LULZ

LULZ Bro what? I actually do reasearch on topics. Why are we supporting Charlie Kirk is the real question though?

1 month ago

LULZ I don't have any quotes from him, but isn't he like ******, homophobic, misogynist, and also spreads propaganda himself? Hmmmmm

1 month ago

LULZ i cant say race ist?

1 month ago

LULZ Yknow, I'd tell you to listen to Dean Wither's debates, but he only does it for clout.

1 month ago

LULZ "Can't hate women if he's married to one" is the stupidest claim ever. marriage was originally made to oppress women

1 month ago

LULZ also i dont get what you mean with the homophobic thing, but i'm pretty sure it means your also homophobic

1 month ago

LULZ Misogyny doesn't necessarily mean "hates women" but that they're seen as less

1 month ago

LULZ Love isn't just abt breeding btw. it's actually natural to like the same gender

1 month ago

LULZ I said it was ORIGINALLY made to oppress women. Before there were assigned marriages. women didn't agree to those, did they?

1 month ago

UlyssesFartBottom hux more like poop

1 month ago

LULZ Genuinely just shut up now. The body parts were made so that we can make children so that our species can live on. As I said before, love is not just breeding.

1 month ago

LULZ Also marriage is seen as a norm today, so a lot of women are pressured into marriage.

1 month ago

LULZ I'm not wasting my time dming you

1 month ago

LULZ You're an idiot who refuses to believe anything that goes against things you already believe to be true. You refuse to change the way you see things. I don't want to waste anymore time with you

1 month ago

LULZ And you're an idiot

1 month ago

LULZ If you're a man with another man in a romantic relationship, you'd try to live life together to best you can like any other couple? If you're talking abt doing it, they can stil do that, but they can't have kids. If they want kids, they can adopt one

1 month ago

LULZ Calculating and question is why Einstein has such a high IQ. It's how you find the truth

1 month ago

Sterncross Okay so you've never heard of same gender relationships in the animal kingdom? It happens with dolphins, lions, giraffes, elephants and even out closest species the monkeys. It's naturally occurring.

1 month ago

LULZ Exactly

1 month ago

LULZ hux, Einstein didn't encourage anything you're saying rn. be so fr

1 month ago

LULZ What he said was true.

1 month ago

Sterncross Einstein was pro gay lol. What argument are you making?

1 month ago

LULZ Maybe I look at web pages to get information abt people like charlie kirk so i know why he's such a terrible person. maybe i look at web pages to know that homsexual relationships are normal. I still do my own thinking and analysing. I have lots of theories, but I've never touched a book about theories in my life. Me and Einstein actually have the same MBTI type which is known for spending a lot of time thinking

1 month ago

LULZ Ai overview...

1 month ago

Sterncross He studied black holes...

1 month ago

LULZ Dig deeper. Watch every video he made. He's said a lot of stupid things too. He said i forget what number but 100 smthn thousand people died from communism im the past year which is so wrong its funny

1 month ago

Sterncross I look at social media, I live in an echo chamber, everything I say and think everyone agrees with. It's totally not because social media has an algorithm to show me stuff curated to my beliefs and keep force feeding me garbage that might or might not be real but I take it at face value because it's the internet so it must be true... If Charlie told me to jump I would ask off where, not how high...

1 month ago

LULZ PMO OMG. THERE ARE NO TRUE COMMUNIST COUNTRIES RN. ALSO MORE PEOPLE DIE FROM CAPITALISM

1 month ago

Sterncross Live as a law abiding citizen in China where there's opportunity with growing industries in technology... Get dragged into some war about oil under war economy driven USA in the name of "democracy" and freedom? Let me think about this one for a second.

1 month ago

LULZ releasing stuff is so descriptive

1 month ago

Sterncross "I'm not getting fed an algorithm, I'm actively being fed his own content" are you reading what you're saying before you hit post? You literally contradict yourself. The algorithm would literally do exactly that...

1 month ago

Sterncross That's a dictatorship not communism... Where did this argument come from?

