You cannot accumulate wealth without immoral practices (minus lottery wins). Someone down the line will always be exploited. From wage slave workers, to literal exploitation of 3rd world slaves. From selling out, to selling data. From ripping other people's ideas, to ripping your own people. No single man needs 50 billion Dollars in his bank account. It's selfish nepotism. Imagine how much you could help the less priviledged people with such a massive amount of money.
Justify this!
Other urls found in this thread:
anamnesisjournal.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
Ur right.
Profits are unearned money, BY DEFINITION.
Profiteering is a jewish hack, much like usury, that allows unimaginable wealth accumulation far beyond necessity and far beyond the worth of its possessor's labor.
If you doubt this then just consider that it's jews who benefit most from this practice. Eventually profiteering polarizes wealth to such an extremity that you end up looking like that soulless concrete shantytown dump called LA.
> inb4 b-b-but muh market forces!!
Didn't Hitler say the economy should serve man, not the other way around?
Stop serving (((mammon))) you divided cucks.
True. That is why artel is the only justified form of private property.
Didn't (((they))) invent interest rates, and that made Jesus so mad that he got mad when he saw this?
they even look like supervillains
>moralist argument
your morality is a spook, sorry m8
Capitalism isn't immoral, but OP is a faggot
"Treat others as you want to be treated."
>Capitalism
works better than communism.
If it's left unregulated or if it's too regulated than it doesn't work as it should.
Capitalism is just as bad as communism, lucky for you this board is full of people who understand that there's a third way.
Dude, check out LA.
It's a fucking Soviet-tier dump of a city.
Difference is, should people be left to make immoral choices by their owm free will or have a gun to their face if they don't do what Big Brother says?
You can analyze Bezos' position from any angle. In 10 years his whole body will be deflating and shriveling like a prune as he wakes up in a existential hungover and starts donating money to African kids wondering what the fuck was it all for.
Everyone started out working their way up from nothing. What you see is the product of decades, sometimes centuries of wealth accumulation. You either build a future for your grandchildren the hard way, or ingratiate yourself with the ones who already put in the work.
become a natsoc already, kick out the jews
You don't know how Soviet union was.
Immoral choices don't occur in a vacuum.
If your selfish choices are harming others, then you really do deserve to have a gun stuck in your face.
You have monetary socialism not capitalism. In true capitalist society(unregulated interest rates) 99% of population would starve to death
>Everyone started out working their way up from nothing.
That's the biggest lie you americans ever invented. The "American Dream" is fake news. Notice how most billionaires came from a priviledged background, essentially using their father's wealth to create their own businesses?
>Someone down the line will always be exploited.
So you rather hand over your rights and expect not to be.
I've been to Eastern Europe.
Let's not pretend a place like LA, a place capitalism produced, is anything but a shantytown dump of a broken shithole.
In a way it must suck to be rich... the more you have, the more you lose when you die.
I hear he's investing in life-prolonging technologies.
LA was once a beautiful white city. It only became a shantytown after it was invaded by a horde of illegal mexicans.
>immoral
>exploitation
>data
>ideas
>needs
>nepotism
>privileges
Spookiest post I've ever seen.
And nothing would work.
Essentially a jewish wet dream.
>You cannot accumulate wealth
>Bezos pic
Stopped reading there.
He doesn't "accumulate wealth". He created his own company and it's all he owns. All his wealth consists of Amazon shares.
...because of capitalism
How much money do you need to live a happy life?
Because of not enforcing border security because Democrats wanted third world voters.
Bezos (and Zuckerberg, Soros, Brin, Warren Buffet, etc) is an anti-free-market SJW who supports Democrats. Justify why your platform is supported by the very people you say you want to leverage it against.
Digits of truth. Capitalism and Communism are the two sides of the jewish coin.
Capitalism hasn't existed in Western Civilization in over a century.
"Generally speaking, the protectionist system today is conservative, whereas the Free Trade system has a destructive effect. It destroys the former nationalities and renders the contrast between proletariat and bourgeois more acute. In a word, the Free Trade system is precipitating the social revolution."
-Karl Marx
amazon warehouses are fucked up to work at
>It's selfish nepotism
How is one man accumilating wealth Nepotism? Are you a retard? Or just dont know definitoin of words?
Capitalism isn't in the constitution.
