Nah

''I know a black person who have done a master in quantum physics''

anecdotal evidence is worthless.

''The USSR's economy grew rapidly for decades''

topkek

''made the living standards rise tremendously compared to Russia before the revolution''

citation needed

''command economies become an ever-increasingly plausible alternative to the unjust anarchy of capitalism''

prove it

''technology will be so advanced we can transition from socialism to communism and have distribution based on need''

MUH POST-SCARCITY

even if it was possible why would it be beneficial?

''should be fixed''

why?

why should we deal with them at all?

''^If we do not deal with them they will attack us for real or supposed racism.''

why is that a problem? They'll attack us regardless.

''This culture has to be fixed''

blacks are our natural enemy.

why?

now you're speaking in circles. Why are you opposed to genocide?

"anecdotal evidence is worthless."
Paugers made a claim that applied to all black people. In that case an anecdote contrary to his claim would disprove it.

''made the living standards rise tremendously compared to Russia before the revolution''

"citation needed"
The USSR in 1990 was a major superpower, had sent men into space, launched satellites, space stations, universal education and healthcare, very low unemployment, life expectancy comparable to USA and for some years earlier, higher, and was many times richer than Russia before the revolution. If you're not aware of these facts I'm just sorry for you, I know the burden is really on me to provide sources in a discussion but I don't care enough for your denial to do that.

''command economies become an ever-increasingly plausible alternative to the unjust anarchy of capitalism''
"prove it"
It makes no sense to ask for proof that one economic system becomes more plausible than another - you don't understand the meaning of "proof" if you can expect that. Proof demonstrates something with 100% certainty - that's impossible in economics, even in most scientific branches - only theoretical mathematic relations can be 'proven'.
It is obvious however that as technology becomes more advanced, the old arguments against communism based on human greed become irrelevant, because machines and AIs can take over the human work and help in economic planning as well. If economic planning wasn't possible due to humans, as some liberals say, the increasing processing power of computers and efficient communication/data transmission of modern information technology render that argument increasingly obsolete.

"MUH POST-SCARCITY

even if it was possible why would it be beneficial?"

Why it would be beneficial to satisfy people's needs so they can live happy lives and pursue their dreams rather than let a bunch of greedy parasites siphon the wealth of workers to become billionaires while millions of people live in poverty, are homeless, have problem affording basic food, clothing and shelter or medicine? Hmmmmmmmmm.......

''In that case an anecdote contrary to his claim would disprove it.''

nope

''The USSR in 1990 was a major superpower, had sent men into space, launched satellites, space stations, universal education and healthcare''

none of those tell me anything about the standard of living for the average Ivan.

''very low unemployment''

citation needed

'' life expectancy comparable to USA and for some years earlier, higher''

quantity doesn't equate to quality.

''and was many times richer than Russia before the revolution''

see the 2nd statement

''If you're not aware of these facts I'm just sorry for you, I know the burden is really on me to provide sources in a discussion but I don't care enough for your denial to do that.''

''I can't provide any so I'll just insult you.''

''It makes no sense to ask for proof that one economic system becomes more plausible than another''

why?

''It is obvious however that as technology becomes more advanced, the old arguments against communism based on human greed become irrelevant, because machines and AIs can take over the human work and help in economic planning as well. If economic planning wasn't possible due to humans, as some liberals say, the increasing processing power of computers and efficient communication/data transmission of modern information technology render that argument increasingly obsolete.''

No citation that we'll ever achieve post-scarcity.

''Why it would be beneficial to satisfy people's needs so they can live happy lives and pursue their dreams rather than let a bunch of greedy parasites siphon the wealth of workers to become billionaires while millions of people live in poverty, are homeless, have problem affording basic food, clothing and shelter or medicine? Hmmmmmmmmm....... ''

''I'd rather have an endless number of miserable people born on an increasingly polluted and crowded planet because we can!''

10/10 plan commie

''I hate killing people.''

weakness

nope

If you claim all black people are stupid and one black people isn't stupid, the claim is false. It's pretty simple.

''I can't provide any so I'll just insult you.''

you wrote

begone commie

so if you need niceness try changing how you approach others.
Nope I can't provide a source at hand, if you dispute them and are interested in those claims I suggest you look them up in your reliable sources of choice yourself, I don't care so much if you believe them or not.

''very low unemployment''

citation needed

Unemployment 1-2% in 1990 http://www.theodora.com/wfb1991/soviet_union/soviet_union_economy.html
Note also the GDP and if you're interested, maybe look up and compare to the inflation-adjusted GDP per capita of Russia in 1914

why?

Read my post again

No citation that we'll ever achieve post-scarcity.

I argued for the case

''I'd rather have an endless number of miserable people born on an increasingly polluted and crowded planet because we can!'

Pathetic strawman

^ deflecting

If you guys want to continue an actual discussion, you really need to stop feeding the trolls (KK2nd and speng), and just downvote any trollish comments without replying to them. By engaging them, you just feed them and they continue to reply with disingenuous troll comments.

Matbe Ann didnt have a sex-ed and basic budget classes.

Maybe Ann shouldn't have had kids period. If she doesn't have a husband or wife, she shouldn't be having kids and raising them in a one parent household. And Ann doesn't exist in the form described; currently she's on welfare and doesn't need a partner to help raise the kids.

The big problem with the proud defenders of Misses is that they just see piles of money and that if ones has it, it certainly worked hard for it!

