Leaderboard

Chile should be fine. From what I heard, Milton Friedman fixed your economy and now, chile has something that resembles the free market. As long as a country is not a welfare state, migration is not an issue.

let's divide ourselves up please pick a side which will it be the left or the right? despite how i've tried i can't seem to find a side to call mine mainstream media lies a political debate is mud slinging and hate heaven forbid they learn how to state their ideas and opinions in a respectful way and support all their claims like they're building a case both sides want my money so they can spend frivolously while piling on top of unfunded liabilities 20 trillion in debt how bad can it get? our future generations will never forget we loaded them down with perpetual debt they didn't even get to vote on it yet all just so we could get things for "free" in the here and the now and live irresponsibly i want freedom and peace let's stop going to war and let's take care of our poor voluntarily though, taxation is force Matthew Ingram

There are sweatshops already in the UK, paying below the minimum wage. Similar corruption in agriculture, "if" you're connected you can sometimes get around taxes. In Manchester, Primark(a low cost retailer) was purchasing clothing from sweatshops there. Had a German ancestor come to work in Britain in the textile industry pre 1914(now all gone). Steel manufacture gone, highest electric prices(tax) in Europe. @Goldenages Some children worked under contract in merchant houses, York being one popular place. Watched a BBC documentary about it called "Children of the middle-ages". An example of a contract mentioned no Drinking at the Tavern, no fornicating with the women of the house, no dice. Under pain of having the contract double from 12 years to 24.

Yes. But with what right does the state have a monopoly for this? There was an enormous rise in wages and wealth. And yes, industrialization does not start with turbine blades and nuclear power plants. I just know the history in Europe - it started with cloth and clothes. Before the first factorys were built all clothes were handmade, and poor people wore them till they decayed on the body, cause they were expensive. So the first shirts, trousers etc. had to be produced cheap, simply because in the beginning there was nobody who could afford a high price. But within years and a few decades both wages and wealth grew, and in Paris opened the first big store, Le Bon Marche , still existing today In this first decades the middle class came into existence. Growth and competiton between corporations was so intense that the wages rose because there was a shortage, thus a high demand, for workers. Thats the normal way when the state does not enforce low skilled migration, just to claim thereafter that we all are responsible for so many poor people and of course have to pay. Child labour was the norm throughout the whole history. Before the industrial revolution a child could work in agriculture, cadge, starve, or steal. Then they could work in factorys, as soon as wages were high enough for the parents to take care of their childs, child labour came to an end and better education could start. It was - and is - capitalism who freed the poor. And it was - and is - capitalism who produces wealth, and as soon as there is wealth the Socialists come and claim it is their merit. Why weren´t there any Socialists in the middle ages? I mean, circumstances were really terrible back then. Today, with so much low skilled migration in a more and more demanding work environment, of course there is low demand for this kind of work and of course wages cannot rise. But thats an effect of a state policy and not an effect of the free market. Before 1914 in Europe, you did not need any passport to travel from one country to another. You did not need any documents to get hired abroad, if a company needed you they hired you. Despite lunatic Kings and Emperors economical freedom was unrivaled high in pre war Europe, and til the moment the government started propaganda there was no hate between countries. regards Andi

On November 6th, 2018, 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 33 seats in the Senate are up for election. It would be a shame if someone organised the base and made sure key people in opposition to Trump's agenda didn't get re-elected.

A response to the recent video Is Capitalism The Real Problem? - REBUTTED! "If we gonna say capitalism promotes inequality, then we must believe or accept that human beings are inherently equal to begin with." (that moment in video, if you want to check out the context). It's a false argument. Human beings might be unequal, and capitalism doesn't create, but aggravate the inequality. "There is this natural inequality in the species, and capitalism does not promote or enhance that, that is just a natural result of allowing private property and free trade, therefore allowing the resources to accumulate towards those who are either the hardest-working, or the most able." (link to that moment) This is also a false argument. If we take the ancient savage world, where the mightiest rule, and you can have only the property you can hold and protect from other brute's claims, we will see that natural inequality plays out into a very different society and different world. What capitalism does is that it strips those brutes of their physical power to abuse others, and instead gives power to the most talented and smartest ones (Stephan admits that IQ plays a huge part in success in a capitalistic society). Then, capitalism enhance this inequality, by giving money (aka "pure" resources), which smart people use like magicians use raw magic force to invoke and enforce their will onto the world and society. Basically, through money and free trade and contracts, smart people use not only their own abilities (which are unequal to others), but also use the abilities of other people. This is how capitalism enhances the inequality. But is that a bad thing? Well, Stephan insist, that those smart people are also hard-working, and through their talent multiplied by hard work they achieve their success. Here is where it looks a bit Utopian to me. Smart people are not perfect. Some of them are prone to exploitation, cheating whenever they can get away with it and so on. Others can be honest in their delusions, believing that they make a better world, and only after the disaster happened they realized what they have done. Power corrupts. Power upscale your mistakes into disasters. Does Capitalism offer any safety system from such things? For now I don't see that, and people turn to government for safety. Of course, government screws them even harder, but its promises are so sweet and, like an abusive boyfriend, it keeps promising that it won't hit them next time. I really appreciate what Stephan is doing, but in his videos he talks about Capitalism as a way to get more opportunities, while most of people (for now) are much more interested in reducing all the possible threats. I know, "Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one", but let's face it, in a society where "freedom of speech" protesters are outnumbered by SJW 10 to 1 those arguments ain't gonna fly. "And of course people feel, that corporations are, basically, corrupt. Is that because they independently studied all of the stuff?" (link to that moment) Also, I admit, that now I am under the influence of The Dictator's Handbook (here is the short summary done by CGP Grey), an academic research that it proves, that big capitalistic companies are not protected from the very same corruption that erodes the governments of the world. It describes how smart people, through manipulation and persuasion and coercion (and not through talent and hard work) can and will cheat and ruthlessly exploit people to get private benefits for themselves and their cronies. So no, Capitalism won't save society from them. At least, I'm yet to find the proof it will.