Well?

I'd slap the shit out of C, and then force B to let A play the flute when she isn't using it, while B remains the true property owner.

I bet you would fuck the other two you pedo

Thank god, i just read the text over their heads and thought this was another pedo thread

Child B, but I'd encourage Child B to work something out with Child A so that the flute would get used to its fullest potential. The best outcome would be that B would have A teach her to play, and B would teach A to make another flute.

Child C can go away.

Attached: 1548838622959.png (1264x471, 102K)

Shit, they'd all get it, Nahmeen?

>Everyone except the commie is a commie
Uh?

>he

Attached: 0a4.png (724x611, 129K)

Give Laura the flute

Unironically kill yourself

A and C are commie as fuck while B is capitalist

Either bait or degenerate scum

Attached: 1535306438_1525362604356.jpg (680x793, 41K)

Attached: my argument.png (900x900, 38K)

This is "A" "B" conversation, so "C" your way out of it before "D" jumps over "E" and "F"s you up like a "G".

Child B is Jewish; she sells the flute to Child A at unfair interest, but since Child A is blonde, she falls for it. Child C is purchased as a slave by Child B with the profits to make more flutes. They are sold to the decendents of Child A.

based and redpilled

>projecting this hard

Attached: 081F25D8-7F33-4C85-B7DC-05F2959F4F60.png (399x322, 42K)

>would you give it to
Shouldn't have taken it from Child B in the first place.

Child C because we need to help our poor brethren

How the fuck are niggers a and c entitled to b's shit? Fuck off. If a wants to by b's shit or if C is willing to work for it we can talk.

A.

Give the fruits of the lowerman to the higherman so humanity can progress. There'll always be people like B capable of making common flutes (although if her flutes were a masterpiece, that's something else entirely). C needs assistance from her fellow countrymen to find what she's good at, no fellow citizen should live in poverty, if all our soups have to be a spoonful less so she can have a bowl to eat, let it be. However if she's unsuccessful after all attempts to help her because she's just a selfish leech?... well, she'll be good at forced labor... whether she likes it or not.

Attached: fasces.jpg (1112x1098, 538K)

Not fit related, janitors pls do your job

A.
how can someone who knows nothing about flutes lock someone from using it to its fullest potential? FUCK the working class, bunch of hypocrites

A, she was better than the other two. Better than most of the girls in that game IIRC.

A obviously. Throw C in the trash and have B produce better flutes

>mfw people would unironically choose anything other than B
The real question here is why do you have the flute. B made it, so B gets to decide what to do with it. It doesn't matter if the flute could save someones life. The flute is B's property.
"How could you possibly take this from me and give it to someone else." This is the most important part, you've stolen B's property.

Attached: 1547004597371.png (645x773, 11K)

>the german kid fucking game
V&

Reminder that only redditors are shocked or offended by the posting of young women.

Attached: 1541986295790.jpg (600x1332, 145K)

Why are there so many people saying A here? I think B should keep it and I couldn't care less how she chooses to use it. She could use it as a poop scoop and it'd still be hers cause she was the only person to invest time into making it

wtf this actually makes sense, I was gonna choose B before reading

What game are those girls from again?

Boku no Pico

Welcome to fascism, sadly, the hardest political ideology to both explain and understand. But basically the idea is to make man achieve eusociality, the highest level of human evolution. This book is a great start. Also fitness was paramount in making a good citizen.

Don't even bother with Jow Forums, though, they're "white nationalist" quasi-libertarians that call themselves national socialists (which they don't understand it either) because they want to be edgy.

Attached: 1521564281700.jpg (907x1360, 178K)

Child B made it, therefore, she gets to keep it strictly speaking. Child C is a bitch because she believes she deserves it for nothing whatsoever and just wants gibs. She does not have the means to learn the instrument so why give her something she cannot use. Child A is entitled, she believes she deserves it just because she can play the damn thing, in a real situation Child B would share the fruits of her labor with others with the observer(government) acting as a mitigator and mitigator only when disputes rose up from the three children. It is from the goodness of the heart of Child B that the other two are even able to acquire the flute in the first place. FUCK BIG GOVERNMENT, FUCK COMMUNISTS, FUCK GIBS, THE DAY IS COMING THAT IS WHY I MUST HONE MY BODY TO DEFEND THE FRUITS OF MY LABOR!