I said it goes back generations. At some point, someone worked their ass off to produce a surplus that was used to improve the next generation. Some people squander their inheritance and go back to zero. Some make safe investments and pass on small gains. Some take big risks and position their kids to start life with a good education and capital to build on.
Coz capitalism and low cost labor
> border security
Isn't that government intervention in the market?
Yup. It's slavery. Period.
did it really tho???
It's usually a good idea to not take economic advice from a smelly bum who never worked a day in his entire life.
We see it every day. If anyone ever wonders why you have Jews both on the extreme libertarian and the extreme communist side and how it could be that the same people can be found at such seemingly opposing ends of the political spectrum: they're pursuing the same goal. Capitalism is the tool to destroy nations, borders, cultures, languages, races, etc. in order to prepare mankind for the Communist revolution.
>You cannot accumulate wealth without immoral practices
>You don't NEED your money
>Imagine how much you could help people by stealing his money
Okay, let's assume he manages to liquidate amazon whilst keeping all its value and actually gets 50 billion bucks. Now let's divide that to the bottom 150 million of the US.
That's a 333 bucks paycheck. Which probably would have no effect due to inflation and how the economy works since they are just as productive as before and will be trying to buy the same limited resources.
it works the other way around
when the jew is on the bottom he wants (((communism)))
once the jew is on top he wants (((capitalism)))
Fortunes ($2.300.000) dissapear, 70% squandered by the next generation, and the third generation combined only have 10% of that sum left. Wealth is a tool, as are you.
If the internet didn’t exist, he’d be selling books out of a store and driving a 10 year old Volvo wagon
In case you didn't get it: Marx was in favour of free trade. He saw it as a tool to bring forth the Communist revolution. The mutt-ification of races, the destruction of borders, languages, cultures, which we perceive every day are the direct result of Capitalism that hasn't been harnessed by the people.
True post except the end, 50 billion dollars under on person is useful according to US gov and other entities that can regulate the shit out of the wealthy and make them lose money. They found that really rich people tend to be long term thinkers with their money, and investing their money into research to create more innovation in the industry because they want to remain the top dog. You need resources to make large leaps in advancement.
That's called a genetic fallacy.
If a hooker told you to stay in school and not do drugs, would she be wrong?
Hypocritical maybe, but not wrong.
Hypocrisy is not s logical fallacy.
Burgers often confuse the two.
Puritanical retards...
Bezos is as self made as they come. He was born to a single mother, valedictorian of his high school and studied engineering in college. He had a variety of jobs in different industries and was a SVP at an elite hedge fund before starting Amazon. He and his family took a huge risk funding Amazon out of their retirement plans. To this day, he still owns 17% of the company he founded and is still chairman & ceo. He pays himself $80k, receives $1 million worth of personal security services and has never paid himself in stock or options.
>amazon warehouses are fucked up to work at
Can you elaborate? I'd like to hear more. Here some big ol titties for your time.
>Wealth is a tool
A tool for what?
>We see it every day.
Yes, trade these days is completely free, and can therefore be held responsible for whatever it is that I don't like.
Answer my question. Did free trade in Marx's day precipitate a social revolution?
just jewgle it mang, workers can't breathe, it's 2000% stress
Now keep in mind, the average dependent person already costs multiple thousand dollars every year. Just the AVERAGE black person is already netting 800 bucks per year in the communistic wealth redistribution organized by the government. And the shittier you are, the more free money you get. The bottom 30% of the black society must cost over 2k each to white people alone.
>Did free trade in Marx's day precipitate a social revolution?
Did Marx name a date? No, he described a process. And that process is still happening.
>Marx saw the constant need for the revolutionizing of the of instruments of production as inevitable under capitalism, and this in turn brought society into a continual state of flux, of “everlasting uncertainty and agitation,” which distinguishes the “bourgeoisie epoch from all other ones.” The “need for a constantly expanding market” means that capitalism spreads globally, and thereby gives a “cosmopolitan character” to “modes of production and consumption in every country.” This in Marxist dialectics is a necessary part of destroying national boundaries and distinctive cultures as a prelude to world socialism. It is capitalism that establishes the basis for internationalism. Therefore, when the Marxist declaims against “globalization” he does so as rhetoric in the pursuit of a political agenda; not from ethical opposition to globalization per se.
