No.91441
What is the best system and why is it state capitalism.
Success stories:
- China
- Hong Kong
- Singapore
- Denmark
Countries must be operated as for profit corporations.
No.91442
>Every single country is state "capitalist" to some degree
> 4 alleged success stories
No.91443
>>91442
Fug off gommie. This is a socialism free zone.
No.91446
>>91443
State capitalism isn't real capitalism. The state is by definition some form of socialism, so looks like you're the commie.
No.91449
>>91446
>The state is by definition some form of socialism
Yeah sorry I did not realize that Monarchy was that thing Marx wanted.
No.91450
>>91446
>Profiting off of sovereign ownership of land is socialism
okay bud
No.91453
>>91441
>hey look, the more capitalist and free countries become the more successful they are
>let's just stop following this trend at the point at which it becomes just barely functional instead of going further to full free market
No.91458
>>91449
>socialism can only be practiced by marxists
No.91460
>>91453
A full free market extends to the sovereign level. Anything but that is artificial restriction.
No.91461
>>91458
>monarchy is socialism
wow just wow I can't even liberty
No.91476
>>91450
State capitalism is literally just a branch of socialism. The only difference is that in socialism, the state owned factories dont turn a profit while in state capitalism, the state owned factories do make profit
Denmark doesnt do this btw. The Scandinavian countries have a really vibrant free market
No.91477
>>91476
>State capitalism is literally just a branch of socialism.
No.
>the state owned factories dont turn a profit
Yes, the party bosses limousines just materialize out of thin air.
No.91478
>>91477
>>91477
>No.
Yes it is. Try doing even a little bit of research on the topic and find out that "state capitalism" is something that only exist in socialist/communist countries. Its literally just socialist state owned factories that turn a profit. Thats it. Thats what State Capitalism is.
No.91479
>>91478
>Every country that calls itself capitalist is capitalist
>Every country that calls itself communist is communist
Look man China is far more capitalist than the USA ever will be.
No.91480
>>91478
State capitalism is just standard capitalism applied at the sovereign level. There is nothing socialist about it unless every citizen was the owner of some joint stock corporation called the state.
No.91484
>>91479
>>91480
>>91480
>State capitalism is just standard capitalism applied at the sovereign level.
In other words, state owned means of production are used to generate profit. the very system that Lenin implemented
No.91487
>>91484
>The soviet union was modeled as a for profit corporation
Yeah no. Otherwise they would have leased land to everyone via bidding like every other countries with state capitalism (hong kong, singapore).
No.91489
>>91461
Yes, monarchy is forced reallocation of resources and would hamper the market. It is indeed not welfare-state socialism to a great extent, as the force helps almost exclusively a group of already resourceful people, but both this and the usual type of socialism have both an unnatural aristocracy and a group of peasants who benefit from it in return for bootlicking. That said, it is a thousand times preferred to democracy, which is the absolute state of the state.
No.91495
>>91489
Capitalists extract profit from their assets. This is not socialism. A monarch extracting profit from his kingdom is in no sense socializing anything. You think the very concept of property is Marxism. Retarded.
No.91498
>>91495
The force is what makes it anything else than 100% pure, unfiltered, "the original recipe"-capitalism. Pure capitalism and "pure" socialism are on two ends of the economic axis. If you only wanna call those two outliers socialism and capitalism, and call everything else something else (I suggest mafism), that's up to you. If you, as most of us do, call everything in between a mixture, such as crony capitalism or state capitalism, that's probably for the best. If you, however, simply call anything that isn't "pure" socialism capitalism, that's an issue of equating late soviet with ancapistan.
No.91501
>>91498
>The force is what makes it anything else than 100%
There is no initiation of force when it comes to contracts and defending property. Additionally the claim that it is only capitalism should there be no initiation of force is a limited definition such as when gommies go "b-b-but it was not real!".
No.91517
>>91478
>Its literally just socialist state owned factories
Pick one. >>91480 is (mostly) correct.