1 month ago

LULZ I said this on a past post, you can't move to North Korea. Also, dictatorships have nothing to do with this

1 month ago

Sterncross I get to live in a good home? That sounds pretty damn good actually.

1 month ago

LULZ Everyone and everything is equal, so yes. There are still things like gift economies and other ways of getting other personal items too. It's not all just copy and paste.

1 month ago

LULZ You don't need a whole mansion

1 month ago

LULZ Do you want people starving and homeless?

1 month ago

Sterncross So why do you need to live in a mansion? If everyone equal to you shares the same assets as you why would you need anything more. Currently we want to live in masions because that kid on tik tok that does the silly dances and videos lives in a mansion and we aspire to also live in a mansion, sometimes we get competitive and want a bigger mansion than theirs. When we all equally live in a similar house there is no competition or aspiration to be bigger. The population is happy with being equal.

1 month ago

LULZ Communism isn't one religion bro

1 month ago

LULZ Dude, please do research

1 month ago

LULZ People are paid based off what they need

1 month ago

Sterncross Ideally communism is more so about the production anyway. In a communist state they should be focusing on equal work and sharing the resources so everyone can prosper with what is being produced. Instead of big CEOs and rich people owning all production and growing it for themselves a communist state would own those sources of production and use the production internally to develop and build the state or export it for other resources to again help develop the state.

1 month ago

LULZ People would still have reason to invent things. The whole reason communists love communism is bc it unifies the people. People would want to invent things to help their people.

1 month ago

LULZ And in a communist country, all the people are those rulers. they all work together.

1 month ago

Sterncross If planners are guessing what goods to make based on the prices rather than what the demand is then that seems like they aren't very good at their job. Because you make things based of the demand of an item not its price, the only correlation those things have is the demand of goods/services contribute to it's price/value.

1 month ago

Sterncross A real communist country is ruled by the people, notice how typically they lable unions and workers as communists... That's because it's the people as a collective wanting something for the many, not a singular person that wants something for their self such as authority or power.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The new ruling class: Instead of creating a classless society, communism creates a tiny group of powerful politicians who control all resources.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Luxury for rulers, poverty for citizens: The government elites live in luxury, while the average citizen waits in long lines for basic food.

1 month ago

LULZ Womder why they're making so many useless items. Hmm.... Let's think abt that. I don't think that would be a problem in a communitst country that only cares abt necessities

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Economic collapse: Countries that tried communism (like the Soviet Union) suffered massive economic decay and ultimately collapsed or changed their systems.

1 month ago

Sterncross HOW DARE COMMUNISM MAKE PEOPLE WORK FOR THE GREATER GOOD OF THEIR PEOPLE RATHER THAN THEMSELVES. EVERYONE MUST BE SUFFERING IF WE ARE ALL LIFTING EACHOTHER UP.

1 month ago

LULZ Communist countries only failed bc the USA cut them off from everyone amd forcibly made it so they couldn't get resources from other countries.

1 month ago

LULZ Why did the USA do that? bc communism means the rich cant be rich anymore

1 month ago

~~hux~~ No escape: Communist regimes historically built walls and banned emigration because citizens would choose to leave if given the choice.

1 month ago

Sterncross Okay so you can stop using copy paste on the AI responses you got, it's time to use your own thoughts and articulate them rather than using AI to make stupid pointless dot points.

1 month ago

LULZ the famines were made BECAUSE they were cut off from other countries.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Yeah, BY THE WALL, NOT USA...

1 month ago

LULZ He rly does need his own thoughts. Said I didnt have any of my own earlier and said he doesn't fall for propaganda, and it's only proving my point further

1 month ago

Sterncross Are you seriously saying that China built the wall to stop people escaping communist China?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Think.

1 month ago

LULZ What wall are you talking about? The one in North Korea bc it's currently being targeted which is why it doesn't allow tourists anymore?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Explain why communism failed, why it didn't succeed. Enough, I'll let you decide. Can't fix you.

1 month ago

Sterncross I'm confused what wall are we on about here hux?

1 month ago

LULZ Are we done?

