WHICH CHILD SHOULD GET THE FLUTE?

B is the commue option actually, commies believe that whatever is produced belongs to the person that made it(so the workers) so fuck off commie
I split the flute in three and give each a part

Child B. Fuck the commies

i break the flute into little pieces and force them to watch. none get the flute.

You mean communism believes that it belongs to the people

Attached: 1544813211554.jpg (620x432, 74K)

>trusting children to tell you the truth
not even the tenth time you post this shit

No they believe that it belongs to who produced it. not a higher up that paid for it to be produced. And as a factory product can hardly be said to be produced by one particular worker the workers supposedly collectively own the factory and this logic is scaled up to everything society produces. Of course that is their theory.

I put the flute up my ass and squeeze shit in to all the children's mouth

this is bait right? you broke the flute, making it useless to all three children. Child A can't play it, Child B can't sell it and Child C can't have his life improved.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon

this nigga thinks he's king solomon or some shit?

your a fucking brainlet mate, if the communist government notices that any one citizen has more than another, doesn't matter if it was because of his own labour, the thing he has more of would immediately be confiscated for redistribution

Implying children would rather their enemy get a flute then have it broken and have no one get anything.

retard, this is about moral theory, communist theory would absolutely give the flute to child B, notice how I always mentioned that this was theoretical but you just selectively ignore that part, this is talking at different wavelengths.

There is no political parallel in this hypothetical because the flute is being distributed by you for free to whoever has the best "reason". No one is in a store buying a flute arguing whoever who is most deserving.

If this was a commie scenario as you say - child B has made 3 flutes, all of which get distributed evenly, while A and C are producing their own goods/services that is equally distributed among the three.

I am not the one who brought the commie claim into the discussion also regardless of the political the theory has moral implications and assumptions and based on that you can say that giving the flute to child B would more accurately reflect the assumptions and implications of the theory than the other options.

cunt, communists, would split the flute. okay its a "theory" thats changes nothing about how a communist would solve the problem.

t. brainlet trying to sound smart but failing utterly

We don't know the payment structure so making capitalism/communism arguments is pointless

Assuming B wasn't doing so under a contract of some sort it makes sense for it to be theirs due to private property. If A was paying them (or providing the materials if B hadn't made it clear they had) then B's claim would be labour theory of value.

I see one child and two ginger demons, trick question?

What do you even think theory means to the people who follow it? Especially in a hypothetical situation about moral theory? Brainlet post friend.
not an argument

i never claimed it was you autistic jew

"theory" has fucking nothing to do with it.
just try and focus on what a communist would do. you say they would give it to child b, because you are retarded. I say they would split the flute because i have big brain. everyone should be equal (acording to communists) so regardless of wether it is a product of her labour they would redistribute it

That is because you will double down on your initial position regardless of what is said as you are just that self absorbed

> Confiscate flute
> tell them to work together
> A teach C and B to play flute
> B teach A and C to make flute
> tell C to stop being playing the victim and take responsibility. Little spastic
> execute them all if non compliant

in an ideal world child B would keep the flute she made, in reality she is paid minimum wage by mr shekelberg who marks it up 1000% and sells it to child A. Meanwhile Child B and A are both paying tax to support Child C who is poor and unemployed but the state can't support him properly because they are busy giving money to nigger migrants. Mr Shekelberg does not pay for her as he uses an off-shore bank account.

>how do Jow Forumslacks see politics behind every situation

Attached: untitled.png (2000x1200, 270K)

because i am right. if you think otherwise, then back it up. Make a fucking argument, instead of trying to say that i would never back down from a argument that i am correct in beliving

It becomes useless if you split it in three. Communist probably makes the flute a communal object for those who want to use it, and then someone steals the communal flute because people can't work together under communism

> kek, undisputed

your probably right to be honest

Any one that doesn't pick B is an idiot libtard

I already made my argument and you have done nothing to rebut it in fact you literally just dismissed it and then went down your path of reasoning which is based on a premise that has been made irrelevant already. Before you can move down your train of thought you first need to address whatever framing would make that irrelevant but every step of the way you forget.

>Financial support

Not gonna lie, you had me in the first half

>I already made my argument and you have done nothing to rebut it in fact you literally just dismissed it and then went down your path of reasoning which is based on a premise that has been made irrelevant already.
funny, i could say the exact same thing.
bye, hope you become less of a brainlet in future

This is true, so pick B

Because you frame your argument in your own preconceptions rather than the topic at hand and screech when people do not buy into this just because you said so.

Rape all three kids with the flute clearly the only answer here

I'd instead argue that a communist stance would be to have child b create 3 flutes to share equally, child A could teach child B + C, or even just play them a song.

This system still breaks down when child B says "I don't want to" because then they are either lynched by the anarchist society or forced to produce things at gunpoint.

>forced to produce things at gunpoint
But real communism has never been tried!

Attached: _1719668_head300[1].jpg (300x180, 15K)

>from each according to his ability to each according to his need
you need more information to answer the question, how uch, for instance, does child B have? Do they have the resources to make more flutes, does making flutes take them a long time. These are important factors in deciding whether to give the flute to B or C
A doesn't get the flute

B.
C is poor, so what? Being poor entitles you to nothing but pity.
A is able to play the flute but has no material claim to it.
The very basis of the concept of property rights entitles B to the fruit of their labour.

Everyone who chose B is a socialist

B.
A is a smug cunt and C is just a nigger.
For the billionth fucking time.

>I split the flute in three and give each a part
nigga you are seriously retarded

A

so many people are brainwashed into property-based paradigms it is ridiculous

I'll keep the flute, thanks.

Id give it to C. It will redpill A and B on the "poor" and their behavior

If A pays B for the flute, A is the answer. But children arent an economy so Im not a communist fag for saying B should keep it

I am willing to physically fight anyone who tries to take away from child B what is rightfully hers.
Come on, try it. I dare you and I'll fuck you up.

Attached: 1536916765725.jpg (1080x1350, 283K)

Confiscate the flute then offer to give it back to B or to A for sexual favors

Attached: 1483807727514.jpg (600x600, 34K)