Attached: 1546321994831.gif (367x219, 523K)

I feel like B requires more context.
It’s either commie propaganda or it’s literal theft. If child B made the flute herself, then it’s hers. If child B made the flute for her employer then it isn’t. You’re getting paid to make flutes. You don’t also get to keep the fucking flute and get paid. Shit you probably get s great discount anyways

Give them what and why are they sweating so much?

The dick
and
The dick

The "flute" and because theyre from a wholesome christian game

Destroy the flute in front of them

Attached: finna-dabbed-on.gif (554x400, 119K)

CUNNY

Anne Marie a best!

back to biz or pol you faggot

A, Gingers have no soul and C a dirty commie.
If B doesn't even consider sharing the flute with A for compensation of teaching her top play too. B doens't deserve flute either, we're humans with morality after all

Those in power should not strip away what a man has made with his own two hands. If these children are in the same sandbox so to speak, B should love to help out her friends and want to see them happy in exchange for something of value and usually with children its friendship or a promise. A will be able to play the beautiful music and C will get to interact and hopefully learn from A and B how to better her skills not only with the construction of the flute but to also play it and rise up from her poverty position. The observer should only act as a mitigator and protector of the metaphorical sandbox as these countrymen will no doubt not need the interference of some higher power, constantly seizing their ideas and profits for some "greater good.' For which the greater good comes from the communities and values held by the individuals themselves.

>we're humans with morality
>stealing B's property is justifiable
We may be humans with morality, you sure as fuck aren't though.

based

Attached: jannies2.jpg (123x124, 3K)

only robots and jews think its okay to keep something just because they made it even if it causes chaos and destruction around them. people with morality want to improve their tribe and are capable of sharing resources for greater good

The individual is selfish, we must progress together... and by that the gifted deserve the tools to make it so. Individualists are scum.

>improve their tribe and are capable of sharing resources for greater good
Fuck you for making me want to unironically say 'bash the fash'

Attached: 1547001552764.png (306x306, 112K)

B of course.

>what are the means of production?

man the right really is retarded

I can understand that and I fundamentally agree on some level. Our views on human nature must digress because we both seem to be posting on a board dedicated to both the admiration of the individual and sculpting one's body to fit the needs of God, nation, and family.

B
>got the materials
>made it by hand
>can learn to play it
>if it breaks, can make another one

the anarchy bro arrive

>so get this, you fucking cuck, if you craft a sword, it's not yours, even though you made it with your own resources
>it's MINE, because I am better at using it than you are
Lmao, fuck off commie.

okay life is basically shit and God made it that way so fuck all three of them, they can fight to the death for the flute for all i give a fuck. i don't think God wants us to care about this shit. i would tell them that life is shit no matter what, especially for child C, but i mean she's a chick so she can just find some guy who makes decent money and live with him or some shit, but yeah life is shit, you shouldn't give a fuck about this flute you dumb bitches, you really think God gives a FUCK if you have a flute or not? no. all he cares about is that you worship him and go to church every sunday and don't murder anyone, so do that and forget about the faggot flute. you stupid stupid cunt, you really think you have it bad? fuck you, try being a man, try having to work 10 back-breaking hours a day just to get it all stolen from you by some jewish faggots. seriously you don't know how good you dumb cunts really have it, this earth is hell and fuck you

Attached: 1532017678046.jpg (724x1024, 173K)

How can I give the flute to anyone if child B made it?

How the fuck is a flute going to improve Child C's life immeasurably? It's a fucking flute, not $100,000.

Anyway, I don't give the flute to any of them, because I never took it from Child B, its rightful owner, in the first place because I am not an asshole.

