>>16776115
neoliberal economics is all about trying to avoid realities already seen by Marx via abusing esoteric concepts like individual "willingness to pay" as a measure of exchange value et c.
Its premises are all about making society's vampires able to get even more blood while humanistic measures are simply ignored for the sake of some multivariable money function having a maximum

>>16776121
>ia abusing esoteric concepts like individual "willingness to pay" as a measure of exchange value et c.
Doesn't Marx also believe that someone agreeing to work for someone else for an agreed rate of pay is exploitation? Why do they hate individual freedom in economics?

>>16776122
>Doesn't Marx also believe that someone agreeing to work for someone else for an agreed rate of pay is exploitation?
Short answer: no.

>>16776115
Economist don't do science, they do hasbara for the people who own the world.

Everything people say about climate change activists, alternative energy shills, alternative medicine snake oilers or pharma grifters - all of it applies for economists, and for them it's all 100% true.

The entirety of economics academia is built on obtaining the patronage of a bipedal stack of cash and then writing a never-ending stream of papers on why the national/global economy desperately needs [thing that would benefit the bipedal moneybag] or it will literally die.

That's it, that's all of economics, 100% of it.

>>16776115
Economics is easy.
You make or acquire goods and products which you then exchange with others.
I just taught you economics.
Economic problems: Assorted barriers in making, acquiring or trading goods and products.
Theres no psychology involved, except in negotiating exchange rates. Skilled negotiators can trade 1 apple for 2 apples.

>>16776115

I don't agree with the caption for far left. That would be something like "prices going up because they just do".

>>16776147
Even more skilled negotiators can trade all of your money, lands, and happiness in exchange for dying for immigrants.

>>16776149
Im on the far left and I completely agree with the idiot.
Moreover economy is a 0 sum game, unlike what economists will tell you.
For someone to have money, someone else needs to owe money. (or labor which is the same)
So again the "idiots" who think that the rich are stealing from you are right.

>>16776115
>>economics is the ultimate culmination in science and math
No, that would be music.

Economics is 89% psychology 0% science and 1% math

It all comes down to "people are stupid". Modern Monetary theory is "print money until your people kill you"

>>16776255
Actually sociology plays a much larger role in my experience. Economics really starts not making sense when you get into mathematical models. I read this novel theory once broadly on the subject of economics and the first half of the book was school sociology and then he plugged in his model and the variables were the most ridiculous things that you couldn't even begin to tangibly quantify like "oppression" or something.

>>16776149
>"prices going up because they just do".
They don't "just do" though, thinking the modern idea of "targeted 2-3% inlfation rate" is normal or necessary is the midwit position

its cool anon have you seen BS? shits lit

>>16776581
exactly there is absolutely no reason bread should be 2% more expensive than it was before
nothing changed

the only reason inflation exists is so the poor get poorer, while the rich get richer with safe investments which easily beat it
they are literally siphoning money from the poor without doing anything

"economists" are all midwits parroting what they were taught, except the (((ones))) who devised the whole scheme

>>16776614
inflation exists because the entire purpose of central banking is to create more money than you have

>>16776619
it's easy to beat it though once you have 5mil+, you are set
you can get 100K income from bonds to live adequately somewhere cheap, and then invest the rest for growth, which means it will double like every decade or so
it gets way easier the more money you have and you can afford a larger income

>>16776623
life isn't some stupid jewish game with fake numbers

>>16776626
should have studied hard and sucked some jewish dick in ivy league and made it

>>16776115
Economics is for rich kids with nepo jobs who are two dumb to learn statistics but need a degree to work for daddy's investment firm.

>>16776121
>>16776122
>>16776126
Marxism is a mental disorder, not a functional economic model.

>>16776255
>Print money until people kill you
And then 100 years later pretend to be the victim while doing the same shit all over again

There's too little philosophy and history in the typical economic curricular desu.

>>16776626
Life isn't but economics is
Welcome to the world of Fiat currency and the IMF

>>16776115
Most economics is a justification for wealth disparity, "we want the rich to get richer, lets create models that says that's good".
If the goal was a health society we would look at the economic systems of the 50s and 60s and stick with them.

Not science. Not math.

>>16776666
>Not math.
And yet it's one of the few career paths for math fags to escape homelessness

>>16776670
You're thinking of finance, not economics.

File: karl-marx-did-calculus-v0(...).jpg (46 KB, 640x430)

46 KB JPG

>>16776121
Karl marx got filtered by simple calculus

>>16776581
More people requires more money which causes inflation. Constant population growth being mirrored by constant inflation is a healthy sign that the population is capable of supporting itself ON AVERAGE. So most people cannot afford houses anymore in the west, yet it's far better than living next to a designated shitting street in pooland

File: inflation.png (95 KB, 800x561)

95 KB PNG

>>16776681
>More people requires more money which causes inflation
The inflation we're talking about is expansion of the money supply beyond what is needed to cover increased population.

>>16776680
>Marxie boy was so fucking stupid he couldn't figure out basic infinitesemials and the concept of the limit.
>Japanese Marx fanboys: "MATHEMATICS IS BOURGEOIS!!!!!!!!!

I love leftists so much. Whenever they end up believing or saying retarded shit they always default to buzzwords like they are trying to wish the problem away with incantations.

>Niggers are shit at math?
>MATH IS RACIST!
>Women are shit at math?
>MATH IS SEXIST!
>Marx was shit at math?
>MATH IS BOURGEOIS!

Never gets old.

>>16776681
>More people requires more money
It actually doesn't
>Constant population growth is good
No it isn't. Transitioning to a largely automated society obligates population decrease.
>Most people in the west can't afford houses
Yes, because population increase and inflation robbery.

>>16776723
Economic fags don't care about monetary theory. They just pretend the central bank is infallible and that M3 is a BMW type.

>Ye goys Im just gonna make my own money and threaten you with prison and theft if you dont use it. Now I can print money and you dont, your money printing is called counterfeiting, while my money printing is justified somehow.
Its the biggest scam in world history after the scam of taxation and slavery. Nothing new under the sun, nothing ever happens

In a civilized society, one does not apply violence.
Instead, one pays others to apply violence for them.
Economics is the extrapolation of this concept, wherein people realized that spending their own money is a vile, savage behaviour.
The correct approach is to spend other people's money and tell them how to spend it too.

>>16776772
>the correct approach is theft and dictatorship
I see where youre coming from

>>16776776
Good, when you make it to the top remember to keep this place open and make sexism the national policy

>>16776781
Bro if I was in power I would create the right to secession and reduce regulation, taxation and state "services". I would open the currency market and make gold, silver and bitcoin legal tender. I would end the fed.

The deep state would probably assassinate me for it

>>16776630
nobody, not even any marxist who has ever existed, ever called marxism an economic model, schizo. you need to read up.
Actually, you're even more stupid than the crowd trying to "disprove" complex numbers by saying they're called imaginary numbers and thus cannot be.
>>16776680
any source beyond that ifunny meme? (there isn't one because you're just some American retard)

>>16776784
>Marxism isn't an economic model!
>The foundation of Marxism: a book titled "Das Kapital"
Mhmm. Ur so right oomfie.

>>16776800
>didn't read past the title
NTA but that explains your understanding.
Marx pointed out the fundamental flaws of capitalism but didn't provide a well reasoned alternative, this doesn't make his criticisms any less valid and we are still suffering under capitalisms flaws today.
I'm classical liberalist mixed markets with governments willing to nationalize vital sectors was about as close to perfection as we have even come, the only reason it ended is those with lots of money wanted more "passive income" aka money for nothing.
Any system that rewards doing nothing will always gravitate towards everyone wanting to do nothing so to hid this we invent titles like "landlord" and "venture capitalist" to obscure the fact these people don't do anything.

>>16776784
This is well established even if it makes you seethe. You're welcome to visit the source material from Marx himself. Not terribly challenging to find.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_manuscripts_of_Karl_Marx

>>16776736
>Constant population growth is good
Who are you quoting? Those aren't my words.

>>16776614
>nothing changed
Never happens and is as much of a agreed upon lie as Dark Matter because it makes the models easier to deal with. Economics is full of these agreed upon lies that are ignored until their impacts accumulate to a level where an additional theory is added to explain the unexpected impact without acknowledging the agreed upon lie.

>>16776115

It runs into the brick wall of exchange being pure ideology and so-called reality being an Occasional block of Laws rather than a movement of "powers", actually.