>[...] national industries are being destroyed, self-sufficiency is being undermined, and “we have… universal inter-dependence of nations.” Likewise in the cultural sphere, where “national and local literatures” are displaced by “a world literature.” The result is a global economic culture, and even a global human, detached from all bonds of geographic and cultural loci, as lauded by apologists for globalization such as G Pascal Zachary. A type of nomad is emerging who serves the interests of an international economy wherever s/he is required.
due to the fact value is subjective, and time’s often considered the most valuable commodity (time is most valuable), can make an argument people with most time on their hands are the wealthiest people. this makes bums the greediest capitalists on the planet.
>Brazilian racist against black people
race has always been used by capitalists as a wedge to divide working class people who are natural allies. Just as the white sharecropper turns to his friends and says "im poor, but at least im not black", the Brazilian slum dweller may turn to his fellow workers and say "at least im not indio".
Stop getting cucked, smart people care about money and power, not skin color
I'm not a fan of jeff.
But it's his money faggot, fuck off.
When you steal someone's purse, is it then your purse?
If you are a true communist, you cannot eat anything anymore, because it is immoral to eat plants, which you are exploiting the hard labour of.
That is how retarded communism is.
Would it kill you to cite your sources?
Anyway, you have still failed to provide adequate proof. Everything you have said/quoted has been vague and general, and unless you are a liar, you will substantiate the argument (that free trade is conducive to social revolution) with facts.
Find a place that had/has a free trade policy (and if it's not totally free, qualify to what extent it is free) and had/has a social revolution (qualify this too), then attempt to correlate these two. Be precise and operational in your language; no spooks allowed.
did Marx actually encourage the break down of cultural and national identity in order to hasten revolution, or did he just say it was inevitable under capitalism? Im pretty sure it was the second one
I'm not a communist.
A substitute for trust. If you see a great company or brilliant inventor you can make other people do things for them. You can support their vision for changing the world and profit with them, while factories and employees can pay the mortgage and not gamble on projects.
They are this way to start with due to capitalism. Capitalism requires an underclass below the workers to scare the workers and keep them in line, this underclass must be kept alive to fill this function. You cant have capitalism with out a welfare state, under socialism everyone is employed.
How much could I? Sure. How much would I? Not a goddamn bit. Plus I'd donate whatever was needed to causes that I actually do believe in. Make sure a dem never again takes the whitehouse or major majority.
>race has always been used by capitalists
Then explain to me why corporativists and billionaires are always race denying liberals and why believing in races will get you fired from any job and even arrested without bail in place like Brazil.
> wants sources for a direct quote
silly burger
Why do you need to subsitute trust?
>this is what cuckservatives believe
You're right, it hasn't. It's been replaced with a more (((globalist))) friendly financial model
>They are this way to start with due to capitalism
Wrong. What "they are" is directly defined by their genes. We live in extremely genetic deterministic times. All information is widely available, all food and nutrition is easily accessible. The main factor is genes, and most of the remaining environment, guess what, it's the genes of your caretakers which tend to be extremely close to yours.
>Capitalism requires an underclass below the workers to scare the workers and keep them in line
That's actually completely fucking retarded and it's something you made up on the spot as a 13yo communist. The more white people are the majority, the more libertarian and free market a place is, but get this, the higher the IQ of a population as a whole, and the more homogeneous it is, the less wealth inequality exists, so you get more liberty and capitalism, whilst getting more equality within whites. Countries with more genetic differences like Brazil will show up worst on the inequality index precisely because of the IQ gaps between populations. As the US becomes less and less white, you'll see inequality constantly rising, you can complain about muh gapitalism but you'd just be deluding yourself.
Source is an essay on Oswald Spengler's criticism of the Communist Manifesto, you could have found out yourself by googling it though.
anamnesisjournal.com
What American "conservatives" don't get is that there is nothing conservative about becoming mouthpieces to capital and ignoring the destructive tendencies of capitalism.
Explain the mechanism then of how IQ gaps between races translates into wealth inequality that does not fall along racial lines?
>Eastern Europe is like LA
In what dimension is that?
No, he actually encouraged it.
