Anonymous #1 1w

Isn’t almost every countries economic system currently heavily capitalist? Please correct me if incorrect

0

Anonymous #4 1w

“Almost” — that means not all. And even in those children starve

0

Anonymous #5 1w

Do you know which countries aren’t capitalist in at least some major way? Because with the exception of maybe North Korea which is under a dictatorship, I can’t recall any

-1

Anonymous #4 1w

My bad, I forgot children have only ever starved under current economic systems

2

Anonymous #1 1w

How far back are we going, like we’re saying capitalism is fine because children were starving in the Middle Ages under feudalism?

1

Anonymous #1 1w

Also my bad, you’re right children have always and will always starve, let’s not make changes to change that

0

Anonymous #4 1w

Yes, exactly. Between middle ages feudalism and modern day capitalism children have never starved

0

Anonymous #1 1w

You know what you got me. Capitalism is fine, fuck those kids I’m not poor what do I care

-1

Anonymous #4 1w

Strawman argument final boss

1

Anonymous #5 1w

Literally though

0

Anonymous #5 1w

I mean technically buddies original point was a strawman argument no?

1

Anonymous #1 1w

We’re twinning right now

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Describe how my original point is a strawman

1

Anonymous #1 1w

The post was pointing out the issues with the insanely unequal distribution of wealth under capitalism which contributes to said starvation, homelessness and lack of care for our sick. You: “children starve everywhere under every economic system no?” Completely ignoring the point of the post stating the issue is how capitalism currently allows billionaires to hoard massive amounts while also contributing in keeping the poor starving and sick

2

Anonymous #1 1w

I responded to your initial point with same argument, yes people have starved under every economic system, but currently with the technology, reach and wealth that is out there, we are in a position to improve that, you tried to go around my point by saying, ah yes, and people before capitalism didn’t starve?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

How did the technology, reach, and wealth required for improvement come to be?

1

Anonymous #1 1w

So apologies, I was initially incorrect in saying we were both using straw man arguments, but your initial point had little to do with the posts point in an attempt to defend capitalism?

1

Anonymous #5 1w

Yes capitalism has helped in bringing us to the point we’re at now, so what you’re saying is that capitalism it is fine to allow these people to suffer in return for more development?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Under*

1

Anonymous #4 1w

The USSR did not have proper technology to keep it citizens from starving?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

When every single system includes suffering, yes, the system that has the least is the best option

1

Anonymous #4 1w

And also to be clear that is not a strawman, i’m not denying that people starve under capitalism. I’m just not pretending like they don’t under other economic systems

1

Anonymous #1 1w

The USSR was under Joseph Stalin, and then continued to be under mad men who took power through betrayal and murder, and you’re asking me why they don’t feed their poor?

1

Anonymous #1 1w

I don’t think the original post point was even to say that we needed to become socialist. The original posts point was that under our current capitalistic system, billionaires are making almost unimaginable amounts of money while the poor continue to starve and die under insane cost of healthcare.

1

Anonymous #5 1w

But with the knowledge and technology that we have at our disposal, can we not try to improve? To get to a system where even less people suffer? Or should we just stick with the devil we know?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Just so we are clear, that would make it a non-capitalist economic system that happened after middle-aged feudalism and before modern day capitalism

1

Anonymous #1 1w

And we’ll never know how that system would’ve functioned otherwise, as almost from the start it was ran by a murderous mad man who had members of his party killed for the smallest and most random of reasons

1

Anonymous #4 1w

I’m not saying we shouldn’t improve, that should always be the goal of society

1

Anonymous #4 1w

I mean, you are almost exactly proving my original point

1

Anonymous #1 1w

“ if it wasn’t taken over by a group of powerful people, the system could have worked well” That can be said about almost every economic system that’s ever been implemented

1

Anonymous #1 1w

What even was your original point? The post criticized the wealth gap under capitalism, and how our capitalist system keeps the poor starving and sick, like I have been repeating, and your reply was “every economic system has had children starve?” What point were you trying to make here? That the worlds always sucked?

1

Anonymous #1 1w

You brought up the USSR, I didn’t even bring up socialism or communism and how they “could” function, which I do not believe. I’m saying your point to include how an economic system under murderous mad men not functioning isn’t a very good point

1