>>16776115
Murray N. Rothbard was one of Ludwig H. E. von Mises's top students.
They didn't use statistics in economics.
They used praxeology.
Which is a novelty.

One can read Rothbard's magnum opus at:
https://mises.org

File: file.jpg (698 KB, 3840x2160)

698 KB JPG

AH IM GOING INSANE, THEY JUST CANT FUCKING HELP THEMSELVES

File: no difference.png (98 KB, 1334x696)

98 KB PNG

>>16776776
The decision masters (The deciders, as George Bush used to say) contribute their voice and commands to the global civilization. Its a trade, they give commands, and receive profit.

>>16776115
The American economic system and stock market is basically a big casino. It's all a scam.

>>16776911
>basically a big casino. It's all a scam.
theres no casino, and no scam for the most part beyond propaganda to pacify you

>>16776808
>but didn't provide a well reasoned alternative
That the alternative he provided wasn't well reasoned does not mean that he did not provide one, nor that it doesn't count as an economic model, nor that this model hasn't been attempted over and over again to disastrous results

>>16776619
Central banks print money as part of "expansionary monetary policy" aka bailing out banks and investment firms with freshly printed money, which necessarily means everyone else's money becomes less valuable. Economists exist to explain Why That's a Good Thing™, and how the private interests in the fed don't lead to corruption because THEY JUST DON'T, OKAY!?

i'm a simple man. i see someone discussing [he who shall not be named], and i stop reading.

>>16776909
Of course it would be you giving the commands instead of being on of the millions of disposable slaves plucking the fields. Also its a very good incentive for making profit if all of it is stolen by a parasitical crop of so called "elites" that contibuted nothing but their dictatorial delusions and mental diarrhea.

You only know slaves and masters, freedom seems to be foreign to you. I hate people like you. Maybe one day youll learn that people dont like to be slaves

>>16776115
Rothbard was right. Neoliberal socialists stay sneething.

>>16776918
>nor that this model hasn't been attempted over and over again
Marxism, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism and Maoism all have different names because they are different.
As for disastrous results Leninism lead to the most rapid industrialism in history and China is proving today that a socialism heavy mixed market can take a country from 3rd world to superpower in ~50 years.

>>16776927
Your just speculating and conveniently dropping the fact that lenin, stalin etcetera killed more people than hitler. If you want to think clearly you need to start from first principles and see how far they reach, what they imply invariantly. For example read Mises book on socialism and you will learn from first principles what is possible and what impossible a priori.

>>16776926
>neoliberal socialists
This is the high quality sort of post I come here for.

>>16776927
>3rd world to superpower
Who cares, if you're just someone living there? You really think more than 0.001% of chinamen give a shit about that, and wouldn't immediately less internal influence for less external influence.

>>16776934
Presumably that's just a weird way of focusing on state intervention, which would be true for both.

>>16776808
>so to hid this we invent titles like "landlord" and "venture capitalist"
or "banker"

Has there ever been 1 (one) economics thread on /sci/ that wasn't a stealth /pol/ thread? I don't know why the jannies don't just ban the topic altogether especially since it's not science & math anyway.

>>16776969
Economics goes in /his/ along with climate modeling, philosophy, and all other humanities.

>>16776969
It's a topic susceptible to one guy behaviour.
And boy does c*****ism have an army of one guys.
Wish they did something productive with their lives. Like hating deadlock.

The fact that economics tends to be so politically chared just tells you what strong incentives are involved in the discipline. Many peoples paycheck depends on their particular view and unbiased economics is rare, sadly. So you can expect a lot of bad faith actors in economics.

That science has problems with it just shows the flawed incentive structure of current science itself.

>>16776980
Tell me why I should hate capitalism

>>16777055
same reason why you should hate communism
it was proven to not work
we do not have capitalism today, even if the intentions were to have capitalism
it failed exactly like communism failed in the USSR
so if you hate communism for that reason, you should always hate capitalism

the reality is that no system will work as intended, because as soon as people find themselves at the top, human greed will prevail, and they will change the rules of the game

>>16776845
dead meme
>>16776784
>Nobody ever called marxisim an economic model
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHHA

Your gaslighting doesn't work on me moshi.
>Schizo
Typical jew. Lie more you dishonest piece of garbage.

>>16776808
>COMMUNISM is Not an economic model
>Marxism just explicitly targets economics as a foundation for all modern problems and creates a value theory that re-defines the sourceing and social pooling of wealth
>Totally not economics.
LOL

MENTAL DISORDER

>>16777095
Try making this post again with ranting about communism. Why should I dislike capitalism?

>>16777136
NTA but I think he's saying you should dislike capitalism unless you control M1

File: 1552753412136.jpg (28 KB, 461x328)

28 KB JPG

>>16777138
I like capitalism because it has kept me fed every single day of my life and given me endless opportunities to do something with my money. I would like to see a more National Capitalism approach where we don't do this disgusting thing with the USD where we pay interest to (((banks))) to create our own currency

>>16776115
Economics is the greatest science humanity has ever conceived of and correctly describes all behaviors at every level.

>>16777142
You could also like a vegetable garden, a bee hive, and a petting zoo for the same reason. Explain how you get to control the money supply under National Capitalism.

>>16777146
First thing is to get the money back to the gold standard, next is to issue it ourselves instead of using a hodgepodge of banks and a "federal reserve".
If I want I can buy a bee hive, plant a vegetable garden, or even start my own petting zoo.

>>16777150
Then gold miners and people who already own gold control the money supply. That's not any better.

>>16777136
try reading comprehension

>>16776115
I'm a third-year economics student.
I'm fine with the mathematical toolkit our department provides.
If I were younger, I would have preferred a major like Physics or Electrical and Electronics Engineering to obtain a better toolkit and apply it to finance.
Otherwise, macroeconomic problems cannot be solved without being the head of the central bank, and I honestly don't care about the politics of the economy that anons have debated for decades on this board.

>>16777152
>people who control resources benefit
Well yes, we have resources to that we can trade for the gold we need to make maintain our currency if domestic production is not sufficient. Are you claiming a currency backed by something tangible is not better?

>>16776614
>poor gets poorer
>rich gets richer
well rich meant to be rich
poor meant to be poor
It makes perfect sense from the perspective of social darwinism. The only thing that's missing is to kill the poor faggots to eliminate poverty and repopulate the world with high iq sigma gigachad rich people.

>>16777197
Better for who?

>>16777202
Rich people care about accumulating resources
Poor people care about accumulating money

>>16777205
Asset backed currency is better for the general population
Fiat currency is better for conglomerates and the government.

Fiat currency makes it much easier to accumulate wealth for corporations while it makes it easier for the government to deficit spend without the consent of the governed.

>>16777212
You didn't explain how it's better. How would letting rich people with gold control money with gold be any better than rich people with interest controlling interest? I don't think you've thought this through. I'm open to reasons.

>>16777232
Do you not understand what a currency being backed by gold means? How is it the rich controlling gold when every single bill can be brought to a bank or treasury in exchange for precious metals?

>>16777245
Have you heard what used to happen whenever a lot of people tried to do that?

>>16777252
Bank runs existing is not a good reason to have a currency that is backed by nothing.

>>16777254
Why not? How's a Scrooge McDuck vault better than printing confetti, unless you're the duck with the gold.

>>16777258
In this case the duck with the gold is the people whose currency is backed by that vault of gold instead of slips of paper owned by the person who owns the vault of gold redeemable for nothing

>>16777290
The duck with the gold just gives it away to the general public instead of the specific people who elected it?

>>16777232
Asset backed currency:

There are 1000 dollars in circulation
There is a population of 19 citizens and one king
Each citizen has 50 dollars as does the king.

The king tells all his citizens they each need to give him 20 dollars so he can fight a war and take over a neighboring country while also allowing free immigration and the export of manufacturing.

The citizens tell the king to get fucked and the country is fine.

Fiat currency:

There are 1000 dollars in circulation
There is a population of 19 citizens and one king
Each citizen has 50 dollars as does the king.

The king tells all his citizens they each need to give him 20 dollars so he can fight a war and take over a neighboring country while also allowing free immigration.

The citizens tell the king to get fucked.

The king prints 1000 more dollars immediatly spending it on a war while flooding the country with immagrants and exporting all the manufacturing.

Each citizens now only has 25 dollars, the numbers on the bill doesn't matter.

The king exports more manufacturing jobs by spending the new printed money and prints even more money... he gives that newly printed money to the imported workers.