1 month ago

LULZ I think he means the invisible wall. The border that people aren't allowed to get theough maybe?

1 month ago

LULZ What does that even mean

1 month ago

LULZ Stop deleting your messages

1 month ago

LULZ Just think abt them before semding them. not that hard

1 month ago

LULZ Did you rly only delete it to fix a typo? we cant be srs

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Point is: If the system only works when perfect, uncorruptible angels are in charge, is it really a practical system for real human beings?

1 month ago

Sterncross Bro quit deleting your stuff it's really embarrassing for you. Looks like you can't handle being wrong and so you delete you being wrong.

1 month ago

LULZ I don't know what you're trying to say with that. If good divine beings made a perfect system for humans, I don't see a problem

1 month ago

Sterncross So then if no system is perfect then it's better to have the system where the small few use their capital to leverage positions where the use those without capital to increase their own capital rather than using the system where everyone as a collective has a say in what to do with the resources owned by the collective?

1 month ago

MentalSwift I just got back after months of being offline due to account loss, whats going on here

1 month ago

LULZ Using imaginary scenarios with magical beings to prove your claim. wouldnt it be so cool if santa gave everyone presents? well he doesn't exist, so no one is allowed to give or revieve gifts from people

1 month ago

LULZ receive*

1 month ago

~~hux~~ So if communism is "great" why did it fail?

1 month ago

Sterncross Because capitalists leveraged their capital to ensure their ways are predominant.

1 month ago

LULZ bc communist countries get cut off bc of the USA and are forced to create famines until they eventually collapse

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Partially, it's actually because nobody once to be treated exactly like everyone else for doing harder work. Society doesn't work without money, that's the thing you don't get, the entire world has a fair system called money, that's actually fair. That's why it failed, facts, not opinion. You literally see, there is no communism anymore, it's done.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The reality: If you work 12 hours a day inventing a medical cure, and your neighbor sleeps all day, but you both receive the exact same reward, you will quickly realize that the system is actually unfair.

1 month ago

Sterncross The world doesn't live off money, it's lives off resources and production. Money is based off gold, gold is a resource we use for value and we use that resource to trade for more resources and services. Society works based off hydrogen and oxygen, great resources the world collectively shares...

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Right, but to obtain those resources, you need a fair system where depending on what you do, you get that currency, to get the resources. Communism expects everyone to earn the same amount of rewards, which breaks hard work, destroys the economy, and it collapses.

1 month ago

LULZ A lot of people who lived in the USSR actually enjoyed it, except for a few. Money isn't fair, because the rich get richer and the broke get broker. People with less money aren't able to climb higher as easily as the people who are already rich. there's a lot less opportunities for poorer people. Universities cost money, mental and physical health costs money, food and water costs money. with everything costing money, people are struggling and have to work 3x as hard just to have a normal life.

1 month ago

Sterncross And that's where I am confused, why do you think under communism your neighbor is sleeping all day. The state would require him to also have some form of means of production. In a communist state all people would have some form of means of production and would contribute in some from. You keep making this stupid argument of the lazy person but in a communist state there wouldn't be a lazy person. So quit using this redundant argument.

1 month ago

Sterncross "Communism expects everyone to earn the same amount of rewards, which breaks hard work" yes if you work hard for 8 hours and the next person also works hard for 8 hours and you both get a house and food. What's the issue?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Untrue, Elon Musk started from nothing, he's wealthy. Broke people don't get broker, they only get poor because they refuse to work, got bad grades in school, and didn't work hard enough. That's the reality. Rich people get richer because they have businesses - they learn from the structure of their model.

1 month ago

Sterncross How does that break hard work?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ But that's the thing: Communism can work, but the reality is humans aren't perfect. If some lazy person gets the same reward as someone else who works, no one would work.

1 month ago

LULZ I mean, there's still a chance of getting rich from nothing, but it's a very small chance

1 month ago

LULZ Stop saying they wouldn't work. Sterncross literallty explained it

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You're right LULZ, I'm just saying, because of the design of communism, it can't be that fair. It would be a small percentage who gets rich - they those rich people become evil, exploit cheaper people, and then it fails.

