Ok, we have those around here. They suck and we get bled out with taxes. I'm for a minimum state for pratical reasons.
We are bound to have more of that with the coming age of technological advancements. I am for free healthcare, but NHS is a poorly managed mess.
Post automatically merged:

Links between technologies and capitalism ?
Competitive market and consumer demands for better life, which includes running your games on better hardware.
 
I'll gladly pay taxes if it means further improving the community I live in

I don't think it is humane or right for a person to pay for healthcare if they are sick, or if they wanna have education and make something of themselves. Person shouldn't be put in debt just to have a shot at fair life

Now, most right wingers I've met are for some reason against that, they all believe in - everyone for themselves. Which is idiotic, you don't grow sense of community and responsibility.

Reason why all billionaires and overall rich people follow people like Trump and Bolsonaro is because they dont tax the rich as much. Everyone wants their own cake and no one can fucking share. Which is why USA is going to shit despite it immense wealth
There is no such thing as free xyz. It's all about tax money. As i said, i'm not against this, but the public services we are offered are shit and we are slaves to draconian laws and taxes. I would rather pay for my stuff and keep my freedom. Free education is a thing thnx to the internet, btw. Taxing the rich actually harms the poor. The rich always find a way to protect their money.
Free services is called charity. It should be done out of the good in people's heart. Most right wingers are against that because taxes actually make the overall living costs increase and govs are usually very bad at providing such services. Private services are usually>>>public ones.
Post automatically merged:

Tito was a tyrannical ruler. Another chef in an era of chefs. He somehow managed to sit his big ass among the Non-Aligned Movement. But he's no different than the others.




Links between technologies and capitalism ?
industrial revolutions,bruh?
 
Last edited:
Even hitler had Followers , Logiko doesn't.
People ganging up on him here
Can't you see what he's putting us through? Don't act like he's the victim.:mihugh:
Post automatically merged:

There is no such thing as free xyz. It's all about tax money. As i said, i'm not against this, but the public services we are offered are shit and we are slaves to draconian laws and taxes. I would rather pay for stuff and keep my freedom. Free education is a thing thnx to the internet, btw. Taxing the rich actually harm the poor. The rich always find a way to protect their money.
Free services is called charity. It should be done out of the good in people heart. Most rich wingers are against that because taxes actually make the overall living costs increase and govs are usually very bad at providing such services. Private services are usually>>>public ones.
How does a world work where robots and AI took up majority of the jobs though? Where does the capital for potential investment come from and how would you as a sole entrepreneur be able to compete versus monstrous monopolies?
 
Tito was a tyrannical ruler. Another chef in an era of chefs. He somehow managed to sit his big ass among the Non-Aligned Movement. But he's no different than the others.
If Tito wasn't tyrannical as he was Yugoslavia would be much much much worse than it was under him. Lesser of two evils.
Would not call him tyrannical, he's one of the rare ones known as "benevolent dictator".

Well actually Russia got away from communism relatively well, because they sort of taxed the nations it controlled. Lots of resources shipped to Russia, everyone else suffered a worse fate.
What do you mean? Russia was utterly miserable for years and years after the USSR broke apart.
 
If Tito wasn't tyrannical as he was Yugoslavia would be much much much worse than it was under him. Lesser of two evils.
You mean as it is now ? So much worse ?


Capital and Investment
Nice theory. But anyway it's complicated to counter-argue this when all communist regimes have chosen a strong leader and minimal freedom.

I'll try to use this famous argument : would you be a royalist until late 19th century because Robespierre was scary a century before ?

industrial revolutions,bruh?
Exactly, and I don't believe that industrial revolutions are linked to extravagant rich people existing (for instance)
 
You mean as it is now ? So much worse ?




Nice theory. But anyway it's complicated to counter-argue this when all communist regimes have chosen a strong leader and minimal freedom.

I'll try to use this famous argument : would you be a royalist until late 19th century because Robespierre was scary a century before ?



Exactly, and I don't believe that industrial revolutions are linked to extravagant rich people existing (for instance)
What? The rich guys were the ones that came up with the tech. Industrial revolution allowed for the mass production and distribution of goods and services, which is why we now have wealthy individuals like never before.
 
Would not call him tyrannical, he's one of the rare ones known as "benevolent dictator".
I mean you can argue both, IMO he def ruled with iron fist but it was necessary for Yugoslavia to remain together

You mean as it is now ? So much worse ?
Have you seen Yugoslavia after death of Tito?

Not a theory. Capitalism can generate more income and more needs which further generates need for technological advancement - Which is why West was technologically more advanced than the eastern block.

would you be a royalist until late 19th century because Robespierre was scary a century before ?
What?
 
Top