No.91519
"state capitalism" is an oxymoron since capitalism is void of command economy:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/capitalism.asp
No.91520
>>91519
Dear Diary. Today I learned I can completely slack off at my job, because…
No.91531
>>91501
Sure, if the kingdom was the king's private property. But, it isn't (at least not legitimately). Either the monarch has seized the property by force, claimed the property as subject to his expropriation without claiming it as his, or it's a business and fits completely in with ancap. This is what most people who strawman ancap with the "change your name to goverment© and taxes to rent™"-meme don't consider.
No.91536
>>91531
>at least not legitimately
There is no property that is not stolen from someone (that was also stolen and so on). A kingdom is absolutely legitimate property.
No.91537
>>91519
A company is a command and control system. Capitalist is fundamentally composed of exploitation of property. Countries exist in the economy all the same.
No.91554
>>91536
>>91537
>There is no property that is not stolen from someone
You cannot steal a thing if nobody owns it, retard.
>A kingdom is absolutely legitimate property.
Because you say so? Stupid fag.
>Capitalist is fundamentally composed of exploitation of property
God, fuck off to your marxist college you liberal crybaby.
>Countries exist in the economy all the same.
Because corporation functions by forcing all of its subjects, stealing their money and killing or prisonong those who do not comply with it, right. What are you doing here, you stupid cunt?
No.91557
>>91554
>You cannot steal a thing if nobody owns it, retard.
And the non shit parts of this planet have been covered in humans for the past 2000 years. Stealing stealing and stealing again. How retarded do you have to be not to get this.
No.91558
>God, fuck off to your marxist college you liberal crybaby.
<He thinks capitalism is not about profiting from your property
Exploiting property is a good thing you fuckwit. Resources should not be sitting around doing jack shit. Sometimes I seriously doubt you faggots actually believe in the basic reality of the system.
No.91562
>>91441
Capitalism will always bring destruction to itself as long as there isn't a roof over it. Modern day capitalism destroys the past, exploits the present and corrupts the future.
No.91565
>>91562
That's funny because the only successful communist societies are the ones that are actually state capitalism.
No.91567
>>91565
Who said anything about communism? Also where do you see this success anywhere in modern societies? And please don't look at the elite raping the system, look at the citizens living under the system. Looks rather bleak if not scary to me.
No.91569
>>91558
>And the non shit parts of this planet have been covered in humans for the past 2000 years.
So what? How does it prove that the property was stolen in the first place? How does that prove that ownership cannot be lost? How does it prove that it was stolen in the first place without owners? How retarded do you have to get to spew this bullshit.
<He thinks capitalism is not about profiting from your property
>He thinks he has an obligation to jew everyone if he's told he lives under capitalism.
>Exploiting property is a good thing you fuckwit
Go back to /leftypol/ with your shitty buzzwords. Property is used, not exploited.
No.91570
>>91537
>A company is a command and control system
But they do not control an economy. Also, companies function in a market with competition unlike states (unless you are talking about corporations that rely on subsidies or charters).
No.91573
>>91570
>States do not have competition
Wrong there are fucking hundreds of them.
>But they do not control an economy.
A government is not the economy. It is one entity that can exploit its resources for profit. Do you think the UK owns Google just because Google operates there?
No.91574
>>91569
>How does it prove that the property was stolen in the first place
Almost all property that exists today was stolen from someone, or developed with stolen property.
>How does it prove that it was stolen in the first place without owners
Someone got it, they rightfully owned it, then someone killed them and took it with war / etc.
>How retarded do you have to get to spew this bullshit.
It would be easier if you at least accepted property as a concept you fucking commie.
>has an obligation to jew everyone
Of course not, but with efficient markets I hope that those that don't are beat.
>Go back to /leftypol/
Look faggot i'm not the one complaining about property being used. I fucking love capitalism.
>>91570
>States do not have competition
Wrong there are fucking hundreds of them all competing.
>But they do not control an economy.
A government is not the economy. It is one entity that can exploit its resources for profit. Do you think the UK owns Google just because Google operates there?