1 month ago

Sterncross "Elon Musk started from nothing" yeah it's only that he lived in a big house with private schooling with his father being connected to emerald mines using that money to help musk start up businesses. Absolutely nothing musk had...

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Sterncross doesn't know what he's saying: It sounds good on paper, but not the phycological reality of humans. It's really not about opinions, it's about truth, if communism failed years ago, then it's not a good design.

1 month ago

LULZ There's no currency in communism btw. You're just describing capitalism

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Exactly, that's the problem with communism. Without currency, every reward has to be fair, going to everyone. However, somebody who becomes a hard worker gets the same reward as a person who sleeps so they stop working, the economy collapses, the small percentage who actually somehow do get rich like you described become evil and exploit the poor. It's basic facts.

1 month ago

LULZ It only failed BECAUSE THE USA CUTS EVERY COMMUNIST COUNTRY OFF FROM OTHER COUNTRIES SINCE COMMUNISM DESTROYS THEIR WAY OF STAYING RICH

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The design is good like you're implying: The humans who run the operation aren't, so communism fails.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ But the communism itself idea is good.

1 month ago

Sterncross Please look at the unemployment rate of capitalism VS communism.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ That doesn't matter what you're saying, if somebody works hard and gets the same reward as someone else, USA or not, they would stop working, the economy collapses, and boom it's gone. It doesn't matter who gets involved.

1 month ago

LULZ You've mixed capitalism with communism quite a few times now, you can't get your facts right, I'm done talking about this.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Communism gone, I have no idea what employment rate you're referring to darling, because communism shut down years ago.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The reality: If you want to start a small business, grow your own extra food to sell, or buy a nicer pair of shoes from a neighbor, the government has to step in and stop you to keep things "fair."

1 month ago

Sterncross In a communist state unemployment would be 0, if not then near 0. Everyone would be assigned some task by the state to contribute in some way. No one is sleeping in a communist state while you're working. Everyone is doing something to contribute in some way.

1 month ago

LULZ cough cough gift economies cough cough there's other ways of getting other personal belongings cough cough

1 month ago

~~hux~~ But if everyone makes the same income, gets the same things, it still wouldn't be fair. Sterncross, you have a massive net worth on BP, do you like it? Imagine it falling down to be like everyone else.

1 month ago

Sterncross You don't need to start a business because you don't need extra capital because everything you need you have. You don't think about nicer shoes because as said earlier communism doesnt make you want to be bigger and better than anyone else. It makes you want to contribute and left the whole society up rather than yourself.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ And what is a specific person doesn't enjoy a gift? Like a toy car, everyone gets it, some people don't want the toy car.

1 month ago

LULZ Are people struggling to survive on BP though? Is BP real life?

1 month ago

Sterncross Again as i said earlier communism focuses on the production and resources being owned by all. The communist state couldn't care about your child owning a toy car while the next person doesn't. It cares when you have a store that sells toy cars when the next person doesn't.

1 month ago

Sterncross You want this piece of candy then go for it, as long as you don't control the production of that candy and everyone has equal access to the same candy...

1 month ago

Sterncross 40% of the state likes cats, 40% of the state lieks dogs, 20% of the state likes fish. The individual in the communist state can get what they want to get. But the state owns the animal shelter/breeders that give access to these pets. There isn't a single individual or entity that controls the animals and only gives people that give something that contributes to their capital access to these animals. Everyone has equal access to everything that they want. small goods are not cared about. But once you start trying to control the production or resources then it becomes an issue to a communist state.

1 month ago

Sterncross Not evereyone gets a dog and no one gets cats o fish, you can get what you want. the small goods are there and you can do waht you want. but you just cant own the production of it and build your own capital from it. Everything is shared by the state.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You can't fix the stupid. I can't fix you. You don't have a brain. If you want, search somewhere why communism failed, why it's bad. And that's it, go do the rest of your day.