>Generally speaking, the protectionist system today is conservative, whereas the Free Trade system has a destructive effect. It destroys the former nationalities and renders the contrast between proletariat and bourgeois more acute. In a word, the Free Trade system is precipitating the social revolution. And only in this revolutionary sense do I vote for Free Trade.21
Marx was actually quite ruthless - not any different from the average Libertarian who would oppose any market interventions - except that he had a different end goal. Or rather, he was actually far-sighted enough to see the end-goal of Capitalism but saw no need to intervene, as he believed it would end in a revolution when it reached the boiling point. Alleviating the suffering of the worker, saving small- and mid-tier businesses, any of that was 'reactionist' nonsense to him, that would only delay the inevitable and keep back 'progress'.
>The lower middle class, the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, the artisan, the peasant. All these fight against the bourgeoisie, to save from extinction their existence as fractions of the middle class. They are therefore not revolutionary, but conservative. Nay more, they are reactionary, for they try to roll back the wheel of history. If by chance they are revolutionary, they are so only in view of their impending transfer into the proletariat, they thus defend not their present, but their future interests, they desert their own standpoint to place themselves at that of the proletariat.33
How do you know if an inventor or a company is any good? If someone comes up to your factory and says Ill be building this brilliant thing so can i have 1000 steel sheets, ill pay you when I start earning. If you would apply for a job and they said they'd pay you when they start earning. How do you know what a good idea is. do you have the cashflow to wait an uncertain amount of time for a return on your goods or services? Thats where the investor steps in and tells you, "Its fine, here is your money, go work, go produce, whatever ill or gain transpires is mine to bear.". Rather than trusting that something will pan out, you get cash. And that's pretty valuable.
Nearly all of it is a single valutation, Amazon. It's not as if he can just spend $49 billion and still be a billionaire, short of borrowing against that valutation.
You can actually click on the pic I posted and look for your self. There are also genetic IQ gaps within a population, and on top of IQ there's also the traits of industriousness and the willing to work in risky vocations such as stock options analysis and trade, or engineering constructions that people will trust their lives into.
But of course, all of this is pointless to even throw at you. You clearly had everything you needed right in front of you to reach the rational conclusions yet you didn't.
Capitalism is great. It gives everyone the opportunity to become a millionaire which is much much harder to do under socialism.
youtu.be
>implying lotteries aren't all fixed
A lottery ticker gives everyone the opportunity to become a millionaire. And in fact, for most people a lottery ticket has a greater chance of success.
So now suddenly its 'not just race' but also other stuff, because your theory falls apart the first time someone produces some homeless white guy with an IQ of 140
>So now suddenly
No, it's not "all of a sudden it's other stuff". It has always been the genes. I posted pics, I explained things to you. Races have different genes, populations within a race have different genes.
>your theory falls apart the first time someone produces some homeless white guy with an IQ of 140
It's hilarious how mentally retarded you are. Given how nearly impossible it has been to alter IQ through intervention for the past 50 years, the "homeless to billionaire" overcoming stories usually happen because the guy was already high IQ before he had his 2 months of homelessness.
But the real reason why you're dumb is because this is a notion of population behavior and a single outlier obviously doesn't debunk anything. You might as well go look for some based black men with maga hats to prove me wrong.
Capitalism in itself is not immoral if kept in check. When you have capitalism with a sense of nationalism in it for your countrymen then it works just fine. The problem is what we have today which is outright crony capitalism or you could argue mercantilism where big businesses get special treatment from the government and do anything possible to make a buck. Now the different aspects of capitalism before you start complaining about it dumb meme flag nigger.
“Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole.”
-Karl Marx
:3
Tell me, in which country are black people wealthier. South Africa, a place with major inequality between blacks and whites, a place that was colonized for decades OR Ethiopia, a place that was barely colonized which has much less wealth inequality within the natives?
You make wealth by producing and distributing to populations. Meaning, the more wealth people make, the more wealth the people near them make. This is a fact that remains constantly true for hundreds of years.
Sorry for pointing out that Karl Marx and your anti-libertarian dictators were complete retards.
"Wage slaves" do not exist.
>amazon warehouses are fucked up to work at
Not only warehouses, but even AWS. I'm in IT , I know some shit. This fucker could pay better to his employees, but no. Too greedy.
>just jewgle it mang, workers can't breathe, it's 2000% stress
I dont use google. ill Duck Duck Go it.