The citizens are now poor and the king has 1,000,000,000,000 that he gives to all his other king firends so they can rape little kids and buy everything.

That's the difference.

>>16777298
How does a currency of real bills stop a king from issuing war bonds to people who have assets and paying it back to them with the blood of people who don't?

ITT: smooth brains don't know the difference between economics and finance.

Finance is mathematics, centered on resource management given a set of rules or parameters created by economic policy. Economics is philosophy, centered on deciding the axioms and principles upon which civilized societies base their resource management decisions.

It's like the difference between political science and civics. Economics is not a hard science, and can only be viewed as such if you take a set of principles as true at phase value (usually due to >your countries propaganda)

>>16777303
>Finance is mathematics, centered on resource management given a set of rules or parameters created by economic policy.
>smooth brains don't know the difference between economics and finance.
Lol what.

>>16777302
Anon you're arguing with a /pol/tard who can't even spell immigrants. Save your (you)s

>>16777306
The truth sounds foreign to the retarded, as always

>>16777307
I guess I'm sympathetic to some of his antipathy.

>>16777302
You said it yourself--buy in. The citizens have to willingly give up money to support a war with asset backed currency.

Without asset backed currency the government can and does spend money without ever needing to worry about paying it back. That was the whole reason there is no constitutional framework for banking in the constitution but there is a framework for gold or silver backed currency.

If you have asset backed currency it makes skimming off the top using credit vehicles almost impossible.

Fiat currency only is ever created to pay for war and the US has been emergency spending out of debt since the 1900s.

Article 1, section 8, clause 12 of the constitution prohibits funding the federal standing army for longer than a period of 2 years during time of war--which is why there's been endless wars since 1900.

The government literally robbed the people of all their gold to pay for the world wars and lied about everything.

>>16777293
Do you know what a reserve requirement is?

>>16777310
>finance is when you paint math on top of economic policy until the policy changes
Yeah, finance is totally different than economics.

>>16777307
>leSpelling
I don't edit. If you focus on the typos and not the message that just tells me you're the kind of guy who cares about superficial things.

>>16777306
>>16777303
Finance is an aspect of economics.

>>16777314
No, only the citizens with assets have that choice. Same as it is now.
>>16777315
Sure. Do you?

>>16777315
Currently or historically? Currently it's a lie told by the federal reserve to make them believe they cant print infinite money at a whim.

>>16777320
Yes?

>>16777322
>only the citizens with assets have that choice.
>Same as it is now.
You're really not doing yourself a favor if you're trying to seriously claim the currency we have right now is the same as one that can be redeemed for physical metals

>>16777322
>only the citzens with assets
They're all that matter. Back when the US had a small population this was ideal and crated the most powerful and technologically advanced society in recorded history.
>Same as it is now
Not true at all. You have to be in the billionaire club or one of their psychopaths to matter.

The credit creators deciede everything--which is why fiat currency is shit.

>>16777325
You're not if you claim it can. Redemption for fizz has literally never worked out for anyone except the same people who'd have been bailed out either way.

>>16777325
>Fiat currency = debt
worse, he's trying to claim debt is an asset.

>>16777327
What evidence do you have that the gold holders are more reliable than the confetti printers?

>>16777329
Where?

>>16777330
You mean other than the fact that it observably created the smallest wealth divide between rich and poor ever in recorded history or the fact that it created one of the most technologically advanced societies in recorded history?

Or are you looking for the inverse that demonstrates that fiat currency creats wealth divide and social stagnation -- which is shown very clearly from the data post 1970s when nixon took the US off the bretton woods agreement.

You can't seriously be this ignorant of the history of banking in the US and the history of the US money systems?

>>16777332
Openly state fiat currency is debt based and debt is a liability.

It undermines every argument for fiat currency made in this thread.

>>16777333
You don't get that BW is evidence against your argument, not for it? It's literally the gold (and silver) holders being unreliable.

>>16777335
Fiat currency sucks just as much as asset-backed currency, exactly, and for the same reasons.

>>16777320
Civics is an aspect of political science

>>16777328
see>>16776723

>>16777340
Why does the denominator matter?

>>16776933
You think capitalism has never killed anyone? What about cost cutting causing the Bhopal disaster or the profit motive of Dole Fruits leading to the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état? What about the hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths in the US every year because of privatized heathcare or every worker killed by cost cutting?
Lots of people like to make the "socialism / communism kill millions" argument without thinking for themselves how many deaths can be attributed to capitalism.

>>16777336
You're telling me that being forced off the gold standard by international bankers was what the people wanted? I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or have a mental disorder. The only people that wanted this were the global bankers, not the citizens and you're delusional conflate leaving the gold standard with asset backed currency being "le-bad"

>>16777338
So you don't know the difference between a liability and and asset... I thought as much but I appreciate you confirming.

>>16777426
More people were killed by Mao in the great leap forward than died in all of WW2 and Stalin killed more people than is claimed to have died in the "holocaust" in the great purge before WW2 even started.

Marxism is a mental disorder.

>>16777339
no, civics is a general class that covers current events, history, economics and world religions.

It replaced history and economics in the public school curriculum...

Political science for people that know enough about everything to annoy their friends and family but not enough about anything to get a real job.

They are similar in that they're largely pointless fields of study made up to waste time and grift money and the major difference is one is taught as a class in highschool and the other is taught in college as part of a predatory lending scam.

Also, how dude worded his retardation implied that finance and economics are totally separate. They aren't. Finance is a sub-set field of economics. They are intimately tied. Talking about finance IS talking about economics and structuring finance is predicated on economic systems of value.

>>16777428
Here is a socialist using the same metrics used to calculate the "death toll of communism" to find a "death toll of capitalism".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIB4e8AfPcM

And if you want to see a neutral historian pointing out the issues with it and still concluding capitalism has likely killed more there is this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Dy200NYD30

I would recommend capitalist stop using the "communism kills" argument because by that same logic capitalism kills more.

>>16777435
>Watch you-tube
I will not
>Watch more you-tube
I sill will not.

If these people understood math they wouldn't be Marxist.

If you had a brain in your head you would be able to give a synopsis of their thesis but you can't, because you don't understand math either.

>>16777439
>If you had a brain in your head you would be able to give a synopsis of their thesis
The "communist toll" is based on communist casualties in every war, simply doing the same with with capitalist casualties instantly blows that number out.
Also included are those that staved under communism, doing that same with those that starved under capitalism blows that number out. As these famines are less reported the big ones are The great Indian Famine, the Irish Potato Famine, the Ethiopia Famine, the 1907 Chinese Famine (pre-communism) and the Bengal Famine.
Then there are deaths from accidents these are added to the communist toll by virtue of happening in a communist country, by that same logic every industrial, engineering and natural disaster death in every capitalist country is the fault of capitalism.

There are very few actual Marxists in the world but many that see the failings of neoliberal capitalism and want to either return to the more socialist classical liberalist mixed markets or go further left to the Nordic model.

>>16777447
>The communist toll is based on casualties in every war
I specifically said the Great Purge and Great Leap forward--these were NOT wars.

These are two specific events that killed almost 100,000,000 people.

>Starved under capitalism dwarfs those starved under communism.
lol, the great Indian famine was 1/10th of JUST Mao and Stalin and the Irish famine was 1/10,000,000th. of JUST Mao and Stalin.

Holy fuck you suck at math and are grasping at straws.

I can point to just TWO communist takeovers that you have to dig through history to even come close and half of those are overseas holdings.

I didn't even fucking have to mention Pol Pot, North Korea, the HoloDomor or most of the African despots you're going to pretend are capitalists.

I'm pretty sure you're the same guy that things debt is an asset and not a liability.

>>16777478
>can point to just TWO communist takeovers
You have had them drilled into you by capitalist propaganda, you haven't heard of the others because they don't fit the narrative of the ruling class.
>most of the African despots you're going to pretend are capitalists
Not real capitalism? Are most assets owned by individuals or the state, it's a pretty easy test.

>I'm pretty sure you're the same guy that things debt is an asset and not a liability
I'm not but if you can take a 1% loan, put it into any index fund and make more than 1% loans can indeed be used to turn a profit without doing anything productive like starting a company with suppliers, employees and customers.

