Pic related is me, explain to me why someone incapable of work must starve...

How do I get on disability since simply not being good enough doesn't apparently count as one

Because jews.

>jewish welfare queen
Nah I'm good

It is also very normal for kids of rich parents to lose their parent’s wealth. There is a saying in banking industry: ”from father to son, from son to bank”.

i hear the price in tea in china is a very profitable investment this season

Why do Americans consider any form of solidarity or just social togetherness as a form of robbery or theft? What sort of programming caused you people to be this way? I don't know about you, but when I see my neighbour and he is starving, my first thought is to help him by giving him some of what I have, as I know he would do the same for me. Remove "robbery" from the equation. It's not a matter of other people robbing you. It's the expectation that he would do the same for you in such a situation.

I can respect libertarian ideas like this, but I don't agree with them. Causes far too much division and an overall lack of social unity.

>How do I get on disability since simply not being good enough doesn't apparently count as one

So you are retarded but not retarded enough for disability ,got it.

I don't have friends in high places, so because labor is a buyer's market I get shafted.

The problem is that is just not one person,its millons. And you are not taking into account the reason why your neighboor is starving,how is he starving in a the richest country in the world with a 3% unemployment? if you starve in the USA you deserve.
I dont even know why im telling you this,you are obviously a troll as I can tell by your memeflag,does anyone know how to hide memeflags? I saw a post not long ago but I did not save it.

>Why do Americans consider any form of solidarity or just social togetherness as a form of robbery or theft
Being the most propagandized nation on earth.
Also vidya

>thinking 3% unemployment is ok
y tho
>you deserve
Kill yourself, neoliberal.

Do you know that you will always have unemployment because you there is always going to be people moving from job to job right? You economically illiterate dumbshit.Hayek calculated that in a true free market you have a 2% unemployment from people switching jobs.

And yes,if you are to stupid to take responsability for your life you deserve to be starve.

First of all, the unemployment rate in the US is 4%, not 3%. You also have to consider that the US is an expensive country to live in. Of that figure of employment, how many work minimum-wage jobs? How many work in jobs that offer them bad working conditions, which give little to no holiday time, which provide no insurance for the workers? In the US for example, 44% of the recorded homeless population are actually employed.

> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States

Besides which, the reason for their unemployment is rather irrelevant. The reason most people are unemployed in the Western world is not because they are lazy and refuse to work, it's because there are no jobs, and what little jobs are available are being outsourced to foreign labour. Nobody deserves to starve, and nobody deserves to lose their home because their government doesn't care about them.

> "hey gais hayek said there should be people starving so it's ok lol"

Soviet Union along with other socialist regimes traditionally had 0% unemployment rates. The concept of dying on the street because you don't have enough money to support yourself was about as alien to Russians and people in the Eastern Bloc as aliens themselves. Meanwhile across the Western capitalist world, it was viewed as an ordinary circumstance.

Attached: classic Stalin BTFOs kulaks.gif (290x300, 2.98M)

How long does it take to move from one job to another, anyway? You say adios on Friday, you come in Monday morning at 8am. What kind of shill excuse is this?
>Hayek
Austrian memeonomics is sociopathic moral theology, not a guide to the allocation of resources.
Kill yourself, neoliberal.

>explain to me why someone incapable of work must starve
Explain to me why an object in motion continues to travel at a steady velocity unless it encounters an opposite force.
It's not fucking fair.

Because I'm not choosing to help my neighbor, I'm FORCED to by the threat of violence from the gov't. And, while having one of the highest tax rates in the world, the damn moochers have the gall to say it's not enough and inequality's too high and we need even more taxes and shit.
Man, fuck welfare and everyone on it.

>implying economics = physics
Kek

Yeah but the question here is, why do you view the premise of helping your neighbour as an inherently bad thing? Why do you automatically equate assisting a comrade in need as "big gubmint coming for me"? This is such a stupid Western mentality.

As for the latter end of your argument, you are describing social democracy, or welfare-statism. I am opposed to such a thing. In a socialist state, everyone would work and everyone would receive the benefits of their labour equally. Social democracy is just capitalism without the necessary institutions to integrate socialism, which is why it fails.

