Proof Capitalism is the most cucked ideology in history

disillusioned

disillusioned

Kraken
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Posts
9,975
Reputation
29,198
Jfl at using the efficiency of the private sector as an argument for capitalism when 50+% of the surplus value of production is then just pocketed by the rich anyway. Basically the logic here is that because for profit operations are a few dozen percent points more productive than state industry that it will make the average person richer even though literally 50-70% of the surplus value will only go to the richest 5% of the nation since it's not realistically possible to tax people more than about 50% before they start leaving to other countries. And that's not even counting the tax loopholes.

Simple example of how cucked the logic of capitalistcels is:

-Socialist state industry produces 100 SV (SV stands for "surplus value") which is distributed equally among 10 people representing a nation.

-Capitalism is implemented and industry is given to a capitalist whom represents only 1 out of the 10 people mentioned above.

-Now under capitalist control the industry works better, and now creates a SV of 140, a 40% increase. However since this is capitalism all of this surplus value goes to the capitalist rather than being shared equally.

-In response the capitalist has to pay a tax of 20-50% depending on how highly taxed he is, since that is the highest a capitalist will realistically pay without leaving the country. However even with this 20-50% tax he still gets to keep over 70-112 SV. The remaining SV is shared among the other 9 people.


Difference in result between socialism and capitalism:

Socialism:

SV of industry: 100
SV per person: 10

Capitalism:

SV of industry: 140
SV for the capitalist: 70-112 depending on tax
SV per non-capitalist person: 5-7 depending on how much the capitalist pays in taxes


Conclusion: Even when for profit capitalist industry enhances productivity by as much as 40% (a real world figure often cited by pro-capitalists mind you) and even when the capitalist pays reasonable or even high taxes, the remainder of the population still makes as much as 30-50% less than they would under socialism.

EDIT: I should also add that capitalism is the ONLY economic system in history where improvements in productive technology actually INCREASE poverty for most of the population rather than decreasing it because on one hand more automation means the value of labor is decreased and on the other most of the extra surplus is just consumed by the wealthy anyway. At least under feudalism the peasants got a portion of the harvest in many nations and thus benefited from richer seasons as well. Under capitalism they get to eat shit.

CAPITALISM.IS.THE.BLUEPILL.OF.THE.RIGHT-WING.


giphy.gif


tenor-gif.143521


giphy.gif


giphy.gif


giphy.gif


giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Joe Rogancel, Deleted member 12344, Squirtoutmabooty and 3 others
dnr
 
  • +1
Reactions: Avoidant
poorfag cope
 
  • +1
Reactions: birchman and MrGlutton
dnr
 
  • +1
Reactions: Avoidant
socialism is simply superior, just how it is
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Joe Rogancel and Petsmart
“it’s not possible to tax people more than 50%”

i’m pretty sure either uk or america had taxes at 70-80% for war efforts at one point

additionally socialism only ever works in abstract texts such as the one you just wrote, never works in real life. I support a mixed economy where some industries are state ran (such as healthcare mainly) with the rest being private
 
  • +1
Reactions: turkproducer
poorfag cope

I always lol when capitalist bluepillers mock the poor as if they won't be among their ranks some day.

EDIT: Ritalincel has to be a bot srs.
 
The private sector OWNS YOU n00b. You are the twink bitch for for-profit capitalist industry.
 
I always lol when capitalist bluepillers mock the poor as if they won't be among their ranks some day.

EDIT: Ritalincel has to be a bot srs.
I am larping I actually support socialized medicine ded srs
 
“it’s not possible to tax people more than 50%”

i’m pretty sure either uk or america had taxes at 70-80% for war efforts at one point

additionally socialism only ever works in abstract texts such as the one you just wrote, never works in real life. I support a mixed economy where some industries are state ran (such as healthcare mainly) with the rest being private
That was with a less globalized world. There’s no restriction on where capital can go, you can buy citizenship for multiple countries. Including first world ones like the UK. The rich don’t have their assets in one country like how they did in the past either.

Overtaxing the rich is a recipe for trouble.
 
Capitalism - A love story
 
Jfl at using the efficiency of the private sector as an argument for capitalism when 50+% of the surplus value of production is then just pocketed by the rich anyway. Basically the logic here is that because for profit operations are a few dozen percent points more productive than state industry that it will make the average person richer even though literally 50-70% of the surplus value will only go to the richest 5% of the nation since it's not realistically possible to tax people more than about 50% before they start leaving to other countries. And that's not even counting the tax loopholes.

Simple example of how cucked the logic of capitalistcels is:

-Socialist state industry produces 100 SV (SV stands for "surplus value") which is distributed equally among 10 people representing a nation.

-Capitalism is implemented and industry is given to a capitalist whom represents only 1 out of the 10 people mentioned above.

-Now under capitalist control the industry works better, and now creates a SV of 140, a 40% increase. However since this is capitalism all of this surplus value goes to the capitalist rather than being shared equally.