1 month ago

Sterncross We have literally debated with you on why it failed with legitimate user responses and your counter arguments were AI dot points about communism. So maybe as you said, stupid can't be fixed, but really take a deep look into who the stupid one might be.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Ok, no one can be a billionaire, no one can be special, everyone is the same, same reward. You can't vote for politicians, you can't have unique views, you cannot do anything other people cannot do. You like that?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The evidence: The Berlin Wall was built by East Germany to shoot its own citizens who tried to run away to the capitalist West. Today, people risk their lives swimming across shark-infested waters to leave Cuba or crossing minefields to flee North Korea. People do not flee paradise.

1 month ago

Sterncross okay no one can be a billionaire but the state itself is rich which we all share... No one can be special even though we all have a role to play in society and we all contribute... everyone is the same with the same reward all enjoying collectively the fruits of our labour... Can't vote for politicians because there is no need to as we all collectively run the state together... we don't have unique views because all of us have the same view of contributing to the betterment of society... I can not do things others can't do like commit crimes or own businesses and try to be better than everyone else... Sounds terrible man.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ What happened to communism?

1 month ago

Sterncross Since it hasn't happened we don't know.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Hard work isn't rewarded: If a kid cleans the whole playground but gets the exact same candy as the kid who napped all day, they will stop cleaning.The committee gets too powerful: The people in charge of dividing the toys always end up keeping the best toys for themselves and bullying everyone else.Massive shortages: The committee cannot guess how many shoes, toys, or pizzas millions of people need every day, so stores end up totally empty.

1 month ago

MentalSwift Nobody deserved to die, not even Charlie kirk, he wasnt even an evil figure he had bad takes but yall act like hes a dictator which is a problem

1 month ago

Sterncross You keep making this stupid argument that I have already dismantles extensively multiple times already. Please use something new.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Good job MentalSwift, just because somebody does a little things wrong doesn't mean they need to die. I don't personally know what he did wrong but that's entirely stupid.

1 month ago

MentalSwift I am really not gonna take sides here but thank you Hux. I just have basic human decency I should care about humans dying just as I would a family member.

1 month ago

Manay Sweet mother of Pearl why are there so many replies and why am I contributing to this cluster****

1 month ago

MentalSwift Communism fell because EVERYTHING fell. the United states will one day collapse or be something else in the far future. Communist countries collapse arent always their fault because every empire has a fall. just saying,

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Good minset MentalSwift, just the reality is a bit different. Because communism supports equality, it sounds good on paper, but without price signals everything fails instantly. Imagine you own a shop, if money doesn't exist and everyone needs to send you ingredients to make something when you run out, you can contact them, but when there is millions of people contacting each other, along with unknown urgency levels, it becomes *nearly* impossible. Technology today cannot support that. That's why something as simple as money acts as a genius signal, regardless of how well or how evil people abuse money. Plus, every transaction is fair, so if you're selfish, both parties still get what they want. Communism fails because it's unoptimized.

1 month ago

LULZ They're given necessities. If they need anything else, they go to people they know. They're not going to be contacting a bunch of different people, because they won't even have phones, unless they had had one before their country became a communist country and they somehow managed to find a way to charge their phone if it's not solar-powered.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Right, but the people you go to won't have any resources because with millions of people you're not going to simply have coordinated resources without a price tag. You also just said something very logical that contradicts what you think about communism: people barely have phones. And we don't have the technology for solar-powered phones. What you're saying literally points to that communism is not a good idea, yet because of this psychological defense your parents' gave you from teaching communism is a good thing, you stick to it.

1 month ago

LULZ My dad is MAGA and my mom doesn't know what she is. And if we don't have the technology for solar-powered phones, doesn't mean that we won't one day. We don't even have a communist country yet. So by the time there is a communist country, solar-powered phones may be normal by then. Also, people will be able t get resources and could give them to others who need them if they want.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Good thinking, but for technology nowadays that cannot relocate items or anything because of polluted requests, it's basically not possible.

