who is more retarded - communists or efficient market believers?

[Harold O'brien]

?

 

[MoggerGaston]

communist and free market are the same in practice

 

[Harold O'brien]

communist and free market are the same in practice

nope

 

[ropemax]

The former are gullible, the latter are detached

 

[MoggerGaston]

nope

Governments and the shit they do would form also in the most free market. You need to control the population so that the elite can benefit.

 

[Harold O'brien]

Governments and the shit they do would form also in the most free market. You need to control the population so that the elite can benefit.

there is a concentration of power and resources yeah

but that's about it

 

[the BULL]

no one believes in efficient markets
corporate socialism is based

 

[Harold O'brien]

no one believes in efficient markets
corporate socialism is based

nah, I'm morally opposed to the idea of giving free resources to those who don't deserve it

freeriders are a huge drag on efficiency and lead to stagnation as a result of reciprocity and loss of trust in society, fucking everyone over in the process

 

[the BULL]

nah, I'm morally opposed to the idea of giving free resources to those who don't deserve it

freeriders are a huge drag on efficiency and lead to stagnation as a result of reciprocity and loss of trust in society, fucking everyone over in the process

free riders aren't a problem anymore, innovation is too high and there aren't many ppl required in the workforce.

 

[Deleted member 18582]

efficient market believers

 

[Bvnny.]

Neoliberals, 100%, communists at least have some good takes regarding some topics outside of economics, while neoliberals are just full-on retarded.

 

[Harold O'brien]

free riders aren't a problem anymore, innovation is too high and there aren't many ppl required in the workforce.

wrong, they are an unsolvable problem.

there will always be work needed to produce resources + provide services. if people can live satisfactory lifestyles with no employment the allocation of this work is inherently unfair. everyone has to do their part

 

[the BULL]

wrong, they are an unsolvable problem.

there will always be work needed to produce resources + provide services. if people can live satisfactory lifestyles with no employment the allocation of this work is inherently unfair. everyone has to do their part

you're thinking like more= better, we've come to a point when maximum capacity isn't needed anymore to provide all the goods and resources needed to live an healthy and fulfilling lifestyle. basically work will only be for sex havers and girls and everyone else will have minimum resources to live decently

 

[Harold O'brien]

you're thinking like more= better, we've come to a point when maximum capacity isn't needed anymore to provide all the goods and resources needed to live an healthy and fulfilling lifestyle. basically work will only be for sex havers and girls and everyone else will have minimum resources to live decently

no we haven't lmao

if tomorrow everyone who didn't want to work stopped society as we know it would begin a slow descent into ruin

 

[the BULL]

no we haven't lmao

if tomorrow everyone who didn't want to work stopped society as we know it would begin a slow descent into ruin

lol in italy there are already a shitton of people not working and it all still functions
we could live in recession for 10 years and we would still all mog king of 1950 in life quality
happiness > overall wealth
and obv there will still be enough ppl that will want to work and earn more than a neetbuxer

 

[Prettyboy]

They are both wrong but in a different manner. EMH believers are just harmless dumb people. Communists on the other seeks to destroy everything in their path

 

[Harold O'brien]

lol in italy there are already a shitton of people not working and it all still functions
we could live in recession for 10 years and we would still all mog king of 1950 in life quality
happiness > overall wealth
and obv there will still be enough ppl that will want to work and earn more than a neetbuxer

it's like 10% and I'm sure the welfare is not generous

if welfare was generous and the narrative shifted to optional work then this would increase dramatically and society would begin to become shit

 

[the BULL]

it's like 10% and I'm sure the welfare is not generous

if welfare was generous and the narrative shifted to optional work then this would increase dramatically and society would begin to become shit

you must look at employment rate not unemployment rate
the employment rate is like 60%, 40% of ppl already don't work, and few of them are in the workforce.

 

[Harold O'brien]

you must look at employment rate not unemployment rate
the employment rate is like 60%, 40% of ppl already don't work, and few of them are in the workforce.

it's 9.8% (% of labour force unemployed) according to latest data from the worldbank

 

[the BULL]

it's 9.8% (% of labour force unemployed) according to latest data from the worldbank

dude i just said that it doesn't matter. employment rate is what matters, ppl don't even enter the workforce.