>>16776122
>>16776126
Short answer: no.
Long answer: "exploitation" in a particular term in Marxian economics that defines the difference between value produced and the proportion of that value given to workers. So even socialist states had calculated "rates of exploitation" to determine how much of the value produced was spent on workers versus other projects

>>16776623
>it's easy to beat it though once you have 5mil+, you are set
It's also easy to beat it if you own land and produce your own food and other value from it.
This is why the elites want to make owning land harder for the plebs.

>>16777509
>"exploitation" ... the difference between value produced and the proportion of that value given to workers
So in the example given, a worker agreeing to work for a wage would be seen by the Marxist as exploitation since clearly they won't be as equally compensated as the employer

File: 1390000001166.png (351 KB, 609x332)

351 KB PNG

>>16776938
Also, neoliberals don't just typically opt for a government controlled command economy, they successfully advocate for and implement taxpayer bailouts of big banks and taxpayer subsidies to the biggest corporations, as well as in many cases a general 'welfare' state, they are essentially lite fascists, in favor of a centralized economy and society but not totally, and a centralized society is essentially what socialism is.

The west adopted the socialist idea fully in the early 20th century, and well it lead to everything that happened in the early to mid 20th century, since then they backed off a little but kept some socialism, which of course grew out of control again and is currently failing again, let's hope we learn the lessons of the 20th century and let socialism die, completely, without having to suffer too much of another cataclysm, sadly some degree of turmoil is inevitable now.

>>16776630
>RENT SEEKING IS HECKIN AWESOME!1
and then you have to pretend 100% of the problem is "jews" when rent seeking wasnt le heckin awesome after all

>>16777653
What the hell is rent seeking? Do you want to ban being able to rent a house?

>>16777645
If you honestly believe that state owns more today than in the past you might want to read this.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_the_United_States
When the state gives money to privately owned business that is called Crony Capitalism, not socialism.

>>16777661
>When the state gives money to privately owned business that is called Crony Capitalism, not socialism.
It's called fascism, which is another branch of socialism, corporate socialism, sometimes called corporatism. The names don't really matter, when you take taxpayer money by force and give it to the biggest corporations, i certainly wouldn't call that a free market, i don't know if i'd call it capitalism but i don't really care, after all Marx coined the term capitalism.

>>16776115
It's pseudoscientific garbage.
Many theories rely on assumptions that are prima facie absurd because without them the mathematics becomes very complicated even on a micro scale, and macroeconomics becomes computationally impossible.
Ask an economist why African countries are complete shitholes despite being resource rich, and you'll get a bunch of retarded copes and hand waving (eg. "They just need to industrialize" or "much colonialism").
They'll never give the actual answer, which is "Niggers are too retarded to produce or maintain advanced, industrial economies."
One of the biggest mistakes the Western world made was allowing economic thinking influence government policy.

>>16776680
People before real analysis was invented:

>>16777697
Consider premises of profit motives, or power motives for those in politics. Economics helps illuminate some such activities they would prefer, but contradiction comes up in that the economics proper would be a pulpit and tool of such people. The modern world is in stark contrast to not just history and tradition, it is in glaring relief to even a hundred, fifty, twenty, ten years ago. The signs they want to hold up as important literally didn't fucking exist for grandma and grandpa, they didn't even exist for your older cousins. So it is a whimsical self-delusion, how can whole generations get by without such a thing, how could it be true if it has such-and-such contingency.

>>16777686
>It's called fascism, which is another branch of socialism
No, fascism is authoritarian capitalism with Russia being a great current example.

>>16777749
>fascism is authoritarian capitalism
What do you call taking money out of my wallet at gunpoint to give to a government designated company if not authoritarian capitalism?

>>16776228

What?? No, dumbass.

>>16777749
Capitalism is where jews take control of the economy, then seize control of the government.
Communism is where jews seize control of the government, then take control of the economy.
"Fascism!" Is what what you get accused of when you start to notice jews trying to take over your economy and government.

>>16777480
>My position is true and yours is propaganda, never mind that Mao and Stalin killed hundreds of MILLIONS of people just trust my assertions about these few million
>Nevermind I'm conflating a political system and the negative impacts of politics for the negative impacts of private property ownership

>I'm not the guy that thinks debt is an asset but I'm going to explain why I think debt is an asset

Marxisim is a mental disorder.

>>16778043
kek

>>16777478
>debt is an asset and not a liability.
It's both

>>16777427
You're one dumb motherfucker lol.

>>16777658
NTA but rent seeking usually means squatting on a common natural resource. Like if there's a river that everyone who lives downstream drinks from and you build a dam so you can bottle the water and sell it to the captive market you created by building your dam.

>>16777658
>Economics is for rich kids who are two dumb to learn statistics
>What the hell is rent seeking
Every time

>>16778164
>common natural resource.
No such thing, you either own it privately or you don't.
>Like if there's a river that everyone who lives downstream drinks from and you build a dam so you can bottle the water and sell it to the captive market you created by building your dam.
It's my property i can do what i want with it, to hell with what you think about my property. If you don't like it you can buy it for a reasonable price and being nice to me or you can fuck off.

>>16778176
Sorry buddy i don't want to ban poors like you from renting houses from me and making you homeless and dying on the streets, sorry i don't want you to die on the streets like a dog you stupid commie, i don't want the poor to die because i hate the poor so much, or whatever dumb fuck commie nonsense you made up in your head about me.

>>16778096
>I'm not the guy that thinks debt is an asset but I'm going to explain why I think debt is an asset
NTA but this is babbys first tantrum about how FRN work, I assume? Confetti debt in the form of cash allows you to access the capital markets controlled by the US government. How is that not an asset?

>>16778177
You might be able to do that under some form of communism. Without an authoritarian police state to protect you, everyone would just walk upstream, string you and your family up on a tree, and break the dam.

>>16778182
Again, you're proving my point: you're probably the retard here for thinking "rent-seeking" just means renting houses, not the economists

>>16778183
NTA but hey you stupid commie murderer, no one believes any vomit you say, or cares about any of your stupid commie jargon, because you kill millions of people and starve them to death and destroy most of the goodness and prosperity in the world. You are a black mark, a satanic stain on human history and all commies should be deported to Antarctica.

>>16778184
Authoritarian police states are the ones who violate and destroy private property rights, in the real world those people simply apply to become a state goon so they can steal my property and kill me for providing the town with fast and cheap access to water.

>>16778186
Rent seeking means you seek people to pay you rent, in other words us professionals call this "renting", shove your appeal to authority up your stinking ass commie.

>>16778187
Crazy head canon you have going. I have no interest in living in a commune. Communism probably maxes out at around 100 people or so and all it offers, even at its hypothetical best, is a different social hierarchy based on charisma and sexual beauty.

>>16778189
You didn't provide that in the example.

>>16778192
>Heh, the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics wasn't REAL communism, take that greedy capitalist!
Self-own. You're still getting deported to Antarctica commie.

>>16778194
Are you a communist?

>>16778193
What? What the fuck is your point retarded commie?

>>16778195
No. What is your point retard?

>>16778198
>>16778196
It's like you're trying very hard to make the anti-communist viewpoint look as stupid as possible. I think I'd take the over that you're a false flagging communist.

>>16776115
A lot of really brilliant mathematics, with a lot of really crappy understanding of human beings and culture at the center of it.

There's been a huge amount of really cool multi-objective optimization that's come out of econometrics. None of it actually works for real market modeling or prediction though (which is pretty much entirely the domain of heuristic methods like sequential monte carlo and Gaussian mixture modeling).

>>16778202
How about you give up assuming motives and ad-homming and actually make an argument for once in your life you stupid fucking socialist.

>>16778210
A commie says what?

>>16776255
> Modern Monetary theory is "print money until your people kill you".

That is, perhaps, a bit of an oversimplification. There's a lot of different camps within modern monetary theory, but my general understanding is that the message is "money usually isn't the bottleneck."

For example, a modern monetary theorist examination of universal healthcare in the US wouldn't conclude that we can't do it because it's expensive. A modern monetary theorist would look at that problem and say we can't do it because our people are fat, sedentary, selfish and unhealthy. There is no amount of money in the world that could pay your way out of two thirds of your population being overweight and 40% of your population being morbidly obese. That's not a money problem, that's a culture and people problem.

>>16778213
Ok buddy maybe one day you'll learn how to make an argument instead of purely ad-homs but for now i think you should stick to learning your ABC's.

>>16778216
My argument was that FRN are an asset because they're something assigned to you that provide access to the capital market owned by the planet's most powerful military. Your response was to shit out mouth diarrhea permuting different forms of the word communism.

