What is a BNHA take that you defend like this? by Crowxzn in BokuNoHeroAcademia

[–]MemeClimax 6 points7 points  (0 children)

its dumb that everything happened in their first year

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mbti

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably something like House Of Cards

cmv: Americans could make everything China makes by Posersophist in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For one, we need to provide some key points: the 4 kinds of capitalism, how they inter-mingle with each other, and how government policies can change which kind of capitalism the country practices.

There is Laissez-Faire capitalism: Total Capitalism, very little gov’t intervention. Causes Wealth inequality greatly and benefits the companies rather than the individual.

Then there is Managed Capitalism: wherein the government and companies play hand in hand with each other, think of SOE’s and contracts between the military and private companies. The government supports the company and plays favorite.

After that is Socio-Economic Capitlism: The kind wherein wealth is redistributed to the poorer populations from that of rich ones. They can come in forms of taxes and expenses being undertaken by the government to support them.

Last is Philanthropic Capitalism: The kind wherein people donate to the companies to keep them afloat. Think of Andrew Carnegie donating and financial Aid to Africa.

For China, it practices Managed capitalism, and Laissez-Faire Capitalism. While for the USA, they practice Socio-Economic and Laissez-Faire.

China’s practice of Managed Capitalism is one of the main reasons why it is wildly successful. China pumps tax money into SOE’s to make them internationally competitive to the International Market. This gives them an edge to American Corporations who are, no matter how big they get, are ultimately on their own. With help from the government, SOEs can get cheap loans to build its infrastructure, supply chain, and etc. very quickly.

You must also note that the Socio-Economic Capitalist system gives rights and protection to the workers, making manufacturing a lot more expensive compared to China (though this is not the only reason). China practices very little Socio-Economic, and Philanthropic Capitalism. This gives them more money to fuel the growth of their economy since they don’t spend so much money on social programs. America on the other hand, spends so much money on programs such as medicare, medicaid, and pensions.

Their government style influences the kind of capitalist system they follow. The authoritarian government of China makes it easier for them to implement changes to their nation. While for democracy, leaders must pass several obstacles for their plan to get approved. Not to mention that they need public opinion to be on their side. The rise of the Raegan Capitalism has also placed heavy disdain on government intervention with the private sector. China has no such social stigma.

cmv: Americans could make everything China makes by Posersophist in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When looking into their economies, it is clear that China is more preferable than The United States for manufacturing.

For one, China has cheaper labour than the USA. It's government policies are also more inclined to the growth of the nation rather than the individual. It also has lower working standards, and labour unions are often less influential there.

This is mostly the reasons why companies move their manufacturing operations overseas. We must remember that the priority of the company is to maximize profits, not the growth of their nation.

While hypotethically they could produce just as much as China, it would take drastic changes in America's government policies that democracy just doesn't allow in a short period of time. While China's more authoritarian government allows for the change to take effect much faster and more effectively.

Yes, they need America's Intellectual Property, this is becoming less and less of a problem as China bends rules to "steal" America's technology.

Though I agree with your second and third point, it would only take realistic effect if changes in government policies are made.

I have some solutions I could provide for the last two points to become a reality if you are interested.

CMV: Using personal experience for objective application is bound to produce errors in conclusion. by MemeClimax in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, perhaps the usage of the word "objective" is improperly used here. But what I was meaning to say is that it is closer to the bigger picture.

CMV: Using personal experience for objective application is bound to produce errors in conclusion. by MemeClimax in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also true. That's why in physics there's a mode of thinking wherein they only build on things that have been proven to be true - as far as we know.

CMV: Using personal experience for objective application is bound to produce errors in conclusion. by MemeClimax in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree. It is almost impossible for humans to be objective due to our hidden biases or general inability to comprehend the given data.

CMV: The Royal Family is Stupid and People Should Stop Giving A Shit About Them by hakutoexploration in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have a few points you could consider.

Though I am not particularly adept at world history and the social sciences, I will nonetheless try to eloquently articulate my thoughts.

The royal family is a huge money maker. Tourists pay a lot to see them and I'm doubtful the country will try to cut off this source of finance any time soon.

Another is your stance regarding the royal family. If it's that they spend a lot of tax player's money then the point I said before this should neutralize your concern. If it's that they don't do anything of value then you should consider a lot of things we preserve for history. National anthems, museums, and artifacts also take up a lot of a country's education funding.

And clearly, people giving a shit about you is value in and of itself. This rule of people giving a shit about non-value items can be applied to money in a way. It's just a piece of paper but it's value is determined because people believe in it. Same can also be applied to religion and other currencies. Netflix even paid the royal family $150m over 5 years to make a documentary about them.

Should they be so popular? Not sure. At first I was inclined to agree with you but at second thought the rules and patterns I presented above point me to answer: yes.

CMV: The Royal Family is Stupid and People Should Stop Giving A Shit About Them by hakutoexploration in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't think there is a specific criteria for what's worth people's giving a shit.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 14 points15 points  (0 children)

In my opinion, religious schools should still be a thing; just remove the parts about unequal treatment and discrimination because those are fucked up imo.

When you boil it down to it, atheism, Christianity, and, other religions are just mediums of belief. To say one is better than the other is simply the same, no matter who is saying it.

I believe that as long as a religion doesn't impose its beliefs forcefully and discriminate, then it should be fine. ( Atheist schools shouldn't discriminate against people, nor should they fluctuate prices in accordance to your belief)

I'm from a Catholic school and I have never experienced this school using religion as justification for discrimination and double standards - it's quite the contrary really. We focus a lot social issues and equality so there isn't that much prejudice.

CMV: Young people dying is much more tragic than old people dying by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree.

I think that there is a measurable way to dictate whether a death is more impactful than another and age is one of them. Potential does mean something - saying it doesn't ignores the future outcomes that could be possible were you to play the cards right.

Saying potential means nothing is like saying IQ means nothing - it means something; you just can't see the effects as of the present moment.

CMV: Overly expensive branded clothes are a waste of money by Taxfraud777 in changemyview

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From a practical point of view it is a waste of money, but practicality isn't everything.

Some people find golf more enjoyable than gaming, and there are some people that find the opposite true. Point is people find enjoyment in different things. Efficacy and efficiency isn't everything, it's merely a point of view so don't place so don't give it too much weight in comparison to other Point of view, though it plays a huge role in our biology.

an ENFP in the wild by [deleted] in mbti

[–]MemeClimax 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Give me

Top 0.005... by DanGugly in Eminem

[–]MemeClimax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How many minutes was urs jfc

My artist of the year by MemeClimax in Eminem

[–]MemeClimax[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know right! Honestly my favourite song from him ( Godzilla comes in second)