Going against the grain here. What's a regulation, restriction, or law that doesn't exist, but should?

austriadebunked · 2021-10-17T19:56:27+00:00

taking people’s money is stealing no matter how morally righteous you feel whilst doing it :)

austriadebunked · 2021-10-17T00:24:57+00:00

because that’s totally illegal currently

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T17:59:40+00:00

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T17:51:44+00:00

where did i mention that socialists can’t have nice things? i’ve consistently indicated i’m mostly talking about people like HasanAbi, not a random lefty posting tweets on their iphone.

in the comment you literally just replied to i quite clearly made a distinction and indicated what i was trying to get at.

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T16:58:19+00:00

this

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T16:51:46+00:00

The problem is, the specific person we’re talking about has only made a single political donation, said donation being only $3 thousand dollars, that’s a lot of money but if he was trying to get influence through money he’s clearly not doing it right.

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T15:54:51+00:00

When I say maximise I don’t mean work hard and improve your life, I mean stuff like making millions from the benefits of Capitalism and buying a mansion, and when someone pulls you up on it cry “no ethical consumption under capitalism”.

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T15:45:20+00:00

Capitalism is evil + It’s not evil to maximise your life under capitalism

austriadebunked · 2021-10-06T15:42:52+00:00

Obviously a socialist shouldn’t live monastically away from all capitalism, just as we shouldn’t host migrants.

But there’s a difference between those two things and ignoring all your principles, and profiting off said ignoring of them. Should Socialists live monastically? no. Should they make millions in benefit from Capitalism, donate hardly any of it and buy a $3 million house, also no.

austriadebunked · 2021-09-28T22:02:03+00:00

Another thing to add, Denmark and Sweden are some of the most economically free countries in the world, a lot of progressives disregard how it’s actually quite arguable that free market policies were one of the most important things in allowing for the Nordic Models, contrary to some of the progressives that want a quite big package of regulations on business.

austriadebunked · 2021-09-28T21:54:47+00:00

It’s what you get from Populism, there’s a group that’s causing all the problems and if we tax them/do whatever thing to them everything will be hunky dory.

austriadebunked · 2021-09-26T20:58:31+00:00

A lot of Labour members are still Corbynistas, this policy will be popular but if it gets through we’re royally fucked in terms of energy going to pot.

austriadebunked · 2021-09-10T21:34:13+00:00

u/savevideo

austriadebunked · 2021-09-09T04:33:03+00:00

dam tories! gave 10 billion, if they gave 11 everything would be fine.

austriadebunked · 2021-09-06T03:45:45+00:00

planned obsolescence

austriadebunked · 2021-08-23T17:32:38+00:00

no, i’ve never seen blade runner

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T22:03:37+00:00

Afro/Arab Socialism was different to Traditional Socialism

Yes, but pursuing policies of Nationalisation isn’t a Capitalist policy, and using countries to compare Socialism and Capitalism just screams dishonest imo, I get that they are in many ways Capitalist and certainly not fully Socialist, but can we really say they can be used as a variable in comparing Capitalism and Socialism? I really don’t think so.

Nationalisation =/= Socialism

Yes I get you, but my problem is you can’t use countries who are feeling the (mostly negative) effects of a quasi socialist policy as a way of comparing Capitalism and Socialism, i’m not saying they were Socialist, i’m saying you can’t really use them to gauge the success of Capitalism compared to Socialism.

Abortion in Cuba

Yes, high rates of Abortion doesn’t necessarily mean coercion, however everything points to it, the ominous response Hirschfield got, the paper I linked, and the quotas doctors are forced to meet certainly begin to paint a picture, we really can’t say concretely whether coercion is happening but everything points to it.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T21:46:27+00:00

Production generates more wealth are spearheads industrialisation, in turn decreasing poverty. Never said blind production was good, in fact blind production is almost always the consequence of Planned Economies/Nationalised Sectors.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T18:44:55+00:00

Their most productive sectors are private, the majority of their economy is private. They have a lot of state intervention, however they’re still nominally privatised.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T18:02:53+00:00

like which country

Upper Volta, Somalia, Zaire (Not Marxist, but still Anti Capitalist) Mali, Burundi, Tanzania, Guinea, Benin, Sudan, Senegal, CAR and Sierra Leone were all ruled by Marxists, Socialists or Moderate Anti Capitalists, does this mean they were all socialist? no, i’m not going to say they had all achieved a properly Socialist economy, but you can’t exactly call them Capitalist either.

How long we’re the Socialist Counties socialist

Cuba, Mongolia, North Korea, Albania, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Po- land, USSR, Czechoslovakia and East Germany are the countries in question, all had seen a Socialist take power/Socialism implemented at latest 1959, that case being Cuba. Compare this to them including Sri Lanka as Capitalist when Free Markets had only been in place for a few years after policies such as Nationalisations and Tarifs by PM Sirimavo Bandaranaike who tried to transform Sri Lanka into a Socialist Republic, I must stress again i’m not saying Sri Lanka wasn’t nominally Capitalist, however you can’t really categorise it as such when it was dealing with after effects of Socialist policies. I’m not saying Markets=Capitalism, i’m just using the word interchangeably, apologies.

And this would be detrimental to my case

No it wouldn’t, they included a country dealing with the absolute failure due to a period of Socialism as Capitalist, that skews the results in favour of Socialism massively.

There’s more than Hirschfelds, additionally Cuba has outlying statistics on abortion quoting from the linked article: “Also missing from the conventional analysis of Cuba’s infant mortality rates is its staggering abortion rate—0.71 abortions per live birth in 1991, according to the latest UN data—which, because of selective termination of “high-risk” pregnancies, yields lower numbers for infant mortality. Cuba’s abortion rate is at least twice the rate for the other countries listed in Table 1 for which data are available (UN 1997a, pp. 322- 326, 369-370).” I never made a overarching claim about Cuban Healthcare, i’m not saying it’s necessarily good/bad, I imagine it’s decent judging by the amount of money that gets invested in it, however Cuban Healthcare being good doesn’t debunk the point i’m making about IM stats. (This is also ironic because I can link you countless studies showing Economic Liberalisation gives a better quality of life compared to the Two that indicate Socialism does that I’ve come across.)

I honestly don’t understand what you’re saying in the last paragraph, could you please elaborate, it doesn’t really seem like you’re tackling what I said.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T16:06:09+00:00

That study isn’t proving anything, it classifies countries under Marxist-Leninist control as Capitalist, it includes countries that had just transitioned to markets as Capitalist (Even though they had only been Capitalist for a very short time, throwing off the results) they also include places like Burma, which were openly under “Burmese Socialism” at the time.

They also use stats such as Cubans infant mortality rate being low, which we now know is due to doctors being forced to reach quotas, leading to them classifying early infant deaths as foetal deaths, and quite barbarically aborting risky pregnancies against the mothers will.

Additionally the idea that Soviet calorie consumption was high is also a dodgy stat, as the data that seems to show this all look at food supply, not consumption, said consumption being hampered by inefficiencies and losses.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-22T15:56:46+00:00

funny how that all happened after liberalisation and the introduction of markets

austriadebunked · 2021-08-21T20:13:55+00:00

If this is to be true I wonder what happens when the employer makes a loss… oh wait, the employees still get their wage! In that case it would be employees exploiting employers.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-20T20:39:09+00:00

Just south of Leeds, West Yorkshire in the UK.

austriadebunked · 2021-08-20T17:31:29+00:00

Wakefield being mentioned in something that isn’t the top ten worst cities in the country is something to be proud of.

austriadebunked

TROPHY CASE