>>16778225
I don't care about jargon like FRN, you can have the most powerful military in the universe if you don't have anything of actual economic value to people to back it up it's all worth about as much as your commie vomit word salads.

>>16778215
>that's a culture and people problem.
A culture is a problem of people. Any observation of countries that do manage to do socialized healthcare have something very particular in common.

>>16778260
Nice argument lol.

>>16778191
>Rent seeking means you seek people to pay you rent
I genuinely can't tell if you're ragebaiting or something lol. I'm not a communist and neither are mainstream economists. If you're going to say everyone in a field is retarded, you should be capable of understanding their definitions
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

>>16778298
That anon is almost certainly a communist pretending not to be.

>>16778285
Thanks, nice ad-hom.

>>16778298
>I'm not a communist and neither are mainstream economists.
socialist then, whatever you fucks want to call yourselves i don't give a shit.
>If you're going to say everyone in a field is retarded, you should be capable of understanding their definitions
Hmmm, actually, no, I don't. I can just point out when what you say makes absolutely no fucking sense. I think that's much easier thanks.
>>16778302
Ok retard. Communists killed 50+ million people in the 20th century.

>>16778306
>>16778304
>I'm not really a commie, I just act stupid to try and make commies look less stupid by contrast.

>>16778317
Yeah i'm a big communist because i say communism is an evil system of murder and rights violations and destruction of private property and killed 50+ million people admitted openly by the chinese government.
Retarded socialist.

>>16778328
You're a caricature. An honest actor doesn't blurt out the same non sequitur all the time. Therefore, you're a dishonest actor. From the sound of it, most likely a communist.

>>16778333
>Y-you're le caricature!
Yeah but i'm still right so you can shut your commie mouth and shove your tyranny up your ass.

>>16777509
how are you supposed to calculate the objective value of manpower and the end product? especially since both vary depending on the circumstance. ie. if a salesman is somehow able to negotiate a higher price than what was planned - if the planned price was estimated by rule of thumb, which price is the real one? how much of the price should be proportionately rewarded to the salesman for their work?

>>16778264
Sure, but the point I was making is that those are the kind of arguments that are made in MMT. Anyone who is telling you that the message in MMT is "you can just print money forever," either doesn't understand MMT or is using it as a vehicle to sell some other ideology/economic program.

The point of MMT is that most problems which people think are problems of "money printing" really have very little to do with money. The problems that are actually solvable with money printings are the easiest ones to solve economically. It's much easier to handle a lack of cash flow than a society where nobody trusts each other and parents steal from the mouths of their children.

>>16778369
>le

>>16777104
Marxism is a historical method/school and Karl Marx famously NEVER defined what socialism would look like, because that's just some utopian speculation. I love how emotional Marx gets you Americans while you unironically actually don't even know the first thing about it

>>16777516
You're mistaking the American liberal morality-based argument "Exploitation is bad, therefore capitalism is bad" for the Marxist historical argument. The exploitation in capitalism exists in the sense that (put simply) an individual capitalist and so the capitalists as a whole just privately take the difference (Produced Value - Production Cost - Paid Wage) for their own gain which is in contradiction to the "societal character" of the work done; most people work and exactly the few thousand who don't decide what's done with the value produced. Furthermore, exploitation in our cursed year 2025 also consists of people living from rent (= significant percentage of income of many people), from the stock market (profit comes from aforementioned difference) and many other means of getting all of your money. In essence, there's a whole system set up to funnel everything you'll ever make or earn into the pockets of some thousand American, European neo-nobility who'd rather burn you to death than use their immeasurable wealth (produced by society as a whole) for the benefit of society as a whole

>>16778787
Forgot to add the conclusion: if you now analyze past societies, especially (that's what Marx was primarily inspired by I guess) the French Revolution, and analyze what led to these revolutions, it has always been a huge contradiction between whoever was in power before (due to economic conditions favouring their class in the past) and the economic reality of who commands and controls most produced wealth in the respective society. That's the marxist argument, or at least part of it. No screeching for morality, no bullshit

>>16778798
Based and marxpilled

>>16778787
> just privately take the difference (Produced Value - Production Cost - Paid Wage) for their own gain
Similar to how the employee takes the wage they agreed to and does whatever they want with it regardless of society, so can the employer.
Why does renting a warehouse and putting machines in it mean I'm obligated to care for the greater society than any other person?

>>16778878
The employee is given a part of the value they produced. The employee is forced to spend more than half of this wage for rent and taxes (tanks). With the rest, the employee can do whatever he wants and that of course means paying off a credit to the bank, buying from the handful of companies he works for anyway with no chance of escaping it, because it was made sure that there is an even worse fate than this kind of slavery.
>Why does it mean I'm obligated to care for the greater society
It doesn't but you shouldn't be surprised when the majority of the population rises up against this obvious contradiction and treats you like the unironic parasite you are. The basis of your wealth as a capitalist is societal, therefore, if you care about your own morals, you should use the wealth for societal, not disproportionate private gain.

>>16778891
>renting a warehouse, putting machines in it, and employing people for an agreed upon wage is parasitic because the employee took out unrelated loans they have to pay back
This is why it's important that Marxists aren't taken seriously. You have managed to convince yourself that every single person who owns a business that employees people is a mustache twirling evil villain. Society provides people looking to be employed at your business the same way that society provides a place for someone to set up business for you to work at.
The person renting a warehouse has no more obligation to use the surplus value they've acquired to build a park than the person who collects a wage. Demanding ownership over the surplus of the owner as a 'society' more than whatever taxes were deemed appropriate by that society should be properly met with bludgeons

>>16778895
Liberal, you need to take your pills. As I said, the argument is not based on morals. It's not "capitalism bad because exploitation evil", as much as you want to believe that based on your lack of education and my wrathful choice of words.
Your whole argument is meaningless, because you just throw around buzzwords and soulless notions of parks to make you feel better about yourself while the group of like 1000 parasites controls every important aspect of your life down to the words you can legally use online. For the sake of your American education level: I said 1000 parasites. Somehow that's way less than the sum of the small business owners you so wholeheartedly fight for. This is because we don't live in fucking 1850 and the world is already divided. Practically all small businesses, even most private landlords are entirely dependent on the big corporations and banks aswell, via the mechanism of credits and the economy revolving around the big corporations. No bank will give you a credit for a business if they can't profit off of it. This is so deeply ingrained that you might not even notice it, especially as an American, but there is a reason that, for example, so many things are dependent on oil and it isn't just convenience. And there is also a reason that there is almost no website that's independent of at least some google, amazon, facebook or whatever service. And lastly, there is a reason for all of your (social) media is just saying the same thing.The reason is that there is a handful of people who have the concentrated wealth and thus economic power of whole nations and billions of humans under their control. You would maybe (wrongly so) call them "jews", but the reason for their control is purely economic, not religious or esoteric.
Have you "agreed" on your country burning up millions of your taxes to attack nations half a globe away just to create better economic conditions for a handful of blood-drinking dynasts?

>>16778895
>You have managed to convince yourself that every single person who owns a business that employees people is a mustache twirling evil villain
Nah, they have to. An enterprise that does not exploit gets eaten by one that does exploit. It's unironically not their fault, it's teh system. They still get the bullet though, life is unfair.

>The person renting a warehouse has no more obligation
As >>16778916 pointed out, obligations are irrelevant. They just have the resources, but they have to use them for means to ensure maximum growth at the cost of social stability so they they have more capital to ensure more growth at the cost of social stability with thich to ensure more growth ect. Otherwise they get kneecapped and bend over the railing. But stability gets destabilized all to hell eventually. Someone might even get a bullet.

>"muh self-employed AC installation business is not like that~"
Your 1-man business is an economic nonentity.

>>16778916
Yup, not to be taken seriously

File: agamben1.jpg (18 KB, 460x301)

18 KB JPG

>>16776121
>the guy that did not read Marx.

aldo Baudrillard already debunked the whole use-value concept as intrinsically reactionary. See: The Mirror of Production.

Literally every serious Marxist (and even Marx wasn't a marxist) agrees that the kind of society described by political economy does not exist anymore, because "reality" is not real.

>>16778916
How many of those 1000 parasites need to be jews before you acknowledge that collective as a factor? Because right now your post reads as
>what's 2+2 and don't say 4

>money is a social construct
What is it about this one simple phrase that causes 99.99% of retards to lock up? It’s like they are physically incapable of understanding it.

