How to embolden your kids against Socialism!!

@wajoma said
Pseud boy we're still not seeing the unemployment benefit as being capitalism, we're still on your first point.

There are aspects of capitalism in a mixed economy, the unemployment benefit is an example of that which is not capitalism. You don't get a mixed economy by mixing capitalism with capitalism and sprinkling capitalism on top.

Did you type that yourself, or it was a copy paste right? How did it feel when you typed v o l u n t a r y ?

Are you really moronic or something?

All capitalist societies have unemployment benefit.
And there’s good reason for them having it, as you will register once you comprehend dialectic materialism.

Probably way over your head.

Anyhoo… Joe…. Joe…. Have you read up on the philosophy yet? Or are you just gonna sit back and let the kangaroo rapist take the rightious spanking for you?

@moonbus said
Only the self-sufficient will survive. That's just what Joe wants. That's the law of the jungle; that's how every other creature in nature acts: the diseased, the old and infirm, the handicapped and the deformed, are ostracized and hunted down by predators. But that is not how h.saps prevailed over large cats and mammoths. How h.saps prevailed was by cooperating, by providin ...[text shortened]... tempt, religious and ideological (Jesus, Karl Marx, etc.), to inculcate compassion has failed.

😢

Joe isn’t self sufficient he relies on the gov to protect his property and keep him rich

@averagejoe1 said
I'm a man you just met in a bar, Shav. You say to me, "I don't make a lot of money, I'm just not programmed to excel. But that feller over there tells me you are a millionaire . Would you give me some of your money?"
How would dialectic materialism apply to you and me talking in a bar, maybe with a few folks sitting nearby wondering what my response should be, o ...[text shortened]... r this premise. Watching you guys skip over issues is like watching dancers in a minstrel show.
🕺💃

Lol you think you’re “programmed to excel”

@athousandyoung said
Lol you think you’re “programmed to excel”

Aw, man, you miss the question….and you are so close. Or, hey, are you playing a little guess-what-I- mean game?? I do that with my grandkids, but we are grown ups. But I gotcha, you are pretending to not see the premise, that the person who asks for the money is the one not programmed to excel. Not the person who has money.
You can’t kid a kidder, you silly goose.🦃

@shavixmir said
Are you really moronic or something?

All capitalist societies have unemployment benefit.
And there’s good reason for them having it, as you will register once you comprehend dialectic materialism.

Probably way over your head.

Anyhoo… Joe…. Joe…. Have you read up on the philosophy yet? Or are you just gonna sit back and let the kangaroo rapist take the rightious spanking for you?

Whether I have or not, philosophy is not relevant to the question, which, as forever with all forum libs, I guess will go unanswered . One of you turkeys wrote about government and Fox News and lots and lots, nothing pertaining to the question.
Don’t you ever get tired of that?
Hey…………..this is definitely not a ‘debate’ forum. More just a silly forum. Sad.

@shavixmir said
Are you really moronic or something?

All capitalist societies have unemployment benefit.
And there’s good reason for them having it, as you will register once you comprehend dialectic materialism.

Probably way over your head.

Anyhoo… Joe…. Joe…. Have you read up on the philosophy yet? Or are you just gonna sit back and let the kangaroo rapist take the rightious spanking for you?

You gave two examples, the US and the UK, both of these are considered mixed economies, i.e. capitalism mixed with something else. The something else, amongst other things, is the unemployment benefit.

shag doody for brains said (or rather, copy pasted without reference to source) the following:

"For example, a definition:
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

Or:
Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, price system, private property, property rights recognition, voluntary exchange, and wage labor."

Nowhere in shag doodies definition is there anything about unemployment benefit, in fact a number of the items could be said to be antithetical to the unemployment benefit, the most obvious: "voluntary exchange" I even gave a clue to shag doody that this would count against his corruption of what capitalism is, when I asked"

"How did it feel when you typed v o l u n t a r y ?

But shag doody continued to entangle himself in, frankly, a web of his own creation.

He has been trying to divert a political philosophy discussion with a foray into epistemology, while I agree, hierarchically, epistemology precedes politics, or rather, political philosophy rests on epistemological structure, metaphysics, the foundation, does in turn precede epistemology, and if we had the time and inclination to delve into these subjects each deserving of their own threads and sub threads we would find at the root of shag doodies dialectic materialism the anti-reason metaphys of Immanuel Kant.

@wajoma said
You gave two examples, the US and the UK, both of these are considered mixed economies, i.e. capitalism mixed with something else. The something else, amongst other things, is the unemployment benefit.

shag doody for brains said (or rather, copy pasted without reference to source) the following:

[i]"For example, a definition:
Capitalism is an economic system based on th ...[text shortened]... ld find at the root of shag doodies dialectic materialism the anti-reason metaphys of Immanuel Kant.

Well said, and understood, but over the head of Shag and the others. One of them threw a bit of dialectic materialism into one of the threads. Shame, the quasi intelligencia makes me dizzy. The simply or the question or the issue, the more complicated they make it. I think they are playing a game with us. I need to go play a whole round of golf to clear my mind.

@wajoma said
You gave two examples, the US and the UK, both of these are considered mixed economies, i.e. capitalism mixed with something else. The something else, amongst other things, is the unemployment benefit.

shag doody for brains said (or rather, copy pasted without reference to source) the following:

[i]"For example, a definition:
Capitalism is an economic system based on th ...[text shortened]... ld find at the root of shag doodies dialectic materialism the anti-reason metaphys of Immanuel Kant.

You were asked whether any capitalist system exists that does not hand out free money.