Because that's how the universe works. If you can't put any effort into not starving, you die - replaced by those who can.

>Work or die
t. Nature

The real problem isn't that you have to work or die, it's that you have to work for the betterment of a slave owner, as a peasant wageslave, or die. You can't fight nature or the universe. You CAN fight slavers.

Imagine you're in a hypothetical battlefield.
A grenade is thrown at your squad, you can yield to altruism and thrown yourself on the grenade, killing yourself to save your squad.
Alternatively you could take shelter, potentially leading to death or injury to your squad mates, however you'll still be alive. In continuing to live you open up limitless possibilities to continue to do good in the future and save lives later on. In death you forfeit everything.
That's the simplest I can explain the downside of altruism.

If you can post on here then you can work

Altruism benefits communities of people with very similar genetics to each other.

>Imagine you're in a hypothetical battlefield.
But you're not, which invalidates your entire line of reasoning. Stop playing vidya

>Yeah but the question here is, why do you view the premise of helping your neighbour as an inherently bad thing?
No, that's not the question at all (see strawman). The question is, do I want to be forced to give money to a bureaucracy that CONSISTENTLY fucks things up and is bloated with unnecessary cost vs keeping that money and donating it to where I want it to go.
>nb4 "the rich will never do that!
History has my side. Look at the bill and melinda gates foundation, st. Jude's hospital... shut, go to your local soup kitchen.
If I want to donate I'll donate--time, money, whatever. But I'd rather not have the government hold a gun to my head for cash to pay the exorbitant pension fund for the head of human resources at the EPA.
People have a tendency to take care of each other. Not all, but enough to see others taken care of.
You just want to rob me.

t. brainlet who cannot understand allegories

>give money or go to gulag
gee ivan givemedatov, i dont know

Well you're clearly not starving...

Do you know what the word imagine means?

Once again, you are using your own government as a structural basis for your argument. You live under capitalism. My position is that socialism would be an answer to an unequal distribution of wealth and mass poverty and homelessness, unemployment, etc. Capitalism is the cause of this, so it's no surprise that any programs put in place to combat it under capitalism would be bound to backfire and fail. Under socialism, there would be no "rich", as the resources would be equally shared by everyone, eradicating the hierarchical dichotomy of rich/poor.

>I don't have any skills or experience, why don't I have a six figure job yet?

Jow Forums basics

>Who we are against.
youtube.com/watch?v=aUN1I5skKZs
youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4
>What we do. What we want.
youtube.com/watch?v=6cYZ8dUgPuU&list=PLpuT0CHI3dp-1gqn8gu6iVTYIvNuiyCjQ
youtube.com/watch?v=nF_h478fIZo
White supremacist,Nazi,Alt-right among others are just labels given to those who speaks for white people and to those whites who want to preserve their culture,heritage & identity. So situation is like -Die or be the "bad guy"
youtube.com/watch?v=r2_K5koFGRY

Attached: nwo2.png (2604x1712, 2.55M)

>explain to me why someone incapable of work must starve.
Evolution. If you don't believe in evolution then here's Saint Matthew.
>For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. But the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him.
>And throw that worthless servant into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth

What a nice non-argument. I appreciate arguments and responses based on analogies, but not when the analogy in question is so wholly disconnected from the topic at hand. Social ownership of the means of production and the moral quandary of jumping or not jumping on a grenade are two totally identical situations, amirite?

>do I want to be forced to give money
That's the nature of taxes. Taxes do not fund spending. Congressional appropriations create money and taxes destroy it. This is how fiat currencies work.
>to a bureaucracy
In the next breath, will you fetishize the form of government that protects and nurtures a permanent ruling class made of two corporations, and forces you to pledge allegiance to their choice of aristocrat?
>where I want
Grownups do things they don't want to do because they're the right things to do.
>bill and melinda gates foundation
Whose wealth was created by parasiting the art and science of computing, and which mostly funds jew surgeries and Windows for niggers.
Rich people serve their own interests, and they can't be depended upon to serve the public interest just because they happen to coincide occasionally.
>pay for
Well, you don't, because that's not how fiat currencies work.

Yes. Obviously you wish us to believe we're in a hypothetical war, which is questionable at best.