The big problem with the proud defenders of Marx is that they see big piles of money and say "Hey! That's mine, give it to me or I'll shoot you!" You're just bandits with a facade of charity.

So let's just leave the poor and sick die, we're teaching them a lesson.

No let's stop enabling awful behavior, that causes all these problems.

Btw, if post scarcity happens, I would probably review my opinions regarding economics

The big problem with the proud defenders of Marx is that they see big piles of money and say "Hey! That's mine, give it to me or I'll shoot you!" You're just bandits with a facade of charity.

A capitalist who employs workers to produce e.g. a chair and then sell the chair, make a profit by taking surplus value created by the workers - they created more value than they're paid for. Now in principle, of course some money is also needed to make new investments and so on, however, in capitalism we see people who take this surplus value and fly off to Cayman Islands or buy a gigantic beach villa to live a life in enormous luxury for value other people created. That's parasitism and needs to be stopped. The don't have legitimacy to have their wealth, so it should be expropriated and used to improve society.

I don't claim any capitalist's wealth is mine, to be spent for my own leisure. My income is among the 5% lowest in Denmark, my apartment is less than 30 square meters, I wear the same clothes as I did 3 years ago, last year I donated 300 USD worth to charity, do I need more? No, but we have people who are homeless, ill people waiting for treatment, cuts in education, long waiting lists for student apartments because not enough are being built and many other problems to solve, that I prioritize over the capitalists keeping their illegitimately obtained wealth. Nobody can work so hard they deserve to be a billionaire. Maybe around a millionaire if you work extremely hard, like those in factories in Asia who work for 70 hours a week and live in a cardboard box because capitalists took most of the value they created. Billionaire is total nonsense and just shows how absurd the system of capitalism is.

Edited 9/26/2016 18:53:31

I am not a marxist, far from that actually. I aknowlage capitalism has it' sur merits and works far better than USSR socialism did. My problem with it is that it creates far worse problems than just income gap but also meritocracy "gaps". A rich kid will have more chances than a poor kid and a french will have more opportunities than a nigerian, this is the big problem of capitalism, added with a laxism of regulaltion that can only work if consumers are fully educated about the products then consume, it ruins itself.

After that, I do not believe that it is sustainable in the future, more people with a ever growing average consumption per person added to less ressources due to climats change is just unsustainable in a medium term span. Unless we find a new system to use ressources more efficiently and fairly, we should see soon enough a total collapse of the planet and the species living in it.

A capitalist who employs workers to produce e.g. a chair and then sell the chair, make a profit by taking surplus value created by the workers - they created more value than they're paid for. Now in principle, of course some money is also needed to make new investments and so on, however, in capitalism we see people who take this surplus value and fly off to Cayman Islands or buy a gigantic beach villa to live a life in enormous luxury for value other people created. That's parasitism and needs to be stopped. The don't have legitimacy to have their wealth, so it should be expropriated and used to improve society.

The worker signed a contract with the factory owner. The factory owner provides a place to work, equipment, among other things in exchange for the worker either making the full chair or a part. That's a voluntary interaction based on cooperation, not a parasitical interaction based on one member being predatory.

I don't claim any capitalist's wealth is mine, to be spent for my own leisure. My income is among the 5% lowest in Denmark, my apartment is less than 30 square meters, I wear the same clothes as I did 3 years ago, last year I donated 300 USD worth to charity, do I need more? No, but we have people who are homeless

How about you and a bunch of like minded folk start a worker owned business? You can hire homeless folk, donate profits to charity and live as plainly as you wish.

ill people waiting for treatment

From 1965 to 1989 healthcare expenditures rose by 224 percent. The number of hospital beds per 100 folk lowered by 44 percent, and the number of occupied hospital beds fell by 15%. The costs per patient-day rose by about 24-fold.

cuts in education

Government spending in education has made college fees raise to huge numbers.

long waiting lists for student apartments because not enough are being built

Way too many folk are going to college, courtesy of the fine warlords we call leaders.

Nobody can work so hard they deserve to be a billionaire.

If you can make deals with tens of thousands of workers and provide services to millions of common folk, you deserve what you make.

Maybe around a millionaire if you work extremely hard, like those in factories in Asia who work for 70 hours a week and live in a cardboard box because capitalists took most of the value they created

Did the capitalists enter their factories and businesses and take their money from them, or did they create contracts?

A rich kid will have more chances than a poor kid and a french will have more opportunities than a nigerian, this is the big problem of capitalism,

Sixty years ago, South Korea was a third world rural dumpster fire, North Korea was higher ahead in living standards even. Would you advise regulated protectionism or deregulated free trade?

we should see soon enough a total collapse of the planet and the species living in it.

No the reptilians will save us

I am not a marxist

Prove it

''I am not a marxist

Prove it''

can't prove a negative

Prove it, profligate

This thread is really hard to follow when you guys keep downvoting the opposition.

This thread is really hard to follow when you guys keep downvoting the opposition.

If there are comments you think are improperly downvoted, please upvote them. Likewise, please downvote comments which detract from the quality of the thread. Here again are Fizzer's guidelines for how/when to up/downvote (see the [?] below the thumb buttons):

You should upvote or downvote based on whether you think the general WarLight community would find the content of this post interesting, enjoyable, or useful. Be careful not to let your own prejudices affect your voting.

Edited 9/26/2016 21:09:18