1 month ago

LULZ I'm aware it won't be possible to connact people for resources. I just wanted to say that having a phone is still possible, as well as the possibility of solar-powered phones. This doesn't mean I'm agreeing with you though. We don't need phones and there's a thing called actually meeting people in person to see if they have the item you want.

1 month ago

LULZ contact*

1 month ago

LULZ Sorry, I'm making a lot of spelling errors. I have an iphone SE and it's really hard to type on due to its size.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You would be happy without a phone? Answer that. And the only way of having a phone is through pure luck because one factory might have temporary resources while communism is active. But that ruins the rule of communism: if communism means everything is equal, but some people have more of one item than others, then it's not fair.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ And it's not about contacts, why would you be happy without a phone? A phone is fun, and nice. And addictive, and impossible to get rid of. It's also extremely valuable to get updated information. Meeting people in person doesn't work, because with price tags everything is already seen, meeting in person means going to multiple people at once, contacting them during urgency, which wastes time while everything is falling around you. Simple math.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ In communism, people already tried meeting in person, they wasted too much time contacting all the people at once. They cannot contact a central factory because price tags are missing, and all people at once lose signals, everything is wild.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Price tags unite people simply because they all see it at once, making confusing coordination gone.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You go purchase something, see the price, and you know what to do. Without prices, you go, you see no prices, it's free with no information, everything is wasted because you might take too much, since there is no price telling you yourself how much to take. Why cannot we just replace the price tags and contact each other? Well, you would need to directly send information, but it wouldn't show urgency levels, and even if you somehow do show urgency levels, a strict shown abundance by a local won't show the entire world because no human(s) intelligence can untangle millions of people's problems.

1 month ago

LULZ Yeah well maybe I don't want to be addicted to a device and actually want to get some exercise. There's things like libraries and schools that will give you better answers than a google search too.

1 month ago

LULZ Also, no price tags aren't going to get rid of something's value. Before price tags, there was trade. Trade is a perfectly good system.

1 month ago

MentalSwift Communism was never truly equal in the first place because the government doesnt treat themself as civillians. because they consider Civillians "peasants" or "workers" while the government is considered the "Elites" which is a problem because thats what my idea of communism was to be.

1 month ago

MentalSwift CORRECTION: thats NOT what my idea of communism was, I consider civillians human beings not peasants. it was a mis type

1 month ago

LULZ We're talking about communism. What government are you talking about?

1 month ago

LULZ 13yr old thinks he knows what communism is

1 month ago

MentalSwift LULZ can you shut the hell up? im educated too when has age ever been a factory,

1 month ago

MentalSwift *Factor

1 month ago

LULZ Educated? Clearly not. There's no government is communism. You're literally spreading misinformation.

1 month ago

MentalSwift Is calling me an Uneducated guy gonna get me on your side? on your team? your harming your diplomacy bro.

1 month ago

LULZ Maybe you could educate yourself a bit by reading every single message before this, other than the ones hux deleted of course. You're not going to be on my side unless you're actually on my side.

1 month ago

MentalSwift reading 155 messages? if its not my 2000 character advertisements I'd rather not but ill try.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Price tags act as a signal, stupid. Not a value alone. Communism will never work, you're living in a fantasy because the first thing you hear while looking at the ideology is "fair."

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You cannot fix the stupid. LULZ will never learn until he actually experiences communism.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Trading also works, CORRECT, IT'S GOOD. BUT TRADING IS AGAINST COMMUNISM, SO AGAIN, YOU CONTRADICTED YOURSELF, SAYING TO YOURSELF HOW COMMUNISM IS BAD.

1 month ago

Doomsekkar what is this bro

1 month ago

LULZ I meant trading is in like you give someone something they want for something you want. How is that against communism? Ehy are you even still arguing with me about this?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Hm, I wonder how that's against communism... ah yes, because communism doesn't allow trading, you're forced to get equal rewards, no matter how hard you work, no matter what you do. That's the entire point why it's bad. And even if you did give everyone rewards based off what they do, without price tags you cannot coordinate so it'll still fail. #fixthestupid

1 month ago

LULZ Bro. People get what they need from WORKING. The rewards are the same thing. People get what they NEED. That is what makes it equal. If I wanted to give my neighbor a toy car in exchange for a funko pop, I could. I'm able to trade eith my neighbor, because it's not a job. I'm not working. You actually sound so stupid rn.