>he actually thinks jobs are gotten through skills and experience
Know how I know you've never worked outside of the service industry?

Thing is though you don't need the state to do that, a close knit homogenous society can use charity as a form of welfare

>we
>I speak for we

Attached: 1531837754630.jpg (670x549, 24K)

It's the distilled essence of self-sacrifice, put into an extreme so you can more easily understand the consequences of your actions.
If you kill yourself, you can't help people.

Liberty lets you help your neighbor if you want to.

>can use
>is a certainty
Sure kid. That's where all you nigger Thatcherites fail.

Why not open with that statement then, instead of the retarded grenade analogy?

We know you're not in the least interested in helping your neighbor because you're a crippledick sociopath. The ONLY "liberty" you're interested in is that to fuck your neighbor over if you want to.

Alright.
Altruism is bad because you can't be altruistic when you're dead, are we happy with that statement?

>muh social Darwinism
This is larp. You should kill yourself for thinking a larp is real.

My point lies in what you just said. Yes, a close-knit homogenous society CAN do that. It doesn't mean it WILL do it. I mean, look at the Western world. Wealthy and prosperous, but despite that you still have mass unemployment, you still have a homeless epidemic, you still have economic instability and you have no social programs to help your own people in need. How will you build this close-knit, homogenous society? How will you ensure there is equality amongst the people? How will you ensure everyone is getting their fair share? Why not build a strong government that will have everyone work and will give to everyone the products of their labour and circumvent the entire issue?

>How will you build this close-knit, homogenous society?

Have to kick out the majority of non-whites first. Otherwise it isn't possible. Communal policies don't work when the commune is full of genetically unrelated people.

There is literally a parapalegic at my work. I have no idea what he does except hang out in his mobile wheel chat thing outside most of the time. But he gets paid.

His arms and legs don’t work but he was able to find employment. I think if he can anyone can.

>He thinks jobs that actually matter aren't.
Know how I know you've never worked?

No it’s the middle class working to pay for you and barely making it. Kys

>why cant we give people who dont work money
sigh...

There were plenty of people on the street in SU or who didn't want to or didn't work, they just weren't there for long as "social parasites" were routinely rounded up and sent to work camps to be worked to death.

But I have. 25 years worth, kiddo. Only two of ten was gotten by cold calling through the "normal" process. The other eight were gotten via networking.
>jobs that matter
Know how I know you think your ability to lick boots and hustle = skill and experience?

Why not? You might need them someday and it'll be cheaper and faster than paying someone to get pregnant and raise a child.

There is a simple solution.

Eat the rich.

Okay, but what happens if the "majority of non whites" protest? How would you arrange this? Where would you send them to? I appreciate the nationalist sentiment, but this idea only sounds well on paper. You have to take many factors into equation when talking about racial unity, such as the very real possibility that a good percentage of your own people, in this case, ethnically white Canadians (British or French) would side against you. You have to consider that opposing nations would declare intense sanctions on your country. You have to expect a rebellion led by the races of people you have targeted for removal. All of this goes against creating a "close-knit, homogenous" society.

Just so you know, I support the idea of ethnically pure nations but as romantic as the notion of "kicking them out" sounds, things would be more complicated than that. To begin with, you would have to enact segregation laws, you would have to make concessions to the affected minorities to entice them to move, you would have to deal with other nations to accept these people and you would also have to alter the political body of the country to have the people in support of your decision to do this.

I like this piece of Western propaganda. I haven't heard this one before.

>Pic related is me, explain to me why someone incapable of work must starve. It's not like rich people have to work as it is

Attached: lib-dumb-commie-DhL0PalX4AMW-lM.jpg (1024x646, 82K)

>Why do Americans consider any form of solidarity or just social togetherness as a form of robbery or theft?
Shitskins. Tell you what, let’s compromise: you agree to try a white ethnostate and I’ll agree to try whatever hippy bullshit economic stuff you want within that state.

In other words, believing the memes the planters created to keep you and them from finding common cause and overthrowing the ruling class.
D&C is so easy with poor people.