>the lazy town logo on the shirt
kills me every time

>Having other people dictate the use of property
>true property owner

Turbo brainlet

Attached: Disdain For The Mentally Retarded.jpg (1024x923, 162K)

>man A owns the land
>man A provides the factory
>man A provides the materials
>man A provides the training
>man B should own it because he put it together.

Attached: adamsmith-1380.jpg (940x466, 72K)

For me to give it to either of them I'd have to steal it from child B first

Attached: hippity.jpg (480x480, 38K)

In actual reality, Child B would almost certainly be selling the flute, or at least want to learn how to play it (why the fuck else would she make it in the first place?). I wouldn't necessarily oppose buying it from B to give to A, but something is fishy about A wanting the flute because she can play the flute. Surely she already has access to a flute, in order to be able to play one, and wouldn't need the hand out.

Child C can go fuck itself.

Child A's the cutest, give it to her

Except B provided the materials by herself and made the flute on her own.
A is just some egomaniac cunt.

>Why are there so many people saying A here?

Bottom left:
>Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy

We are talking about maximizing social utility. If you are running a country, you are effectively "taxing" child B, and you need to decide wether your will use your tax to help child A, B, or C.

>muh fruits
congrats you don't have public schools, infrastructure or public work force (police, firemen, etc)

>muh poorest
congrats you have a warfare state. This literally only works if you are Norway or Saudi Arabia where you have a ton of natural resources. Otherwise you run out of money

>muh child A
You put money into developing the best and brightest, and increasing the return on the economy. You can give Child B a bond based on the economic activity Child A generates.

>man B owns some land and the house that stands on it
>man B cut down a tree on his land
>man B used one of the logs to carve out a flute
>man A should own it because...?

Why can't the "higher" man just buy the fucking flute honestly in the first place? Why is B going to keep making flute if you just keep taking them? Why are you posting on Jow Forums when you're clearly 14?

Except
>child B makes several more flutes and sells them
>child B develops other carving skills
>child B increases her work value and work capacity
>while child A's work value would be based on luck

A

Who gives a shit if B made it, she doesn't know how use the thing.

>man A owns the land
oh, did he make the land himself? how did he do that?

B explicitly provided the materials for the manufacturing of the flute, which she ALSO did herself. There's no employer at this point because they're utterly no use for one. She may have bought the materials from someone else, but in doing so, she became owner of those materials.

Eat shit you fucking gook nigger. Singapore may be a "model" society for chinks, but it's no way actual humans should live.
You can't even chew gum in Singapore, those rice pickers are basically declaring open war on Uncle Sam.

Wrong.

Attached: 12983312.png (673x398, 157K)

stop it.

Attached: 1524803681466.jpg (480x480, 32K)

>only robots and jews think its okay to keep something just because they made it even if it causes chaos and destruction around them.

The alternative is them not making it and there being chaos and destruction anyway.

Morality has nothing to do with it, but human beans ARE rational, and they'd give up the flute to stop "chaos and destruction" because stopping chaos and destruction benefits them too.

Furthermore, you're a fucking idiot. B clearly made the flute in order to sell it. Even if some Jow Forums sexual deviant buys it just to stick it up their pooper, Child A will STILL be in the market for a flute, and Child B will STILL be able to make flutes, and will have cash to buy more materials.

Taking the flute from Child B just means she won't be making any more flutes. You've made all three children, except MAYBE Child A, worse off. Good work. You stupid motherfucker.

Higher man, as in not in parenthesis, nigger. Her skills are unique in this scenario so she should be aided by the state, I never said B shouldn't be duly compensated for her own contribution to the state... she's getting paid a standard industry wage (that allows a certain ever elevating quality of life) plus a small percentage of profits paid to her through her corporation.... she may not be particularly gifted, but she's still a citizen. And as previously stated, C needs State assistance to find what she's good at.

>you must be a child because you disagree with me politically

Wonderful logic there, buddy.

An instrument is a tool for expression, not an object to keep. Fuck this board I'm going back to getting high and blasting jazz

Child B gathered the means of production herself. It says so right in the picture. Giving the flute to anyone but her is not capitalism, because that would be saying she didn't actually own the means of production.

