Liberal Forum

RedheadedStranger » 19 Feb 2024, 7:26 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 7:26 pm

Bingo.

This is why the push for mixed race babies is so heavy at the moment. It's an "equity" thing. The blacks don't naturally possess the IQ needed to be productive citizens, so it must be bred into them by the elites by blending the races 

This is also why the black family hit has been systematically destroyed over the last few decades too. We can have them dumb *** men raising those modified mulattos. That would **** up everything.

Damn... that's racist as hell of me to say isn't it?

Oh well.

               Agreed....
   and the death spiral ****** find themselves in today didn't happen by consequence ---- it was by design.. One only should look at LBJ's "Great Society" to map the path of the American ****** devolving to the status of special needs children --- with generational dependence on Government... They were conditioned to believe failure & irresponsibility was acceptable..... 

             Breeding Negro dependency on government has helped no one but Vote-sucking Democrats.  

Cannonpointer » 19 Feb 2024, 1:20 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 1:20 pm

FTFY. It's just capitalism, bro. It's had time to metastacize - but it's just capitalism.

Not green capitalism. Not jaundiced capitalism. Not crony capitalism. Just capitalism. 

The thing the founders fought against when their outcry could not reach their beloved king's ear, blocked as it was by the British East India Company. .

*blocked by the City of London 

Sumela » 19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm

But they are identifiable if folks in power would ALLOW this.  I assume that is your point.

So, if humans were ''better'' - Capitalism would be more ""kind".  Or, are you being facetious?
Im asking if Capitalism is inherently evil or that man's inherent evil corrupts Capitalism?

 

Not better, honest about themselves living as simply reproductively here equally timed apart as "ancestrally displaced" balancing results to cycles of life eternally separated as displaced since conceived sharing common senses adapting in plain sight cradle to grave between fertilized cell and infant arriving to dead and decomposing corpse after dead as population only goes forward one at a time with each great great grandchild replacing their specific previous 4 generation gap DNA donors linked in sequence of arriving since inception of ancestral lineages lived so far.

I have repeatedly explained the natural algorithm to numbers of conceptions while incest between previous generation gaps to last arriving will decrease the numbers of people involved 16, 8, 4, 2 adding each 1 that can evolve into 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents, 16 great great grandparents each generation gap changing population left here today. this cycle has changed population every rotation of this planet balancing 3rd from the star in this solar system, galaxy, universal moment total sum of past and current events.

Evolving doesn't change how and why life is never same details again to what, where, when, which, whom is navigating space for their specific time, place, thing believed possible today.

Sumela » 19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm

But they are identifiable if folks in power would ALLOW this.  I assume that is your point.

So, if humans were ''better'' - Capitalism would be more ""kind".  Or, are you being facetious?
Im asking if Capitalism is inherently evil or that man's inherent evil corrupts Capitalism?

I would say that capitalism is DEFINITELY inherently evil. It uses artificial people to dominate real ones. It is not just without a conscience; it is LEGALLY OBLIGATED to have no conscience - pretenses notwithstanding.

There are stockholders and stakeholders. For example, if a wall street firm were to build a subdivision, the stockholders would be the owners. The stakeholders would be the folks whose roads just got more crowded, costing them more of their life in traffic and less of their life with family; the species displaced by the development; the city that must now run water and sewer and electric to the development, etc. If the CEO were to budget in some abatements for the stakeholders, the stockholders could (and would) sue (and win).

It is the absolute duty of company executives to onboard every possible asset and offboard every possible liability. They get the cow and society gets the dung - unless and until their is a price on dung. It was capitalism, and not their beloved king, against which the founders of this nation rebelled. 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 19 Feb 2024, 8:23 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 8:23 pm

Exactly.

You are a free enterpriser - and that is a dying breed. More precisely, it is a being murdered breed.

You can still be a "free enterpriser" but you have to "play the game" really well...the Mexican immigrant family who "employs" their 2-4 children in the restaurant serving food has the right idea on maximizing their effective income.

I know for a fact right now, California's taxes and regulations on SME (small medium enterprises) are quite egregious...compare that to some startup founder who raised $10M and declares a  > $1M loss every year that carries forward for future tax deductions and it's no contest.

As a final aside, the typical route to "success" for a free enterpriser is selling the business for a great sum upon exit ($5M, $10M, $20M, or more) and then retiring. But here you face the same problem...which individual actually has several millions stashed away to buy your (admittedly precarious) business, even if they wanted to?

The only orgs that do...are private equity and already large players in your field. 

So yes...if you want to "cash out" you have to sell everything...to the capitalists at the end.

The secret is that the capitalists know this, and why they give generous offers to "free enterprisers" (like the guys who invented YouTube before it was bought out). A lot of "free enterprisers" who didn't sell out ended up losing everything when the valuation tanks for one reason or another. 

Sumela » 19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Feb 2024, 9:33 pm

But they are identifiable if folks in power would ALLOW this.  I assume that is your point.

So, if humans were ''better'' - Capitalism would be more ""kind".  Or, are you being facetious?
Im asking if Capitalism is inherently evil or that man's inherent evil corrupts Capitalism?

Capitalism is not evil or good. It's just a system for organizing and distributing society's resources based on the supposed concept of competition in markets. 

The problems with capitalism are too many to name, as you can ask any of its critics from Lenin to Kacinzsky, but my primary criticism is that it rewards the most conniving, rent-seeking, and sociopathic members of society while screwing over industrious and intelligent (but honest) types.

While 150-170 IQs are busy researching and coming up with new paradigms in avant-garde science, math, technology, or the arts and advancing the "human condition," the above average 115-140 crowd (intelligent but not the top) that lusts for money, power, and prestige end up taking all of society's gains for themselves.

National Socialist user "Mefobills" coined a term "sordid gain." The contributions (alleged or real...) of these rapacious types is not anywhere in concert with what they receive. Here we witness a well known phenomenon of "market failure" - yet because of how society and economy is structured we are "not supposed to" do anything to correct this imbalance. 

"Liberal democracy" in particular seems to be...almost set up in a way that prevents society from keeping these "sordid gainers" in check. Or to punish them for misdeeds. 

There are at least 15 other valid criticisms of capitalism I can think of but this one is probably one most can relate to, as undoubtedly many such as yourself have been indoctrinated with the "hard, honest work" ethos that was never real.

It was always an illusion.
 

LowIQTrash » 21 Feb 2024, 3:27 am » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2024, 3:27 am

You can still be a "free enterpriser" but you have to "play the game" really well...the Mexican immigrant family who "employs" their 2-4 children in the restaurant serving food has the right idea on maximizing their effective income.

I know for a fact right now, California's taxes and regulations on SME (small medium enterprises) are quite egregious...compare that to some startup founder who raised $10M and declares a  > $1M loss every year that carries forward for future tax deductions and it's no contest.

As a final aside, the typical route to "success" for a free enterpriser is selling the business for a great sum upon exit ($5M, $10M, $20M, or more) and then retiring. But here you face the same problem...which individual actually has several millions stashed away to buy your (admittedly precarious) business, even if they wanted to?

The only orgs that do...are private equity and already large players in your field. 

So yes...if you want to "cash out" you have to sell everything...to the capitalists at the end.

The secret is that the capitalists know this, and why they give generous offers to "free enterprisers" (like the guys who invented YouTube before it was bought out). A lot of "free enterprisers" who didn't sell out ended up losing everything when the valuation tanks for one reason or another. 

Capitalists, capitalizers, carpet baggers. Conspirators, conspiring, conspiracy theory. 2/3 are a work in progress to the 3rd every reality denies playing a role.