No.91577
>>91574
>Almost all property that exists today was stolen from someone, or developed with stolen property.
Sure. What does it have to do with your claim about "property can only be stolen"?
>Someone got it, they rightfully owned it, then someone killed them and took it with war / etc.
Or they died. Or gifted it. Or traded. Or abandoned.
>It would be easier if you at least accepted property as a concept you fucking commie.
I did. I just did not accept that stealing is the basis of the concept.
>but with efficient markets I hope that those that don't are beat.
There's place for many, you don't have to expand like crazy. Personal relationships and reputation offer a niche even for those who would be too small and weak otherwise.
>Look faggot i'm not the one complaining about property being used
But you are. Or was it not you who advocated that legitimate property has to be stolen.
>Wrong there are fucking hundreds of them all competing.
Monopolizing their job by isolating a region from others is not a competition, fag.
> It is one entity that can exploit its resources for profit
More like violently interfere and rob.
No.91580
>>91577
>What does it have to do with your claim about "property can only be stolen"?
Literally never claimed that. Only that almost everything anyone has these days was stolen from someone else, who stole it from someone else going back thousands of years.
>Or they died. Or gifted it. Or traded. Or abandoned.
Yeah they gifted something stolen from someone else, or traded something they made from stolen goods. I don't give a fuck about this though IDK why you are being autistic here. We are talking about state capitalism here not the history of property.
>that stealing is the basis of the concept.
Of course its not the base. Just that most things that anyone owns now is.
>advocated that legitimate property has to be stolen.
Again never said this, nor do I believe it.
>Monopolizing their job by isolating a region from others is not a competition
Move you faggot. Millions of third worlders are doing it right now. Countries want the best and brightest, the biggest corporations, etc. So many things to compete for. Gotta get that revenue up.
>More like violently interfere and rob.
<hurr durr renting is robbing
okay gommie
No.91589
>>91580
>Literally never claimed that.
<There is no property that is not stolen from someone (that was also stolen and so on)
>Yeah they gifted something stolen from someone else, or traded something they made from stolen goods.
Again, how is property created in the first place?
>Just that most things that anyone owns now is.
What does this have to do with anything?
>Move you faggot.
No, fuck off from my property, faggot.
>Countries want the best and brightest
What countries do not want is other countries or other independent entities forming on their territory.
>So many things to compete for
Countries compete with each others only due to their inability to enforce the isolation without officials losing money. Go tell meth producers how the hunt on them is helping them develop.
>Hurr durr taxation is rent
You are not tricking anyone, statist shill.
No.91593
>>91589
>Again, how is property created in the first place?
Some human picks it up and calls it theirs.
>What does this have to do with anything?
Just because it was stolen does not mean it is not legitimate now.
>No, fuck off from my property, faggot.
It's not your property. You rent it from the state. What the fuck do you think property taxes are. Don't pay them and you get evicted.
>What countries do not want is other countries or other independent entities forming on their territory.
Yes not being stolen from is pretty nice. After you still have your property then want to profit from it. What kind of faggot are you to not get that.
> due to their inability to enforce the isolation without officials losing money.
Just like literally every country.
<hurr durr companies only compete because of their inability to be a monopoly
>You are not tricking anyone, statist shill.
A country is just a piece of land with a corporation owning it.
No.91594
>>91593
>Some human picks it up and calls it theirs.
And how is this stealing?
>Just because it was stolen does not mean it is not legitimate now.
It doesn't mean it's legitimate because it was stolen. Even less so if they are actively preventing the person who they stole it from from regaining it.
>It's not your property.
It is, the state is just a band of thugs that rob it. It doesn't mean that if i come and rape your mother and kill your dog that your property becomes mine.
>Yes not being stolen from is pretty nice
But countries do keep military to prevent others from stealing what they haven't yet. And locked borders and currency and international transactions to prevent their subjects from changing it.
>companies only compete because of their inability to be a monopoly
Literally true, you fucking mongoloid. It's not a fucking game.