Just get a dead end job and work your way up that industry's totem pole.
I went from dishwasher to line cook to kitchen manager, in a span of two years at the same restaurant.
Before that I was like you, I kept getting shit jobs and acting like I was above that, quit the shit jobs and stay broke and stay having to start again from the bottom. I wasted my early twenties, now 30 is getting closer and closer and I'm barely getting my life together.
Stop crying and just do the work.

I am in favour of a white ethnostate, I am merely skeptical of how we would go about achieving this. I mean, Central European countries wouldn't be so difficult to manage since the foreigners in that country are predominantly first generation who came during the migrant crisis but as for the US, you're talking about third-generation foreign races of people who's families have lived in the country for decades (Asians, Hispanics) and some even centuries (Africans).

If you were to go about reverting the demographics, you're looking at least half a century of social programs to incentivise emigration, balkanisation, and a hell of a lot of domestic issues within the different ethnic states. For starters, you would have to place ethnic minorities on a single-child policy and...I don't know man, it's a difficult situation to get out of. I believe it can be done, but it would be difficult. It would require great diplomacy and cooperation between the First World and the Third World in accepting the remigration policy, which could prove difficult considering their history with the West.

Attached: Strasserism.png (1384x1005, 30K)

>Yeah but the question here is, why do you view the premise of helping your neighbour as an inherently bad thing?
No, you are intentionally misquoting the argument.

Helping the needy is an honorable thing. Having the government FORCE you to help them is not.

>cede most of the country
Start your ethno-state in a low-pop area where browns are rare. Then build.

Its not complicated if you are endued with the colonial spirit, user.

Because you are defective
Go to a charity

Taxation is theft. It isn't an American idea, it's a basic logic idea.

Attached: fish slap.jpg (506x345, 52K)

If you ignore social Darwinism, you will suffer the consequences of actual biological Darwinism.

Dysgenics is real.

Attached: 1408624676156_wps_5_World_IQ_graph_jpg.jpg (634x414, 43K)

Please explain why commie nations have to have walls and shoot to kill policies to even stem the stream of people fleeing their wretched hellholes.

Kill yourself, neoliberal.

>Daily Fail
Kill yourself for being a cuck to a meme.

Joke's on you, it's to keep crippledick jews like you OUT.

Also, if you neoliberal jewniggers didn't sabotage every socialist system that threatens to make you look bad, there wouldn't be people trying to get out, would there?
Get your cripple jew dick out of where it's not wanted, boomer.

Ignorance is not an argument.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_(social_offense)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Brodsky

In 1963, Brodsky's poetry was denounced by a Leningrad newspaper as "pornographic and anti-Soviet". His papers were confiscated, he was interrogated, twice put in a mental institution[9] and then arrested. He was charged with social parasitism[13] by the Soviet authorities in a trial in 1964, finding that his series of odd jobs and role as a poet were not a sufficient contribution to society.[7][14] They called him "a pseudo-poet in velveteen trousers" who failed to fulfill his "constitutional duty to work honestly for the good of the motherland".[9] The trial judge asked "Who has recognized you as a poet? Who has enrolled you in the ranks of poets?" – "No one," Brodsky replied, "Who enrolled me in the ranks of the human race?"[9][15] Brodsky was not yet 24.
For his "parasitism" Brodsky was sentenced to five years hard labor and served 18 months on a farm in the village of Norenskaya, in the Archangelsk region

>Earning passive income isn't work
Wow, almost like that's how it was set up to work!
There's no way this isnt bait. sage in all fields

Under socialism even a retard like you would be found something to do, because in socialism everyone must work. Thats the point. The critisizm of capitalism is the capitalists do not work.

Now some people may have problems, and not be able to work so well, thats ok, socialism judges people by their willingness to work, and does not discriminate against people who are just less able to do as advanced tasks. What it does discriminate against, however, are those who are unwilling to work; the capitalists. This is why the capitalists get shot.

Imagine being this assblasted no one, literally NO ONE wants to live in your commie shitholes. Imagine having to build a gigantic wall, not to keep enemies out, but to keep the enslaved population from escaping. Imagine being so assblasted that the wall came down that, almost 30 years later, you're slinging buzzwords on pol because you can't get over how miserably your idiotic experiment failed.

Take a moment to thank God you are not a communist.