>>16779020
>Literally every serious Marxist
French sociologists are not Marxists.

>>16779038
NTA I think all 1000 of them can be Jews but antisemitism will still be retarded because it only ever targets the other 15.19 million Jews who are middle class (gay but whatever) at best and more likely Chinaman-tier plebs.

>>16779054
That's not true. Money is a construct of the state, not society. You don't need to understand the fine points of whatever society to talk about their money.
>It's fiat
>It's paper backed by precious metals
>It's literally precious metal
>It's digital
>It's crypto
>It's created by the state
>It's created by lending

>>16779062
>Money is a construct of the state
And state is not a social construct?

>>16779063
Nope. States are defined by territory.

File: db27cdae24237200245553d0b(...).jpg (146 KB, 736x558)

146 KB JPG

>>16779065
Behold - a state!

>>16779068
If a state is defined by territory, then so is the absence of a state.

>>16779070
That's the opposite - that would mean that territory is defined by state.

>>16779072
How do you figure?

>>16779059
Will it be antisemitism to call out that all 1000 of them are jews?

>>16779085
No, bu it will be retarded antisemitism to blame/hate/call for roping roping Jews instead of roping billionaires. I'd precisely classify it as ultra-rich Jews using the rest of the Jews as a disposable scapegoat shield.

>>16779085
>all 1000
Name some names, post their pictures, and dox them.

>>16776122
>Why do they hate individual freedom in economics?
Because there is no individual freedom when one side of the exchange is at a massive disadvantage of power.

>>16779092
>No
That hasn't been ny observation of modern times.
>muh billionaires
So even in this hypothetical where these 1000 people who run our lives consists entirely of jews, the solution will be to ignore that and kill billionaires. It's very interesting how this blind spot was programmed in

File: Memetic_Apocalypse.jpg (3.73 MB, 2482x4308)

3.73 MB JPG

Oopse our theoretical framework created a death spiral of mutually reinforcing hatred and delusion because it is the most useful tool for greed to exploit.
The economists literally summoned Satan, a process that maximizes that amount of division, destruction, and insanity in the world.
And now it is Powered By AI(tm)
Turns out basing a society on greed is the surest way to damn it.

File: JohnvonNeumann-LosAlamos.gif (281 KB, 490x639)

281 KB GIF

You really think that the same theorists who brought you Nuclear M.A.D., the entire world held hostage by the political class, had it right?

File: naturalcapital.jpg (1.8 MB, 3264x2448)

1.8 MB JPG

Capitalism is a sect of Abrahamic ideology.

It is not coincidence that this is the first lesson of the first chapter of their book of lies:

>And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

>So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

>And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

>And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

>And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

>And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Human supremacism is the original sin of Abrahamism, and in capitalism it is given pseudo-secular garb as concepts such as "natural resources" that contextualizes nature as a gravel pit or lumber yard for human use.

Capitalism is nothing more than methodological applied human supremacism. To justify the division it requires maintaining perpetual class wars, to create categories of "less human humans," underclasses to exploit more fiercely to bribe / threaten the middle class with (Obey or be homeless and criminalized.)

>>16779140
>So even in this hypothetical where these 1000 people who run our lives consists entirely of jews, the solution will be to ignore that and kill billionaires.
Even if all the people in direct control of the world are Jews, it would mean 0.00001% of the Jews being the problem. Meanwhile 100% of billionaires are the problem. We all know how this blind spot was programmed in. Doing shit to actually harm powerful people is dangerous, meanwhile kicking Moishe the shoemaker in the balls is both safe and based.

>>16779062
>>16779054
>>16779020
>>16778812

>Liabilities and assets are the same thing
Marxism is a mental disorder.

>>16778107
>>16778114
>Liability and assets are the same thing
Mental disorder
>>16778176
Taxes are rent seeking--they should be abolished.

>>16778183
>Debt is an asset
Marxism is a mental disorder

>>16779146
Capitalism is a system of trade.
Retards like you are incapable of comprehending a system of transactions and social ideology aren't the same thing. Social systems help establish how things are valued but the system of exchange is independent.

When a monkey gives a tourist a shiny rock for a banana that is a form of capitalism.

You retards lose every argument and are too retarded to understand why.

File: ChadBecoming.jpg (554 KB, 2518x1024)

554 KB JPG

>>16779159
>Muh independent existence.
Things-in-themselves can't into relationships.

>>16779161
>If I make up my own definitions I WIN
>That monkey was Abrahamic

You don't believe in objective reality.

Marxism is a mental disorder.

>>16779169
>Makes up his own definition of "capitalism."
>accuses others of nihilistic semantic games.

>>16779147
Without fiat currency 99% of the worlds billionaires could NOT exist. If you want to get rid of the billionaire class than you must first understand the direct connection between wealth accumulation in the modern world and debt based currency.

We do NOT have capitalism and retards like you are programmed to attack the solution while ignoring the problem.

This thread is loaded with Marxists ignoring banking and debt creation and lumping it in with sound money because they have no clue how the billionaire class came into being in our era as a direct result of the federal reserve destroying competition in banking and in currency.

Marxists, to this very day, are the most powerful and prolific class of morons every created by the billionaire class to ensure the survival of the billionaire class.

Marxism = pro billionare

>>16779190
Thankyou for clearly demonstrating the basis for all Marxist ideals: name calling devoid of comprehension.

>>16779147
>Even if all the people in direct control of the world are Jews, it would mean 0.00001% of the Jews being the problem.
>jews may be 100% of the reasons for the problem you're experiencing but we need to come up with a solution that addresses everything but that

>>16779204
Why are you so dead set on never addressing rich people?

>>16779191
>We do NOT have capitalism
I guess real capitalism has never been tried before...

>billionaire class came into being in our era as a direct result of the federal reserve
I totally forgot that the billionaire class is an exclusively USAian issue.

>>16779210
This has already been discussed. You are 100% fine with rich people as long as they are jews. You are fine with killing rich people as long as they are not jews. What more is there you want to say?

>>16778798
he was screeching about how his turning of hegels dialects into his own form of dialetical materialism was a fundamental underpinning of the world and how all other philisophies on metaphysics was wrong to the point of rejecting even materialism and imperialism
in the end those who followed him unironically believed his words that the cycle of revolution would result in whatever the completed form of society would be to the point of trying incorporate everything without any concern to the amount of contradictions they produced - as marx proclaimed that it was natural and thus they took for granted believing that all contradicitons would just magically resolve themselves.

>>16778916
> marxism talks about the consequences of X but he never said anything about what is morally right or wrong!!!!
> but hes right and X is actually morally wrong in my opinion but you cant accuse people who prescribe to his ideas of being moralists because technically his theories are just about the consequences of X
lol, lmao
from that view all of western economics isn't moralist either, just about cause and effect as much as everything else is

>>16778774
>Karl Marx famously NEVER defined what socialism would look like
Wasn't he involved in First International as both a leader and founder. Wherein he then moved the headquarters to New York where he famously DID advocate for what a socialist revolution and socialism would look like when he wrote The Civil War in France (1871)?

>>16779329
>materialism and imperialism
fuck autocorrect
rationalism and empiricism*

>>16779155
Thanks for gracing this thread with your meaningless buzzword phrase for the tenth time.

>>16779337
Well, it might surprise you that western economics is in fact not moralist

>>16779191
Trvke.
Central banking is one of the 10 planks of communism.

>>16779225
If anything, I dislike the jewish ones a little bit more

>>16779068
KEK

>>16779144
Regardless of your point, what is even the alternative to MAD? Force everyone to give up their nukes and hope the entity that forced them doesn't secretly build them? Nonsense.
>>16779154
Taxes are a rent enforced with violence.

>>16779191
>>16779430
>If I denominate the Rothschild's estate in gold and land, they're not billionaires!
Dumbest vacuous truth in the thread.

>>16779191
you need to make your people work one way or the other. if they have too much they stop working. there's no possible economic system where everyone is better off because that is set, in reality, by human nature, by each of us, by whatever it takes to makes us work.
thus, you either work at gun point, as in illegal for you NOT to work, with consequences, but you get shelter/food, either you're free to do whatever the fuck you want but if you don't work you'll most likely die.
anything else on top of this is called an "economic system" that supports the general approach to making pleb work.
again, it is impossible to have everyone well off without determining people to work through ... means. either you all stop working and import slaves to work for you, either you work, one way or another you will work or everything goes to shit and the rest come and take your shit and forcefully make you work for them.
I am amazed people are still utterly clueless about this essential aspect and keep trying mental gymnastics to come with with a system that gives them shit without having them fucking work. that is not actually possible, ever.
no, robots won't save you either, that's even worse for everyone

>>16779442
None of that has anything to do with what I said, also the Rothschilds are central bankers.

