The wealthy are naturally superior

>tf
>tp
Why are anglos such peasants? Is it in their blood?

i wish politicians lowered the minimum wage so i could find a poorfag job instead of being a NEET that depends on his parents

> It isn't practically sustainable.
Works in my country

nothing works in your country mate

Attached: Sin título.png (1089x863, 106K)

Are you part of the rich or poor class?

have you read any marx? not accusing you of anything but i 100% agree and this seems vaguely marxist. cheers

No, I haven't read any Marx. I do go to university so perhaps I have been memed into being a Marxist socialist as Jow Forums and others seem to believe.

The point is that you seem to think an organization worst than the mafia adds a positive value to people's life when it does the complete opposite.
The quality of life is improving thanks to deregulation and lowering of the tax burden. When you take out the parasite of the land that is the government out of the equation, the only thing holding people back is their own defects and irresponsibility.
The debt is just one of the biggest telling signs that government is an entity of useless incompetent corrupt leeches that can't balance a budget and wouldn't be able to cut it in the private sector.

nah haha it's just a really solid analysis imo, also marx is fun to read, i recommend wage labour and capital. really short but great.

I know you Americans love deregulation but that is just not the answer. Look at your country and what deregulation has allowed Monsanto to do to people and the environment, look at how deregulation has allowed fracking companies to irreparably fuck up your environment, look at how deregulation has made medication is extremely expensive.

In my country (Australia, ignore the flag) deregulation has done nothing but increase the cost of living. Our power prices are higher, our telcos over charge, our insurance companies are the most profitable in the world and our banks have year on year been making so much money they literally coined the term 'super profits' while the give nothing back to the consumer. Recently we changed the laws on media ownership to deregulate it further and all it did was allow Murdoch to buy even more of our media.

You say that deregulation is the answer because the government is evil and yet large companies consistently bend the rules, act immorally or lobby the government to change things in their favor

A lot of factors are oversimplified but you’re mostly correct. Also you forgot the selfish nature or men and the future automisation of future industries.
You can quell slave uprisings by using other slaves as your police force. After all during antiquity they hired slaves as slavehunters so you can see how true human nature is

>With the poor as a slave class, there are no consumers to make money off of
exactly right, and this is why capitalism regulates itself. There is mostly no need for anyone to step into the market to prevent a "slave class" or similar because it is not in the interest of the rich

Capitalism has done nothing to regulate wage growth. At the end of the day the average wage is stagnating while the top 1% year on year are making more money. This is unsustainable because if all the money in the economy is hoarded by a few and kept in off shore accounts, the economy will suffer.
Plus capitalists keep pushing for lower taxes for the top end of town when already tax evasion by the richest people and largest multi national countries is a huge issue.

I would further add, capitalism does nothing to regulate monopolies or duoplolies. Once companies get so big they can buy up all the smaller competitors then the consumer has no choices in the market and must pay whatever the monopoly/duopoly sets their prices as.

there is no problem with the rich getting richer, and the poor usually just stay poor and don't get poorer, and by the way, when we are talking about the poor, they are, at least in the west, not poor at all, only in a relational sense.
And since the market is adjusted to maximum consumtion, the consumer, which is the worker at the same time, will never become too poor. Connecting to this, monopolies usually aren't a problem either as the price can't grow too much or esle the consumer will be unable to consume (and in a global market, monopolies are extremely rare)

The poor may not get poorer when you speak relationally, however that doesn't mean that the amount of people living beneath the poverty line in their country can't increase. This happens when an economy is mismanaged. The rich getting richer is ok as long as they pay their taxes proportionally to what they earn. If that isn't happening then to compensate, the government must increase spending in the economy. With a neo-liberal government, the spending may give short term benefits but ends up back in the pockets of the top end. And the cycle continues which reduces spending power of that nation's currency, can increase inflation and make a country less attractive to investors. Governments can combat this by spending on infrastructure that will create jobs and improve trade or create or improve industry.

In Australia our cost of living is increasing, and because of that retail spending has sharply declined. There is only so much money the rich can siphon until it negatively effects the economy.

I actually agree with most of your points. The government should certainly invest in infrastructure, education and such, it's their job. However, when it comes to the market, the government shouldn't try to moderate it and waste money on it.
Propotional taxes are already a thing in most countries and I don't think that the rich should pay more than they already do. I think you underestimate the positive influence a class of the rich can have. They definetly don't just sit on their money, they invest much, more than the government could ever do, which increases the overall wealth significantly. For example: company comes into new city -> city gets taxes from company -> city has more money to invest