 

[n0rthface]

Both are mentally ill

 

[Harold O'brien]

dude i just said that it doesn't matter. employment rate is what matters, ppl don't even enter the workforce.

the italian welfare system is convoluted af

but there is no welfare for people who just don't want to work or can't find work. only for those who get dismissed and have paid national insurance for a while. so my point stands

 

[the BULL]

the italian welfare system is convoluted af

but there is no welfare for people who just don't want to work or can't find work. only for those who get dismissed and have paid national insurance for a while. so my point stands

in italy we have welfare for people who don't want to work if they offer you a job you can just refuse

 

[Deleted member 17791]

Probably communists. At least you can have a functioning economy based on little to no gov intervention, socialist economies just break down.

 

[Harold O'brien]

in italy we have welfare for people who don't want to work if they offer you a job you can just refuse

is this wrong then?

An overview of Italy’s welfare system

Policy in Practice's Giovanni Tonutti looks at how Italy’s welfare system compares to the UK and what changes the 2014 Job Act have brought.

policyinpractice.co.uk

it's hard to find details

 

[incel194012940]

No one seriously believes in efficient markets it’s a mixture of bad faith disingenuous argument and racist dogwhistling.

Communists are unhinged and would probably enjoy clubbing you to death

 

[the BULL]

is this wrong then?

An overview of Italy’s welfare system

Policy in Practice's Giovanni Tonutti looks at how Italy’s welfare system compares to the UK and what changes the 2014 Job Act have brought.

policyinpractice.co.uk

it's hard to find details

it's pretty outdated. it's well known that ppl don't go to work here, it's a main topic on political talk shows. the welfare expences are huge but it is what it is, ppl don't feel satisfied by going to work only to go back home alone.

 

[Deleted member 16380]

Both are dangerous, but "efficient market believers" are COMPLETELY DETACHED FROM REALITY.

Communists are surprisingly good at implementing communism:

"No man - no obstacle to communism"

 

[incel194012940]

it's pretty outdated. it's well known that ppl don't go to work here, it's a main topic on political talk shows. the welfare expences are huge but it is what it is, ppl don't feel satisfied by going to work only to go back home alone.

still accurate? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Basis_of_a_Backward_Society

It was a interesting read

 

[Erik-Jón]

Both are dangerous, but "efficient market believers" are COMPLETELY DETACHED FROM REALITY.

Communists are surprisingly good at implementing communism:

"No man - no obstacle to communism"

Neither it’s me,gushy gushy with a big bushy

 

[Zer0/∞]

Everything is priced in, retard.

 

[the BULL]

still accurate? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moral_Basis_of_a_Backward_Society

It was a interesting read

somewhat yes. you have to include also that wealth and lifestyle gap between groups gets higher and higher, people notice it and feel even less incentive to contribute to society. hypergamy is just the top of the iceberg

 

[Harold O'brien]

No one seriously believes in efficient markets it’s a mixture of bad faith disingenuous argument and racist dogwhistling.

Communists are unhinged and would probably enjoy clubbing you to death

some 100% do

 

[Harold O'brien]

it's pretty outdated. it's well known that ppl don't go to work here, it's a main topic on political talk shows. the welfare expences are huge but it is what it is, ppl don't feel satisfied by going to work only to go back home alone.

I feel like you're a very biased source

I want to see legitimate statistics on unemployment claimants but I can't find them. for the UK i can and it's like just under 5% of working age population. I feel like society would start to break down if this got >25% (which it would with an optional employment narrative)

 

[the BULL]

I feel like you're a very biased source

I want to see legitimate statistics on unemployment claimants but I can't find them. for the UK i can and it's like just under 5% of working age population. I feel like society would start to break down if this got >25% (which it would with an optional employment narrative)

miring that you still didn't get the difference between the meaning of unemployment and employment rate.

 

[Deleted member 17872]

I feel like you're a very biased source

I want to see legitimate statistics on unemployment claimants but I can't find them. for the UK i can and it's like just under 5% of working age population. I feel like society would start to break down if this got >25% (which it would with an optional employment narrative)

Unemployment is different from LDARing.

 

[Harold O'brien]

miring that you still didn't get the difference between the meaning of unemployment and employment rate.

I do but employment rate is not useful for what we're trying to quantify because it includes the whole population. What you want is labour force participation rate but this excludes informal labour, full time parents, housewives/husbands, people wealthy enough they don't have to work etc

So the best statistic is unemployment benefit claimants

 

[Harold O'brien]

Unemployment is different from LDARing.