>>16779453
Are you the marxist pretending not to be a marxist who keeps saying cash isn't an asset because it's issued as debt? Like a retarded monkey, with no argument, over and over again? Or are you a different anon who can offer an argument?

>>16779460
No, I don't think so, silly seething socialist.

>>16779464
Why do you keep promoting socialism?

>>16779468
weak genes he cannot compete

>>16779445
Why are robots worse for everyone? Rather I wouldn't trust the modern masters of the world to properly implement robots, that does not mean they will not be the answer eventually.
The problem is ownership and connectivity, we will need to be able to own our things without needing a constantly online connection to big brother.
If we get that, there is no reason robots can't do all the necessary labor while we play cards all day same as tractors allowed most of us to get out of the fields

>>16779572
>Why are robots worse for everyone?
because they will take away from you the only real value you have that is keeping you alive, that of a working unit.
what do you think happens to farm animals if we'd stop eating meat (suppose you had breakfast), even if we declare all farmers are mandated by law to keep ALL their animals alive, on their own dime?
that could work out for a while, but any "accidental" disease among the cattle would be welcomed.
this cluelesness about the state of things is both maintained by your masters, through curating philosophy and public debates and what books and discussions are allowed, and by human hubris and stupidity

>>16779580
Ah

>>16779468
I don't? You sound schizophrenic.

>>16779225
>You are 100% fine with rich people as long as they are jews.
>You are fine with killing rich people as long as they are not jews.
No, I'm pro killing them regardless of them being jews, just for being rich people. You are pro killing jews, regardless of them being rich or not, which translates to pro killing poor jews because they are much more killable.

MMT can't come fast enough

We're not just going to print money, we're going to print money at such a scale it becomes worthless as a concept and medium of exchange

>>16779758
Have you posted anything of a different form than
>Socialists!
>Socialism!
>Marxists!
>Marxism!
>Commies!
>Communism!
?
You're literally just advertising this by repeating it over and over again with no other content. You're trying to acclimate other anons to accept it as a debatable or credible economic system, which it isn't. Fuck off back to leftypol.

>>16779759
Then we're equally antisemitic

File: intredasting.jpg (89 KB, 900x900)

89 KB JPG

I didn't read the thread and I'm just going to post something I was thinking of just now.
The concept of priming be it negative or positive requires a controlled environment, and for any type of person marketing anything towards anyone, it is something incredibly difficult to reproduce. That is to say that in order for someone to be ''primed'' there would need to be a type of constant, reliable set of circumstances in which the person is subjected to specific stimuli associated with any negative or positive trait. That is nearly impossible to pull off, and marketers are fully aware of this. That is the main reason why the main tactic used is repetitional priming, which does not require a controlled environment in order for people to be swayed by these types of programming. But what people seldom realize is the fact that the pandemic actually provided fertile grounds for people to be primed in any negative or positive way, as it was a type of controlled environment that prior had not existed for any given amount of time. This was one of the points in time where I think that there was a high amount of people being primed into thinking things negatively or positively. I would say that this is actually a rather interesting point in time, as the things people were consuming over the internet had a large probability of affecting their worldviews permanently, which is known as priming. Not to be confused with the Pavlovian method of conditioning, that introduces new associations with specific stimuli, the concept of priming, instead, makes use of existing stimuli that is then associated with something else also existing. No new stimuli is introduced, instead, it reinforces existing beliefs that is then associated with something else. Which could theoretically be called a type of ''confirmation bias'' as well. Except in this case, this confirmation bias is being tweaked and operated upon, by some people.

>>16780103
>covid was the first use of mass priming
Brother do you know about Operation Mockingbird?

>>16779422
>Debt as a liability is a buzzword
AHHAHAHAH

>>16779442
You're so fucking dumb it's unreal how you don't even realize two people are mocking your obvous stupidity.

Say the line about debt being an asset. I need another good belly laugh.

People like you are so willfully stupid about how the sytem actually works you forever attack the wrong targets and dance like little puppets for billionaires.

>>16780897
Let's see if you can make a post that isn't meme slop. Explain in your best adulting millennial voice why cash on hand isn't an asset. Go.

>>16779765
>>16779765
That's not how MMT works. MMT doesn't just mean you can "infinitely print money forever" without any consequences. All MMT tells you is that the money supply within a sovereign nation is not usually the thing that causes your economic and social problems. If you are a sovereign nation and you have a problem that you think you can't afford, it's not the money that's causing the problem to be unaffordable.

This does mean that there are problems we currently treat as larger than they are which can probably just be handled by putting more money into them and not worrying so much about the details. However, the problems that can't be solved that way (e.g., universal healthcare in the US, or higher education systems when public universities spend like the money would get set on fire if they didn't), are really big problems. They are problems so big you literally can't print enough money to pay for them, even if "nobody" is there to actually directly enforce negative consequences for money printing.

>>16780920
>Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is an economic framework stating that governments that issue their own fiat currency are not financially constrained in their spending and can always afford to pay for things, instead being limited only by actual resources and inflation

>>16780929
Yes, reread what I wrote and what you replied with.

Do you know what a culture which is so irresponsible with their own health that no amount of money printing could make a universal healthcare system solvent? A resource limitation.

The thesis of MMT is that money is almost never the problem for macro-economic challenges for sovereign/money issuing states. Money supply challenges are a symptom of some actual underlying resource constraint. They aren't the real problem.

>>16780938
Given that, and NTA, what happens when money supply challenges become a resource constraint per se, because the currency you issue is captured by so many milkshake straws that increasing the supply constrains the resources even further?

File: 1745334487878141.jpg (45 KB, 750x598)

45 KB JPG

>>16776800
>>16776808
Over a century later and people still do not understand the object of Marx's critique. He wasn't pro or against any "economic system" or "economic model", he was against "economics" as a whole as an abstraction that obfuscates the underlying relations of human society. That's literally why the subtitle of Capital is
>a critique of political economy
How free markets are or how much a government intervenes or how efficient resources are allocated are of little relevance to the area he's interested in, which is how society reproduces itself and how that process is mediated, and relationships of exchange (the scope of economics) are clearly not the only ones humans have, but they are the dominant ones under his "capitalist mode of production", and so he's critical of "economics" as making the nature of these relationships seem as if they've always been dominant and unchanging.

As for his relationship to "capitalism le bad" and socialism. He does not think that this mode of production is bad because markets are le inefficient or whatever. On the contrary, he thought that it unleashed so much productive capacity that by analyzing it, a new society could emerge from it that eliminates class relations altogether (socialism, communism, whatever you want to call it). That last part is the point of contention and seething, and it's also the part he gave less of a shit about describing, as trying to predict the future is futile. Hence his emphasis on actually doing things ("praxis") instead of spitballing about the future. "seizing the means" is a means to an end, not an end in of itself. His writings on the nature of "socialism" and "communism" are few and insubstantial.

It's not that hard. Theorizing about the nature of the society you live in, and asking if a different world can be created from it, is not esoteric magical jew science.

>>16780981
This is the marxism is inevitable argument, as a natural trajectory from abundance, rather than a self-effacing, premature revolution, a green fruit that's not ready to eat yet. I'm neither of those anons but I very much approve of this version of marxism, even if the normal kind is completely unpalatable and despicable.

>>16780981
>He wasn't pro or against any "economic system" or "economic model"
"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.

(footnote) 1. By bourgeoisie is meant the class of modern capitalists, owners of the means of social production and employers of wage labour." (Marx and Engels, Communist Manfesto)
>>>> being against owners of capital owning capital is not pro or against any economic system or economic model
this isn't even quoting from the section where he believes the only economic model is one where all private property is abolished
inb4 marx's writings don't count as marxism

>>16780990
Marxism is a mental disorder.
>>16780938
>>16780956
Marxists pretend that debt is an asset.
They don't care about monitory policy because they're too dumb to understand it and it undermines their cult like concepts to admit that debt based currency isn't capitalism.

>>16780981
>If you're calling me retarded for saying stupid shit it's because you don't understand what I'm saying.

