Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Now non-white people can be white
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ana the Ist" data-source="post: 75874149" data-attributes="member: 302807"><p>I mean seriously.....unequal distribution is the main criticism of capitalism.....and it's not valid.</p><p></p><p>What reason do I have to work hard and struggle if no gain followed? Please describe a system that results in equality without removing choice. I can't even imagine how it works. It's the kind of wide eyed idealism I expect from children....not adults parading around as academics. She's not smart. </p><p></p><p>We should be examining the failures of our universities. If this is what they produce then something has gone wrong. </p><p></p><p>Economics is a vast and dense and frankly boring subject that involves a wide range of factors and variables that are extremely complex and difficult to understand. Economic genius is extremely rare as a result. If we look at the two most influential figures of the modern age....Adam Smith and Marx....I think we can best assess them based on their predictions. Smith's predictions came true almost exactly as he described the rise of the merchant class beyond the wealth of the monarchy itself. They came true for decades long after he was dead. He even predicted the problems that would result and they came true as well</p><p> </p><p>Marx's ideas failed immediately. They never even leave the starting point. It's obvious to all and participation becomes forced. </p><p></p><p>The reason why you've heard about Marx and almost never hear about Smith is because of the truth claims they laid out. Marx laid out a claim that is emotionally satisfying. Inequality exists because of oppression. If we remove oppression we can all live as equals in all matters. A utopia. </p><p></p><p>Smith was trying to speak an ugly truth as gently as possible....that we are inherently in competition. All resources are finite by their very nature.....so trade is best described as an exchange of resources. All seek gain in this endeavor or otherwise they would not exchange at all unless by absolute necessity. </p><p></p><p>That's not a pretty picture of reality or human nature.....but often, truth isn't pretty. </p><p></p><p>It's hard for me to take someone seriously when they make such complaints. It's a basic misunderstanding of reality that is emotionally satisfying. That's why Marx appeals to people who don't understand basic economics and Smith only appeals to people who actually want to understand it....ugly truths or not.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ana the Ist, post: 75874149, member: 302807"] I mean seriously.....unequal distribution is the main criticism of capitalism.....and it's not valid. What reason do I have to work hard and struggle if no gain followed? Please describe a system that results in equality without removing choice. I can't even imagine how it works. It's the kind of wide eyed idealism I expect from children....not adults parading around as academics. She's not smart. We should be examining the failures of our universities. If this is what they produce then something has gone wrong. Economics is a vast and dense and frankly boring subject that involves a wide range of factors and variables that are extremely complex and difficult to understand. Economic genius is extremely rare as a result. If we look at the two most influential figures of the modern age....Adam Smith and Marx....I think we can best assess them based on their predictions. Smith's predictions came true almost exactly as he described the rise of the merchant class beyond the wealth of the monarchy itself. They came true for decades long after he was dead. He even predicted the problems that would result and they came true as well Marx's ideas failed immediately. They never even leave the starting point. It's obvious to all and participation becomes forced. The reason why you've heard about Marx and almost never hear about Smith is because of the truth claims they laid out. Marx laid out a claim that is emotionally satisfying. Inequality exists because of oppression. If we remove oppression we can all live as equals in all matters. A utopia. Smith was trying to speak an ugly truth as gently as possible....that we are inherently in competition. All resources are finite by their very nature.....so trade is best described as an exchange of resources. All seek gain in this endeavor or otherwise they would not exchange at all unless by absolute necessity. That's not a pretty picture of reality or human nature.....but often, truth isn't pretty. It's hard for me to take someone seriously when they make such complaints. It's a basic misunderstanding of reality that is emotionally satisfying. That's why Marx appeals to people who don't understand basic economics and Smith only appeals to people who actually want to understand it....ugly truths or not. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Now non-white people can be white
Top
Bottom