>Just like literally every country.
North Korea or china would disagree. Also, immigration laws fucking everywhere.
>A country is just a piece of land with a corporation owning it.
No it's not.
No.91595
>>91594
>Also, immigration laws fucking everywhere.
To keep out the fucking idiots. Everywhere wants phds.
>And how is this stealing?
It's not
>It is, the state is just a band of thugs that rob it
It sure as fuck is not yours. You came along and bought the land from someone else who stole it.
>Literally true, you fucking mongoloid. It's not a fucking game.
And its literally true for countries AKA not a real fucking point.
>It doesn't mean it's legitimate because it was stolen.
Not BECAUSE you idiot.
>And locked borders and currency and international transactions to prevent their subjects from changing it.
Of course you defend your property.
>No it's not.
You're right they do not have nearly enough control over their property.
No.91597
>>91595
>It sure as fuck is not yours.
It is.
>You came along and bought the land from someone else who stole it.
Or homestead. Or inherit. Your claim "All property was stolen so stealing further is great" is retarded.
>And its literally true for countries AKA not a real fucking point.
And countries are monopolies that deprive people from their property and freedom because of that. How is that so hard to grasp?
>Not BECAUSE
Why else? You do not advocate for any another reason and ignore legitimate methods to acquire property.
>Of course you defend your property.
More like keep those who you rob under your control. You do not call a band of thugs that rob you every now and then your owners or owners of your property.
>they do not have nearly enough control over their property
They do not interfere onto other's property and do not infringe on people's freedom of ownership and association. They do not operate through voluntary transactions and contracts. They do not use violence to remove competition. They are not a monopoly controlling a large group of subject on a certain piece of land.
No.91607
>>91597
>It is.
Ah so you can own stolen property. Great!
>Your claim "All property was stolen so stealing further is great" is retarded.
Not the even close
>Or homestead. Or inherit.
Not in almost all cases that exist today
>deprive people from their property and freedom because of that.
You are not deprived of property by virtue of not being able to steal from me.
>You do not call a band of thugs that rob you every now and then your owners or owners of your property.
<hurr durr it's okay to steal from the property owner because rent is theft
>They do not operate through voluntary transactions and contracts.
There is no moral problem with being INVOLUNTARILY EVICTED. Property is what matters. If it is not your property you are not being deprived of anything. And it is not your property. You are a renter. In countries such as hong kong and singapore this is actually done explicitly. NO property is sold, all property is on a 50 years lease from the government that is the property owner.
No.91610
>>91441
china has no freedom of religion and freedom of speech so it is not a good example
No.91612
>>91610
You can say whatever you want as long as it does not threaten their property. Of course you would evict tenants threatening to kill you.
No.91614
>>91612
no
china is not an ancap
No.91615
>>91614
China is a state capitalist country. AnCap has corporations that govern land all the same. The only difference is that with AnCap the relationship is explicit instead of implicit.
No.91619
>>91573
>Wrong there are fucking hundreds of them
Which of them have competition in their own jurisdiction (excluding the uncommon border dispute area)?
>A government is not the economy
No shit, Sherlock. Control of an economy != economy. Stop misquoting me.
No.91621
>>91619
>Which of them have competition in their own jurisdiction
<Wallmart has a monopoly because Kmart does not have a building physically inside it.
durrrr
>Control of an economy != economy
What do you mean "An economy". They exist is the global economy.
No.91622
>>91621
>retarded non-sequitur
Neither Walmart nor Kmart have jurisdiction of their own buddings, unlike states.
>What do you mean "An economy".
There is more than one economy. Specifically domestic economies.
No.91623
>>91622
>Neither Walmart nor Kmart have jurisdiction of their own buddings,
Walmart could torture everyone that enters. They won't though.
>Specifically domestic economies.
Ah yes there is the economy of street A where wamart is and the economy of street B where kmart is.
No.91624
>>91623
>Walmart could torture everyone that enter
They can't.