Exactly so even this statistic would be an overestimate of people just choosing not to work

 

[the BULL]

I do but employment rate is not useful for what we're trying to quantify because it includes the whole population. What you want is labour force participation rate but this excludes informal labour, full time parents, housewives/husbands, people wealthy enough they don't have to work etc

So the best statistic is unemployment benefit claimants

you don't need to be in the workforce the get welfare benefits here that's the thing.
full time parents aren't a thing anymore, informal labour doesn't matter, and wealthy people are only a small fraction.

 

[Harold O'brien]

you don't need to be in the workforce the get welfare benefits here that's the thing.
full time parents aren't a thing anymore, informal labour doesn't matter, and wealthy people are only a small fraction.

you need to be working age population

Yes they are

Yes it does

 

[Harold O'brien]

you don't need to be in the workforce the get welfare benefits here that's the thing.
full time parents aren't a thing anymore, informal labour doesn't matter, and wealthy people are only a small fraction.

Let me ask you this, where do you think resources come from?

People make them . If less people are making resources and more people are trying to claim resources from the government the entire system will collapse. This is evident

 

[the BULL]

you need to be working age population

Yes they are

Yes it does

being a "full time parent" doesn't mean shit, you're just another NEETbux. ppl have children and work
and yeah no shit, so what?? the employment rate is calculated with working age population at the denominator.
the thing is that already A LOT of ppl choose to not to work, there are STILL unemployed people among the workforce, and you're talking about freeriders you have no idea of HOW MUCH WEALTH is actually produced in 2022 and HOW LITTLE STAFF you need to do that.

 

[Harold O'brien]

being a "full time parent" doesn't mean shit, you're just another NEETbux. ppl have children and work
and yeah no shit, so what?? the employment rate is calculated with working age population at the denominator.
the thing is that already A LOT of ppl choose to not to work, there are STILL unemployed people among the workforce, and you're talking about freeriders you have no idea of HOW MUCH WEALTH is actually produced in 2022 and HOW LITTLE PERSONAL you need to do that.

It means someone else (your spouse) is providing for you so you are not reliant on the government.

Informal labour is huge and not included, the definition does seem to vary between total population and working age population but oecd uses wap so that is probably what I'd go with

Regardless, this is all superfluous. The only statistic that matters for the point I'm trying to make is unemployment benefit claimants. If someone gets resources another way that is completely fine

 

[Mastermind]

Capitalism is a glorified scam that once worked so it has to be good

 

[the BULL]

It means someone else (your spouse) is providing for you so you are not reliant on the government.

Informal labour is huge and not included, the definition does seem to vary between total population and working age population but oecd uses wap so that is probably what I'd go with

Regardless, this is all superfluous. The only statistic that matters for the point I'm trying to make is unemployment benefit claimants. If someone gets resources another way that is completely fine

spouse that pays for you = you're a female or a chad (females and chads go to work)
and if ppl can afford to stay at home while their parents pay for them with past wealth it means they aren't needed in the workforce. i really couldn't give a shit if my laziness (which is not really laziness but more the fact that i don't want to deal with certain low energy ugly scrubs) is going to cost the 10 billions corporate bosses some millions, if the government can't afford sanitary expenses or provide public transport (if you aren't healthy enough you should die because natural selection and bikes are a thing and produced in a copious amount, you really don't need to go that far away from home that's just something you think you need) etc. etc. as a doomer male going to work for 2 pennies = cuck. the rich and beatiful must pay the ugly and poor, it's simple.

 

[the BULL]

@Harold O'brien the problem with economists like you is that you only think about numbers. happiness can't be quantified with GDP

 

[Deleted member 18849]

A better question would be:

Who is more retarded? Communists or religious sheep?

 

[the BULL]

not to mention that if i came to work i would get automatically get treated better than you because taller bigger and more gl @Harold O'brien i could literally keep ranting like a monkey and i would still be higher ranked than you in your office

 

[Rabbi]

Neoliberals, 100%, communists at least have some good takes regarding some topics outside of economics, while neoliberals are just full-on retarded.

Communism is naiive utopianism a classless, moneyless, stateless society? How the fuck do you have a moneyless society? You've devolved into the barter system. How do you respond to supply and demand without a market?

 

[the BULL]

@Harold O'brien when you get mogged in your workplace by someone like me and suddenly females start treating you like shit you will agree with corporate socialism too.