-In response the capitalist has to pay a tax of 20-50% depending on how highly taxed he is, since that is the highest a capitalist will realistically pay without leaving the country. However even with this 20-50% tax he still gets to keep over 70-112 SV. The remaining SV is shared among the other 9 people.


Difference in result between socialism and capitalism:

Socialism:

SV of industry: 100
SV per person: 10

Capitalism:

SV of industry: 140
SV for the capitalist: 70-112 depending on tax
SV per non-capitalist person: 5-7 depending on how much the capitalist pays in taxes


Conclusion: Even when for profit capitalist industry enhances productivity by as much as 40% (a real world figure often cited by pro-capitalists mind you) and even when the capitalist pays reasonable or even high taxes, the remainder of the population still makes as much as 30-50% less than they would under socialism.

EDIT: I should also add that capitalism is the ONLY economic system in history where improvements in productive technology actually INCREASE poverty for most of the population rather than decreasing it because on one hand more automation means the value of labor is decreased and on the other most of the extra surplus is just consumed by the wealthy anyway. At least under feudalism the peasants got a portion of the harvest in many nations and thus benefited from richer seasons as well. Under capitalism they get to eat shit.

CAPITALISM.IS.THE.BLUEPILL.OF.THE.RIGHT-WING.


giphy.gif


tenor-gif.143521


giphy.gif


giphy.gif


giphy.gif


giphy.gif

State ran socialism has been a failure nearly everywhere it has been tried. State ran industries tend to fall into a hole of inefficiency due to the fact that they are funded by the state, which means that the businesses can have the bare minimum output and make the shittiest goods. Only on paper does it work.

While it is true that capitalism is the only system where innovations in production can result in poverty, capitalism is also the only economic system that has massively cut down on global poverty.

Capitalism isn’t the blue pill of the right. Capitalism is the de facto economic ideology of anyone to the right of socialists. If it’s a blue pill, it’s a blue pill to anyone who either isn’t a fascist or doesn’t read Marx.
 
State ran socialism has been a failure nearly everywhere it has been tried.


State ran industries tend to fall into a hole of inefficiency

My point in the OP demonstrates why this isn't as relevant as it sounds.

While it is true that capitalism is the only system where innovations in production can result in poverty, capitalism is also the only economic system that has massively cut down on global poverty.

100% propaganda.

Capitalism isn’t the blue pill of the right. Capitalism is the de facto economic ideology of anyone to the right of socialists. If it’s a blue pill, it’s a blue pill to anyone who either isn’t a fascist or doesn’t read Marx.

This is really no different than saying blackpillers are dumber than normies because almost everybody is a normie.
 



My point in the OP demonstrates why this isn't as relevant as it sounds.



100% propaganda.



This is really no different than saying blackpillers are dumber than normies because almost everybody is a normie.
Your point in OP was a argument based on paper. State ran industries can be ran well on paper but how they are ran in reality is what matters and more often than not, they fail to succeed.

There’s also factors you didn’t take into consideration when making your analysis, like corruption. A corrupt government is emboldened even further by having the entire economy under their control. Which gives them the chance to partake in embezzlement on a mass scale. Cabinet ministers also are given control over massive chunks of the economy, which basically makes them oligarchs. Which further makes them prone to partaking in corrupt activities. (As seen in the USSR).

100% propaganda? Not an argument. Global poverty has been cut in mass amounts since the 1980’s due to the expansion of capitalism and the opening up of markets that used to be closed. (China is a big example of this).

Edit: Your thread doesn’t disprove the fact that state ran socialism has been a failure. Cuba used to rely on the USSR and then once the USSR fell, they entered a massive crisis and were only saved from crumbling by Hugo Chavez. The USSR failed to recover from the stagflation of the 1970’s and crumbled (partly due to their broken economy). China was a 3rd world backwater until the pro-capitalistic reform that Deng Xiaoping put into place. Vietnam was a hopeless 3rd world country until they opened up their economy to competition. Communism has been a failure in application, especially state controlled socialism. Socialists don’t even argue for state control anymore because they know how broken it is.
 
Last edited:
dr

u wouldn’t be complaining if u had seven 0’s in ur bank account
 
dr

u wouldn’t be complaining if u had seven 0’s in ur bank account
no shit

but the job as government is supposed to be to act in the best interests of the majority, not the minority
 
I found myself disagreeing with you all the time but lately you make up spot on threads my dude
 
no shit

but the job as government is supposed to be to act in the best interests of the majority, not the minority
the govt doesn’t care about ppl don’t/can’t contribute to them. get rich or be ignored
 
the govt doesn’t care about ppl don’t/can’t contribute to them. get rich or be ignored
i know thats the reality but in theory government should work the way i said
 

Similar threads

Zenis
Replies
78
Views
7K
AscensionMan98
A
heightmaxxing
Replies
40
Views
3K
chimpkill
chimpkill
the_nextDavidLaid
Replies
74
Views
5K
the_nextDavidLaid
the_nextDavidLaid

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top