>Ah yes there is the economy of street A where wamart is and the economy of street B where kmart is.
Both are usually located on the same street and a street is geographically small enough not to be an economy (unless we are talking about an isolated one-street town).
No.91626
>>91624
>They can't.
Wallmart manager walks out of his office, and opens fire on all the customers. They sure as fuck can. They wont.
>geographically small enough not to be an economy
Ah so the entire difference between walmart and german is that you have to take a bus between EU countries.
No.91627
>>91626
>Wallmart manager walks out of his office, and opens fire on all the customers.
And that manager is subject to the jurisdiction of the state. Expect an investigation if this happens.
>difference between walmart and german
The difference is that Walmart operates within a competitive market that it does not control. Germany can control its economy by market regulations. monetary policy, etc.
No.91630
>>91627
>that it does not control
Walmart is the only store on Walmarts property. Total monopoly. Germany is the only state on German property.
> Germany can control its economy by market regulations
Walmart has full control over who sells goods inside walmart. Down the street though? No. Similarly Germany has full control over what happens in Germany. Not here in America thought.
>And that manager is subject to the jurisdiction of the state.
And Vietnam was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
No.91631
>>91630
>Walmart is the only store on Walmarts property.
But does not control the economy it operates in.
>Walmart has full control over who sells goods inside walmart.
But does not have vendor control in any of the markets it operates in.
>And Vietnam was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
It wan't..
No.91632
>>91631
>But does not control the economy it operates in.
Nor does Germany. It has the whole of UK France Etc to deal with.
>But does not have vendor control
Just like every country
>It wan't..
Clearly it was. They violated international law and got invaded for it.
No.91635
>>91632
>Nor does Germany.
It does.
>UK France Etc to deal with.
How do these countries control Germany's domestic economy?
>They violated international law and got invaded for it.
Invasion != control. Just because vermin invade my garden does not mean they control it.
No.91636
>>91635
>How do these countries control Germany's domestic economy?
How does KMart control Walmarts domestic economy? Well KMart could invade for one. Otherwise KMart has no control. Neither of them are a monopoly on the market though, just with their property.
>It does.
Just like walmart :^)
>Just because vermin invade my garden does not mean they control it.
Well anon if you walk into your Garden and the Rat shoots you, sorry they control it.
No.91639
>>91636
>How does KMart control Walmarts domestic economy?
K-Mart does not have an economy
>Just like walmart
Walmart does not control the economy it operates in.
>Well anon if you walk into your Garden and the Rat shoots you
Maybe if it kills me,
No.91640
>>91639
>Walmart does not control the economy it operates in.
Neither does germany
>K-Mart does not have an economy
Ah so one bus ride away (like the distance between EU countries) and then they have one.
>Maybe if it kills me,
:^)
No.91641
>>91640
>Neither does germany
It does.
>Ah so one bus ride away and then they have one.
They participates in the local, domestic, and even international economies but does not control either.
No.91642
>>91641
>hey participates in the local, domestic, and even international economies but does not control either.
And walmart participates in the local economy, the Joe town economy, and the world economy.
No.91643
>>91641
Walmart sure as fuck controls the economy inside walmart.
No.91644
>>91642
Correct. K-mart and Walmart do not control any economy.
>>91643
>Walmart sure as fuck controls the economy inside walmart.
There is no economy inside Walmart.
No.91645
>>91644
>Correct. K-mart and Walmart do not control any economy.
Wrong. They control the economy of walmart and kmart. They do not control the international economy. There are INDIVIDUALS ranchers that own hundreds of square miles.
>There is no economy inside Walmart.
Well whatever is inside it where other businesses can exist and sell things (subway) they control it.
No.91646
>>91645
>They control the economy of walmart and kmart.
There are no walmart nor kmart economies.
>Well whatever is inside it where other businesses can exist and sell things (subway) they control it.
True, Walmart controls certain factors of their operations, but Walmart does not control how their resources are allocated.
No.91647
>>91646
>but Walmart does not control how their resources are allocated.
