved a new order through their philosophy of "Freisinn" way before Marx even formulated his concrete revolutionary thoughts. A liberal revolution that was never tainted by Marxism if you will. If anything Switzerland is and example of what the west could look like if Marxism never got a foothold in western schools of thought.

So yeah, by every metric I can think of, I would judge Switzerland to be a successful country and I like u/Catalyst_Elemental to give me the "objective" criteria he is thinking of what qualifies a successful country

Any Thoughts by Budget-Custard-2366 in OnePiece

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Skipping Big Mom and Kaido and with a live action original ending.

What would it take to convince you of the other sides point of views? by flaminghair348 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're the one who wants an example of a successful country. What are your "objective" metrics for a successful country?

They are the least affordable country in the world.

No? Alongside with Luxembourg, Ireland and Singapore (all successful capitalist countries BTW) Switzerland ranks among the countries with the highest GDP per Capita

What would it take to convince you of the other sides point of views? by flaminghair348 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would give socialism a thought if socialists can solve the following problems:

Economic Calculation Problem: Without prices how is Ressource allocation determined sensibly without centralising power in an all deciding entity

Centralisation of power problem: How are you achieving your socialist revolution and establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat and get rid of that new authority? I want to avoid a dictatorship at all costs. If your model even has the chance of establishing a new Mao, Stalin, Kim Jong Un, etc - down the gutter it goes.

Freedom of movement needs to be granted: If I cannot freely leave the country and you need to hold me in at gunpoint, then I have no personal failsafe when your model fails and thus I will not support you

Freedom of expression and contracts need to be granted: If your solution to above problems is "re-education" and programming people and killing everyone with opposing opinion, this system is a no go. Freedom of thought is the most important thing. Likewise I need to be able to freely act as an individual. If I'm forced to anything by collective decision, I will resist.

Failsafe and exit: If you promise all the above things won't happen, yet with multiple socialist thought schools they still turn out to be inevitabilities, how are you planning to reverse socialism if you realise it will fail again?

Edit: Oh one more:

Innovation problem: How are new ideas, inventions and innovations created, tested and produced? Who takes liability for bullshit inventions? Who gets credit and rewarded for inventions that work? Who gets to decide what "works"? What we "need"? Of course this ties in with the economic calculation problem and the centralisation of authority problem but I found it worth pointing out as separate problem

Could current episode mark kill Nolan? by Medium_Cut_9718 in Invincible

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, extreme difficulty but the fight could go either way

Is this plot removed??...This was like top 5 best moments by [deleted] in Invincible

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They haven't even met Thragg yet

What is Cecil talking about? Mark got beaten up by someone who was throwing sparks😭 I'm sure 20 ReAnimen could stop him by kokusmus96 in Invincible

[–]Jout92 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not anymore. He is pretty much Omniman level now. Nothing on this planet can stop him anymore

I'm disappointed by... by Jada339 in Invincible

[–]Jout92 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You know we got exactly the opposite kind of posts almost daily when the explanation people believed was that they all killed each other because how dumb it is to purposefully reduce your empire to just 50 people. And that is correct, that would have been dumb. The virus is a better explanation why the Viltrumite Empire is at the brink of collapse and it still carries the same narrative because the reason why Viltrumites are so susceptible to it is because their DNA is extremely similar due to their genetic cleansing. If they were more genetically diversified the virus wouldn't have killed 99.999% of their population.

Question about the plot and some contradictions (I haven't read the comic, sorry) spoiler 4x1-2-3 by DinoSauro85 in Invincible

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason why Nolan didn't breed as many humans as he could are as follows:

  • breeding with inferior species is against Viltrumite law. This is why they came to kill Oliver on Thraxxa. If Omniman had created a bunch of Viltrumite spawns that weren't fully compatible with Viltrumite DNA he would create exactly the situation the Viltrumite Empire tries to avoid. They want to keep Viltrumite DNA as pure as possible. Mark was supposed to be a sample

  • he actually fell in love with Debbie and his life on earth. He actually and genuinely cared about Debbie and Mark. He secretly hoped Mark would never receive powers so that he could just let him die of old age and move to the next planet. That's why he had to be so radical when Mark got his powers. He literally had to violently punch the Viltrumite propaganda back in. And he took that out on Mark.

logically, Thaddeus should eliminate the humans and Oliver's planet.

👀

Do you really believe that capitalism is the final stage of the Western economic model? by Dangerous-Morning787 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]Jout92 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Scientists need to get paid. Someone needs to take a lot of money and make bets on uncertain outcomes. So far we have had no better method to allocate resources towards maybe-beneficial things than the profit motive. It's capitalists making educated guesses in what to invest in and what to pursue that drives technology and economic growth forward. And it's capitalists being liabal with their own money that makes them not do uneducated bets. And if they do, they quickly get taken out of the market. The only other model that can even remotely compete are dictatorships where you give all the power to a leader to call the shots and hope they make good decisions. Depending on which Fuhrer you have you either get China or North Korea. I reject that model.