Attached: Berlinermauer.jpg (400x300, 152K)

In the Soviet union being unemployed was illegal
Everyone was given job even if they didn't choose one
Like wat

The poor don't starve in our capitalistic system, they get food stamps/EBT.

this

Literally nothing wrong with this. Also, you claimed these supposed people were "worked to death". Thus far, you have provided an isolated example of a lone rootless cosmopolitan who was only sentenced to hard labour, not worked to death. The guy died of a heart attack in America and was awarded a Nobel Prize.

Attached: 6103e61b-7c90-41e6-a695-7675eff32ab2-2.png (1515x687, 328K)

Someone incapable of supporting themselves goes on welfare and/or charity. Of course the government support is grossly inefficient compared to charity, and the government would make things easier if we didn't have to throw out so much food to avoid liability concerns when it could be donated...

Attached: 1515601928283.png (719x740, 117K)

So you are okay with the government forcing an ethnostate on the general population but not the government reinforcing social programs?

As far as I know, the term "taxation is theft" was coined by an American economist who was a libertarian. So yes, it literally is an American idea. The idea of limited government in favour of free markets stems from Americanism.

If earning passive income is not work, then stupid, lazy millennials should have no problem doing it.

Probably has something to do with the fact that at the time of the USSR existing, most of the world was capitalist, and so a natural conflict of interest would arise. Gee, I don't know, why does any country have walls? Why was McCarthyism a thing? Why were there proxy wars fought against the socialist world for the latter half of the 20th Century? Why is Donald Trump planning to build a wall? Is it also to prevent the stream of people fleeing the wretched hellhole?

And I don't mean to strawman here, but it's a little condescending hearing arguments from anti-Communists criticising the Soviet Union's militant nature, especially when I know for a fact most of the people making the arguments would be perfectly fine in looking the other way if their government acted the same way in their interest. Capitalism is parasitic, and the Soviet Union wanted to protect their people from this parasitism.

those that do not earn their worth do not deserve to fruits of someone else's labor

>Literally nothing wrong with this.

I cant help you if you see nothing wrong with claiming "we wuz 0% unemployment" while also claiming "I see nothing wrong with jailing the unemployed or underemployed.

>you claimed these supposed people were "worked to death"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag

Death toll was high enough.

>Thus far, you have provided an isolated example of a lone rootless cosmopolitan who was only sentenced to hard labour,

I gave an example of famous person so your american brain could wrap your head around this concept. Brodsky was released because he was a Jew with good connections and also they were letting Jews leave at the time. Others werent so lucky.

>Brodsky's sentence was commuted in 1965 after protests by prominent Soviet and foreign cultural figures, including Evgeny Evtushenko, Dmitri Shostakovich, and Jean-Paul Sartre as well as Akhmatova.[7][12] Brodsky became a cause célèbre in the West also when a secret transcription of trial minutes was smuggled out of the country, making him a symbol of artistic resistance in a totalitarian society, much like his mentor Akhmatova.

Point is, you are dense individual who doesnt understand what he writes with your "0% unemployment meme". Anyone who lived in Soviet Union or any other communist state at the time can tell you that being unemployed was illegal and punished by hard labour.

>t.boomer
Go back to your containment general.

Earning is a social construct. So is private property.

>Brodsky was released because he was a Jew
Obviously we won't be repeating that mistake.
>implying that past practice must necessarily dictate future practice
>complaining about how the holy USA has fallen away from its roots
Pick only one

>Why is Donald Trump planning to build a wall? Is it also to prevent the stream of people fleeing the wretched hellhole?
To keep spics out, duh. No one fled from West Germany to East, or South Korea to North, as your retarded theory says they should. Everywhere and anywhere your idiocies are tried, hell on earth is the constant and only result. Commies should all be killed out of hand.

Attached: in-1967-polish-mercenary-rafal-ganowicz-was-asked-what-it-6855419.png (500x503, 137K)

rights are also a social construct and so are morals
your point?

>It's not like rich people have to work as it is
Oh yeah, being rich is super easy. That's why everyone is rich.

That you're a jew.

Succ

Attached: cocksucking commie.jpg (439x333, 52K)

>say someting retared
>get called on it
>y-y-ou must be le jew

The genetic fallacy is an accepted argument here. If you can't take it, go back to /s4s/