Yes they do. All they have to say is "If you want to rent you u must pay your employees X dollars minimum and feed them twice and day and donate 2% of your money to charity".
>There are no walmart nor kmart economies.
Because they are hundreds of square feet instead of miles? How many people have to live inside until then? What population density.
No.91649
>>91647
>All they have to say is "If you want to rent you u must pay your employees X dollars minimum and feed them twice and day and donate 2% of your money to charity"
And how does this have anything to do with an economy?
>Because they are hundreds of square feet instead of miles? How many people have to live inside until then? What population density.
What does population have anything to do with defining an economy?
No.91650
>>91649
>And how does this have anything to do with an economy?
It's a regulation on the economy inside walmart.
>What does population have anything to do with defining an economy?
You keep claiming a corporation can have no economy
No.91651
>>91649
>walmart buys 10 miles
>builds houses
>rents out to other companies
>regulates everything
still no different than the subway in the box store
No.91652
>>91650
>It's a regulation on the economy inside walmart.
True, it regulates certain operating policies of entities inside Walmart but does not control resource allocation nor dictate the laws that these entities are subject to.
>>91651
Is resource allocation self-contained in this 10-mile Walmart? Is it their own town with their own legal jurisdiction? If so, then yes they would be an economy.
No.91653
>>91652
> Walmart but does not control resource allocation
It controls everything it owns. All the natural resources and their allocation that walmart has.
>Is resource allocation self-contained in this 10-mile Walmart
There is the global world economy that every country has to deal with. So no obviously not.
>Is it their own town with their own legal jurisdiction
It's whatever the property owner wants. If they do something someone with more guns declares wrong though they will be invaded. See for example vietnam, or rape.
No.91658
>>91651
>rents out to other companies
>regulates everything
Except renting is a temporary transfer of ownership and unless you state the conditions that way you'll be rightfully told to fuck off. You cannot fuck someone up just because you rented some property to him.
No.91659
>China
I would hardly call one of the lowest GDP per capitas on Earth and an economy that relies on maintaining cheap exports a success story
No.91664
>>91658
>Except renting is a temporary transfer of ownership
<what is evictiont
>You cannot fuck someone up just because you rented some property to him.
Of course you can. It would just be immoral.
>I would hardly call one of the lowest GDP per capitas on Earth
Yeah bullshit
<Russia 8.7k
<China 8.1K
And just look at the cities and China is wayyyyy better.
> that relies on maintaining cheap exports a success story
The cost of industrialization
No.91665
>>91653
>Except renting is a temporary transfer of ownership
This is the most idiotic thing you have said yet.
No.91666
>>91653
>It controls everything it owns
It does not. Its products are subject to tariffs, firearms are heavily regulated, food handling must be FDA compliant, etc.
>There is the global world economy that every country has to deal with.
Yet these countries also have self-contained resources that are not regulated and controlled by other countries.
>It's whatever the property owner wants
No, every activity that Walmart partakes in is subject to federal, state, and local regulations.
No.91667
>>91665
Actually that is how mortgages functioned in muslim society during the Middle Ages to weasel out of usury laws.
No.91668
>>91667
There is no "temporary ownership transfer" the bank owns the asset. The renter just rents to own it like one of those shitty appliance places. You don't own the TV until it is paid off.
No.91670
>>91668
It is true that it is not a complete ownership but an ownership by the trust, which the eventual home-owner is a member of.
No.91671
>>91441
>China is a success story
Stopped right there.
No.91678
>>91664
>what is evictiont
Evicting someone who paid you without a refund or without conditions that would break the contract is a crime.
>Of course you can.
Physically. You can attack a group of armed men with a toothpick as well. it doesn't mean you'll live through that.
>And just look at the cities and China is wayyyyy better.
Yeah bullshit.
Looks like you're chink shill or /leftypol/ shitposting.
No.91722
>>91615
corporations dont break nap
No.92229
>>91453
entirety of Africa is ancap entirety
all 3rd world shitholes are minarchism