@wajoma said
You gave two examples, the US and the UK, both of these are considered mixed economies, i.e. capitalism mixed with something else. The something else, amongst other things, is the unemployment benefit.

shag doody for brains said (or rather, copy pasted without reference to source) the following:

[i]"For example, a definition:
Capitalism is an economic system based on th ...[text shortened]... ld find at the root of shag doodies dialectic materialism the anti-reason metaphys of Immanuel Kant.

What a crock of 💩.

And they’re not my definitions of capitalism, they’re from encyclopedia.

It’s your definition which moot. Because nobody else uses it.

And just because you don’t grasp history, politics or reality, you spew forth mumble jumble that makes you look like the roo’s arse you’re trying to rape all the time, back in your trailer.

Nut job.

@wildgrass said
You were asked whether any capitalist system exists that does not hand out free money.

The Pseud Known As Shag Doody For Brains said:

04 Apr '23 04:26
"Capitalism hands money to people too."

05 Apr '23 03:41
" ...fact that capitalism hands out money as well"

Then we had a back peddle, where he changed the terms:

05 Apr '23 05:00
"Unemployment benefit = a result of capitalism"

Please note. Not capitalism, but a result of capitalism. And I am fully prepared to acknowledge when there is the prosperity of capitalism the socialist parasites are soon to follow. Not with more capitalism, but with something that is not capitalism, hence: Mixed Economy.

I will now quote Shag Doody further to exemplify the extent of his imagination and wit:

"platypus raper squeal like a little piggy gimp koalas limped gimp platykoala randian goat fukker fukking retard dumb nuts koala fukking dumb arse moronic crock of 💩 mumble jumble roo’s arse in your trailer nut job."

@wajoma said
The Pseud Known As Shag Doody For Brains said:

04 Apr '23 04:26
"Capitalism hands money to people too."

05 Apr '23 03:41
" ...fact that capitalism hands out money as well"

Then we had a back peddle, where he changed the terms:

05 Apr '23 05:00
"Unemployment benefit = a result of capitalism"

Please note. Not capitalism, but a result of ...[text shortened]... ts koala fukking dumb arse moronic crock of 💩 mumble jumble roo’s arse in your trailer nut job."[/i]

I don't get it. You set up an economic system, it leads to something else, but you cannot say that one thing did the other thing? Or are you saying prosperous capitalism will always be a part of a mixed economy, but any part of that system involving handouts is not capitalism? This is merely semantics, as we cannot find examples of one thing existing without the other.

The system of capitalism handing money out to people appears to be a feature not a bug.

edit: Here we are saying "mixed economy" is just the predominant form of capitalism. So it appears you are talking about capitalism when you say mixed economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#Types

@wildgrass said
I don't get it. You set up an economic system, it leads to something else, but you cannot say that one thing did the other thing?

You surely don't get it.

It's preferable to use the language of economics to discuss economics but I'll try to use your language to explain it to you. Apologies to others if this gets too advanced ;^)

The something else is not the thing
One thing did not do the other thing.
Another thing did another thing to the thing

Hope that's at a level you can understand.

Edit: Dear Wildgrass and The Pseud Known As Shag Doody For Brains I have found this useful resource to get you on your way:

YouTube @ 11s

Edit 2: Did you get it right?

@wajoma said
You surely don't get it.

It's preferable to use the language of economics to discuss economics but I'll try to use your language to explain it to you. Apologies to others if this gets too advanced ;^)

The something else is not the thing
One thing did not do the other thing.
Another thing did another thing to the thing

Hope that's at a level you can understand.

Ed ...[text shortened]... on your way:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b0ftfKFEJg&t=11s

Edit 2: Did you get it right?

Nope. You've rejected common definitions of capitalism in order to make your point here. You instead use imprecise / deliberately narrow definitions. The obvious is right in front of you.

You and shav are talking about the same thing. Most if not all capitalist systems are you what you describe as mixed economy. Mixed economy is capitalism.

@wajoma said
The Pseud Known As Shag Doody For Brains said:

04 Apr '23 04:26
"Capitalism hands money to people too."

05 Apr '23 03:41
" ...fact that capitalism hands out money as well"

Then we had a back peddle, where he changed the terms:

05 Apr '23 05:00
"Unemployment benefit = a result of capitalism"

Please note. Not capitalism, but a result of ...[text shortened]... ts koala fukking dumb arse moronic crock of 💩 mumble jumble roo’s arse in your trailer nut job."[/i]

Idiot.

There’s really not much to say. You just don’t comprehend.

All capitalist societies need unemployment benefit, for otherwise the people get uppity.
Socialism, for example, does not have unemployment benefit, for there is no unemployment.

Wake up to facts, moron.

@wildgrass said
Nope. You've rejected common definitions of capitalism in order to make your point here. You instead use imprecise / deliberately narrow definitions. The obvious is right in front of you.

You and shav are talking about the same thing. Most if not all capitalist systems are you what you describe as mixed economy. Mixed economy is capitalism.

There is no 'common definition' that says if you mix capitalism with socialism you get capitalism. There is no 'common definition' that asserts you can't have capitalism without mixing in some socialism, if you can find a reputable source that says so let's see it. After being asked repeatedly Pseud boy finally posted some definitions, (you can look back yourself) I agree with the definitions Pseud boy posted, no argument. Nothing in any of the encyclopedia definitions mentions, allows for, specifies the unemployment benefit.

You've tried to mash together two virtual antonyms that's how confused you are.

Let's play some more Sesame St, one of these things is not like the others:

Imprecise, broad, wide ranging, narrow, all encompassing, sweeping, indistinct.

Narrow, accurate, specific, precise, exact, imprecise, limited.

How did you go?

You yourself have admitted to the distinction by acknowledging 'most' instead of asserting categorically 'all'. That's how unsure of yourself you are. You're unsure of yourself, I'm not.