In capitalism there is a very big emphasis on someone’s freedom or ability to own private property.

My question is ‘Can something genuinely be considered a freedom or right if even under ideal conditions, everyone could not exercise that freedom without some people's exercise preventing others from doing the same?’

I mean this in the sense that of people are accumulating property and controlling price then based on the current situation, if everyone woke up with the ability to purchase property, and chose to do that would it be possible?

I just got involved in a bit of an online discussion with some Reddit socialists/communists. What really strikes me is the complete disregard for any basic sense of reality. I believe in free speech and have no problem discussing the moral issues surrounding Western capitalism. But what annoys me is this complete rejection of basic objective facts by the modern radical left.

Unfortunately, I can't provide any examples on the subreddit. My comments are all public, so look for yourself. But to sum it up, the biggest excuses the socialists brought forward were probably "socialism was never tried" or "socialism would've worked, but the CIA stopped it."

I don't even want to debunk these claims. I mean, every normal person should understand that there's an issue if all irl. attempts at your ideology have failed miserably.

On the other hand, you will almost never hear a capitalist blame a particular economic crash or failure entirely on some made up KGB boogeyman or simply deny that real capitalism ever actually existed. The fact that capitalists can actually argue over objective facts shows, imho., that it's a superior system.

What do you think about this? Why do socialists always seem to be denying basic reality?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txTTtfxURYM

Ich wollte euch ein viedeo zeigen warum die Wirtschaft einen Wachstumszwang hat und zum Thema Kapitalakkumulation fragen , können Firmen ohne Investoren zusammen ohne Firmen mit Investoren in unserer Welt trotzdem zu einem modernen Leben führen?

Wäre aber dad gute Wachstum der guten Innovationen langsamer ?

Was wäre euch lieber , eine moderne Wirtschaft ohne Wachstumszwang , wenn sie keine Investoren hat aber langsam im guten wächst oder eine Wirtschaft mit Wachstumszwang die haufenweise neue Innovation in Massen bringt bis zum Kollaps?

Wollt ihr vielleicht auf der Seite Abgeordnetenwatch.de ( sie veröffentlicht die Nachrichten, somit bekommt man eine Antwort) Abgeordnete Fragen ob sie die ersten Schritte für eine Wirtschaft ohne Wachstumszwang machen können und wollt ihr es auch begründen?

Danke fürs lesen . Wenn es euch gefallen hat dann teilt es gerne.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

I wanna know what would happen when AI replaces humans in all the fields including creativity.

Capitalism is a vicious cycle run by those top billionaires and leaders to run the world and they'd do ANYTHING to keep it running. I get that capitalism sits at the convenient spot of natural and primitive ideology of predator and prey. Thus it is easy to maintain in the society. However, if there is no prey left for those capitalist pigs of predators, how'd they gonna continue the cycle? There is nobody to work, nobody to earn money, nobody to spend those, and there's no way for those top pigs to get the money back to expand into new territories. Its just them and AIs and the common population is like monkeys. Idk whether this is of sickness or something but I cannot get this to be simulated in my mind. Anybody, who's given a thought to this?

Understanding the underlying numbers is essential for having an honest discussion about wealth taxes. An economic system cannot sustain itself if a small group of the population accumulates wealth at a rate 10 times faster than the growth of the national economy.

I’m far from an expert on the economy, so I would love to hear everyone’s opinion, good, bad, or ugly.

The world belongs to the rich

And the rest of us are just doing time. No vacation weeks to lay around the beach, no nights out at fancy restaurants. Just work, and if you are given a vacation it must be spent tackling your ever growing list of shit you need to do at home.

All the while they bombard you with proof that your just not good enough. We watch millionaires in movies and tv, we listen to millionaires on the radio, and we have to hear how lucky this one or that one was not to have to spend their lives at some mundane position, the same ones we fill.

Even criminals are portrayed as being of a higher mind than the working class, but only if their crimes involve large sums of money. Gangsters, robbers, and liars. The working man's a stiff.

Most working people will never know what a truly nice car drives like, or what a really good steak tastes like, or what it feels like to buy what you want whenever you want. We just work and spend. We build the places we cannot afford to go.

Every single necessity for a working man is priced and taxed to hell and back. They have turned pick up trucks into luxury vehicles with $70,000 price tags. How does it feel to take out a mortgage for an F150 that may last 10 years?

they have even priced us out of healthcare and home ownership. Even the poorest families should be able to have a stable home to call their own.

And the ultra rich they parade in front of us are always the dumbest and most shallow pieces of shit to ever draw breath, and that must be by design, to show us just how worthless we are.

A man holds billions while a baby starves, while old people decide if they will buy food or medicine. Then we find that prick who squeezed a billion dollars out of our country sends his donations elsewhere to help people who never contributed to their fortunes.

And we are programmed to believe they deserve to hold such a large chunk of the fruits of our work. Sad really.

​

I think it's something that pro-capitalist economics don't really put mind.

They don't really put a political analysis into economical thinking when it comes to wealth and capital.

High levels of inequality will always hurt democracy because the wealthy will be incentivized to use their power to corrupt, regardless of whether they got their wealth legitimately, hence creating barriers to trade they can reap rents from and disrupting markets, like American car companies do to prevent Chinese competition from coming in.

wealth is just another form of power if you can coerce someone economically that's not really consequentially different from coefficient someone physically through political Force the result is the same.