>How the fuck is a flute going to improve Child C's life immeasurably? It's a fucking flute, not $100,000.

Right? And how to A learn to play a flute without having a flute?

Is she not entitled to milk of her labor?

Attached: 123890321.jpg (709x376, 34K)

>muh child A
>You put money into developing the best and brightest, and increasing the return on the economy. You can give Child B a bond based on the economic activity Child A generates.

Or you could just fuck off, let B sell the flute to A, and B gets paid and A gets the flute just the same as in your retarded ass answer. I guess parasitic bureaucrats don't get "paid" to take B's stuff in that case, but they'll just have to get real jobs.

>muh fruits
>congrats you don't have public schools, infrastructure or public work force (police, firemen, etc)

Yeah, we'd have schools that aren't total shit, roads that aren't total shit, no police killing people over personal matters, no police draining enormous amounts of resources to show up to the crime scene way too late to do a fucking thing about it, and firefighters without the cancerous politicians involving themselves.

you bastard

Attached: 1507800510013.jpg (352x351, 45K)

But the real question is how did I end up with the flute

Attached: 103921-full.png (739x568, 18K)

Capitalism is shit, though.

Attached: 17a.jpg (1277x1876, 739K)

utilitarianism vs capitalism vs liberalism

>Her skills are unique in this scenario so she should be aided by the state,

How are her skills unique? NO ONE ELSE in the world can play the flute? If that is indeed the case, and playing the flute is indeed a skill that's useful for something, then SURELY she can get the flute from Child B through some arrangement or other. Buy it. Buy it on credit. Tell B she'll give B 10% of the money she makes playing the flute (since she can obviously do that if she's the only flutist on Earth and people want her to play the flute for them) up to whatever amount.

Even if B made the flute because she wanted to learn to play it, there is definitely a price she'll sell it to A for. She'll just use the money to make another flute AND pay for lessons. Then A will have to keep working on playing the flute or B will get better and take her business.

If you, you stupid waste of a fuck, redistribute the flute via force, B has no incentive to make another flute, A has no incentive to get any better, C is still starving in the street like a tard (it happens no matter what, she can't eat the fucking flute), and the entire species stagnates. Good work, you colossal fucking retard.

>[Child B] may not be particularly gifted, but she's still a citizen.

Why is she not particularly gifted? She made the fucking flute. Apparently A can't do that. If we assume A is the only flutist in the world because she's the only flutist in the hypothetical, we have to assume B is the only person in the world who can make a flute because she's the only one in the hypothetical who can do so.

And what the fuck does her citizenship matter? It changes nothing about the flute, who made it, who provided the materials for it, or why it's Child B's.

>you must be a child because you disagree with me politically

I disagree with you philosophically, you fucking 14 year old. Go to bed.

Attached: My Disgust - Frowning Arab.png (500x507, 105K)

You flipped B like and omelette and took it. Because that's exactly what taxation is.

The true redpill is that capitalism IS utilitarianism. Child A would end up with a flute either way, and Child B is only rewarded for her production, and therefore incentivized to keep it up, in capitalism.

child B made the flute by expressing her will. that is how she acquired "ownership" of the flute. she willed the flute into her hands by getting the material and making it, so she should keep it.
however
i, being an adult man, could easily take this flute from her. i can will it into my own hands, through the use of force or by the implication of potential violence. if the will of child B was what gave her "ownership" of the flute, then my will now gives me ownership.

with the flute now in my hands, its origin is completely irrelevant. philosophy and ethics go out the window and all that really matters is what i decide. do i choose to go by some autistic philosophy or do i just give it to whoever i want? in the end it really doesn't matter, but i give it to child C because she has nothing and will probably never get anything from anyone because people only think about taking. i mean, just look at the thread so far, no one would give it to child C. i would give it to her just to spit in their faces, to spit on their autistic philosophy

Attached: 1541170002284.jpg (350x338, 22K)