The irony is I can explain your position all day long and you are incapable of explaining mine.

Marx is robustly understood: psued bullshit foisted off as intellectualism to morons.

>>16781050
>Marxism
>Marxists
>debt is an asset
>monitory policy lmfao
>cult
>debt based currency isn't capitalism
Lol I already told you to go back to leftypol you ridiculous false flagging communist piece of shit.

>>16776614
shut up you spastic

>>16781090
Fuck off commie this is an economics thread

>>16781232
>economics thread
>on the science board
lol, great joke

>>16781253
>the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.
>nooo economics aren't "Science!" though!
Back you go

>>16781261
What are the experimentally tested non-trivial predictions of economics? Oh right, there are none. Just worthless schizobabble.

>>16781264
MMT is a massive experiment in money printing

>>16781267
>worthless schizobabble

>>16781270
Every time a commie is faced with economic discussion their reactions are always adorable

>>16781273
>u a kahmmie bcuz u dont take my unfalsifiable schizobabble economical theories srsly!!!!
It's adorable every time an economics fan tries to pretend to be a scientist.

>>16781261
>>the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.
cope. prove that economics is in of itself a logically, or even internally consistent system before you write shit like this. prove that value isn't arbitrary. provide any proof that the core tenants of economics can be experimentally proven, rather than just being a tautological truism.

>>16781275
>>16781291
Lol

Econchads why are we smarter than everyone? We are the king science.

>>16781264
A huge portion of city-level programs and policies are studied by economists since there are many cities around to be used as control groups for comparison.

>>16781314
Because economics already accepted the quantum nature of reality long ago with the marginal revolution. The value function evolves over time in a superposition of all possible values determined by supply and demand constraints until $ collapses into a single definite outcome when a transaction occurs.

>>16781316
So where are the non-trivial experimentally tested predictions?

>>16781319
I'm not an economist, all I know is that these are called quantitative urban models so go look up some of them yourself I'm too lazy.

>>16781321
So you have no idea what you're talking about and just wanted to throw out some pseudoscientific buzzwords? Got it.

>economics don't belong here, this is a heckin science board
>m...math? Not related at all...

>>16781325
Ah, I see, you are operating under the wrong assumption that scientific words you do not understand are pseudoscientific buzzwords. Well let me correct that for you: the term "quantitative urban model" is, in fact, comprised of meaningful scientific words. Have a good day, ma'am!

>>16781326
>i'll just admit that economics has nothing to do with reality... that'll show the economics deniers!

>>16781327
Making up pseudoscientific "models" is not an alternative to having experimentally tested predictions. Many pseudoscientists don't understand this, so I hope you learnt something today.

>>16781318
This.
Bellman was a genius.
Also black scholes or merton intertemporal CAPM is derived from stochastic HJB.
>>16781319
>experimentally
I know ure a chemist with 1.5 cgpa.
experiment = data in economics.
If your calibration of parameters are well enough your predictions will be good as well.
experiment is for faggots who can't use stats.

>>16781329
>supply and demand have nothing to do with reality
The most financially literate commie

>>16781402
Lol, retarded schizo
>>16781494
Illiterate economics fan can't even read posts he's responding to. So sad.

>>16781505
Give it up lad

>>16781547
Too dumb to post what I asked for? I'll give it up once economists prove their field to be scientific.

>>16781550
k

File: Ye need pple like me.jpg (57 KB, 540x304)

57 KB JPG

>>16781494
>supply and demand
Jewish construct. There is no choice. Read in Italian-English voice: in this country first you create the supply. When you got the supply you create the demand. When you got the demand you eliminate the alternatives. When you got the alternatives eliminated you will create the subscription. When you got the subscription you will raise the prices and you will lower the quality and the quantity, When you got the complaints you will blame supply and demand.

Example A: first there are vaccines. Then there are diseases. Next you will be forced to take the vaccines.
Example B: first there is supply of all the digital stuff (computers, internet, smart phones). Next you can't even live in a society without buying and using and upgrading and buying some more of all these things.

In b4:
>ooga booga /pol/ tourists /x/ schizos take your meds*drool*.

>>16781554
Kys

>>16776115
working on my Ph.D in economics right now. the field is pretty good. You ignorant fools in this thread should actually read something about the discipline, though.

>>16781555
>when you create the supply you create the demand.

I create a gigantic supply of shit in my toilet every morning, why is no one willing to pay me for it?

>>16781555
>>16781494
>Supply and demand have nothing to do with reality
It's like he understand the problem but can't comprehend the APPLIED MATH that divorces supply from demand.

It's called "Fiat Currency and central banking"

If Marxists weren't total retards that completely ignored monetary policy--because they're retarded--they would gain massive traction.

There is a huge faction of central bank haters and federal reserve haters that sound an awful lot like Marxists but the main distinction is the mental disorder inherant in marxists ignores debt robbery completely.

>>16781564
So why don't you try to answer this question, with your "expertise"? >>16781264

>>16781555
If you dont get supply and demand you dont get basic algebra and you should get off /sci/

>>16781564
I regularly have sit down chats with my friend that works at Goldman Sachs who has a Masters in economics. I give him tips on the tech industry and he gives me some insights into what assets GS is leveraging.

I have no background in economics and a heavy background in math and computer science. All the stuff he had to "learn" has been obvious to me for decades.

Successful economists mostly do sales and risk assessment. You're not smart for getting advanced studies in it--come talk to me when you're making 7 digits a year.

>>16781569
Oh, economists mostly don't use experimentation (unless natural experiments count) because it has large external validity issues in the social sciences. If you compare replication rates across social sciences, econ does really well, and the disciplines that use econometric analysis do really well. The more experimental your field, in the social sciences at least, the worse your replication rates tend to be. So econ doesn't really use a lot of experimentation, although it does use some.

It's really embarrassing for economists and economics fans that they can't even post one (1) experimentally tested prediction of their field lmao.

>>16781572
Supply can be artificially constricted and demand can be artificially fostered.

Supply and demand does exist, but their connection to one another is largely divorced in our era.

The entire smartphone market, for example, is totally artificial as is the auto industry.

>>16781574
>i know a guy with an MA and I think i'm smarter than he is
okay man. What? Maybe you are. Who cares, are you really inferring a bunch of stuff about the whole field because of some guy you know? That is retarded.

File: 1742584822169645.png (153 KB, 1036x508)

153 KB PNG

>>16781581
They operate off of model interpretation and historic data.

>>16781582
>Supply and demand does exist, but their connection to one another is largely divorced in our era.
Ah, a Modern Monetary Theorist

>>16781584
I'm inferring a bunch of stuff from several people in the industry who are very successful.

The last time I met an undergrad studying economics I had to explain to them what fiat currency was. He said they didn't teach monetary policy at his school.

I also had to take economics because my school forced me to take credits outside my majors and it was statistics for idiots.

>>16781580
Come on now, I didn't really ask for excuses for why your field isn't scientific. I asked if you have an experimentally tested predictions. Try again

>>16781592
What you're saying is just irrelevant, right? It's bait? The fact that you met some 20 year old and he didn't know the definition of fiat currency, and then he gave you some excuse about why, doesn't really mean anything. What you're saying is just like, undergrad retardation.Oh you took an intro course and it wasn't challenging? Well fucking duh, man. It wasn't supposed to be lmao. I don't know what extrapolation you're making here but these things have at best a tenuous connection to like, the quality of papers that get published in econometrica or whatever.

>>16781594
>experimentally tested predictions.

I mean.... supply and demand? that's a model that predicts price and quantity movements, and simultaneous equation models do a very good job of successfully predicting price and quantity movements using supply and demand. I just explained that economics doesn't really use experimentation in the way that like, chemistry does. So looking for RCT laboratory experiments with results that replicate in economics is like, a losing proposition. If you just want models and papers that replicate, you can find those by looking for them lol.

>>16781582
what the fuck is this supposed to mean?

>>16781605
>that's a model that predicts price and quantity movements
That's like saying "punching someone makes them hurt" is a model of human behavior.
>simultaneous equation models do a very good job of successfully predicting price and quantity movements using supply and demand
Post these models which make "very good" predictions then.
> I just explained that economics doesn't really use experimentation
Should I really explain the basics of the scientific method to economics phds? Experimentation is what determines whether a hypothesis is valid or not. Saying that you don't use experimentation is saying that you don't care about whether what you're saying is accurate.

>>16776115
lying about the economy is part of the economy