1 month ago

LULZ wait i meant to say the rewards AREN'T the same in the second line. I can't figure out how to delete my message to replace it with the correct version

1 month ago

~~hux~~ So if people get what they need from working, how would you know what they need when millions of people are tangled without the coordination of price tags? And you said the idea of trading, that works, but communism doesn't allow trading. If it did, it might be fixed, but they literally don't allow it due to an equalist society. Rewards are always the same thing because that would break the rule of communism, that's why it's so stupid. If they fixed it, it might work, but either way humans strive for freedom, which at the same time makes them not want aggressive equality.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ TL;DR: Imagine driving a car, if the person crashes the car, it's the person's fault. The car is communism, it would work, but the driver driving it (the person who runs communism) didn't drive it correctly - they forgot basic physics on coordinating millions of people with no optimization and non-advanced technology for the century. If the car had a good driver, the car runs smoothly. The passengers of the car don't like the car they're driving in and want a specific color, they get the same copy of the car, different color, that makes communism good you might think, but that also is against communism and already starts capitalism because people aren't getting same-value rewards.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ People want freedom, communism sounds like freedom because everyone works together, until you then hear the secret design: attempting to disobey laws of physics. Capitalism is the same as communism, just a non-flawed version that is actually free. People work together based off a currency that guides them. And in any system, people can abuse stuff, so don't directly blame it on things outside of the fantasy of communism.

1 month ago

LULZ Genuinely just shut up bro. There's going to be documents on people kind of sauing what they'll need. People can just go to a place with food and be like, hey i need this. trading with your neighbor IS allowed. You just don't understand how communism works. Go read Karl Marx's communist manifesto.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Trading is so allowed, that's why my ancestors who experienced communism didn't get trading privileges. If trading existed, then why did communism shutdown due to no coordination? Making documents sounds great and all, but if everything has to be extremely equal, what if the buildings can't afford having enough storage for the mail? How will you choose which mail to respond to in order to give resources back. Price tags guide that. I don't understand, is this some sort of brain condition you have where you can't think logically?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Oh right, you'll just respond with a psychological mechanism either because you're very defensive of this fantasy ideology that failed right in your eyes and blame it on the CIA, oh wait - isn't that propaganda to believe that? Like you once told me I believe propaganda. And secondly, either because you realize I'm right, but still afraid of loss.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You said to trust Sterncross once, he's a god to you? Oh right - he said I was wrong about Roblox stocks, but what does he know about business, I study it; and I was right, Roblox just now lost 70% of stock.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Also how do I go to a place and say "Hey! I need this pizza." if the establishment doesn't have the ingredients? Like, the restaurant has to contact themselves to someone for ingredients, but if there is no price tags the system will fail because of no known details on abundance levels or scarcity. You might waste something or take too little, you might come into confrontation with a person who wants that but without price tags didn't realize they aren't allowed to take it.

1 month ago

LULZ Food shouldn't need a price tag. It's a necessity that should be available to all. Ingredients would get to a pizza store the same way they fo now, except without money being exchanged. Also, I don't see Sterncross as a god at all. I don't even know where you got that from. A few days ago someone said that braintot kind of saved Roblox in a way. I agreed with that person. People put in a lot of money into those slop games, they're the only thing you see on the home page now, and kids who don't have anything better to do with their lives play them. Sterncross disagreed with this; therefore, I disagreed with him. Just because I trust Sterncross for the most part, doesn't mean I'm going to agree with everything he says.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ If a government owns everything inside its borders, it cannot use global prices to run its local factories. Knowing the price of a car on the global market does not tell a factory manager how much to pay a local steel mill for metal, because the government owns both the mill and the factory.Without internal prices, the government has to guess how much resources are worth, which leads to shortages and economic waste.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Even AI understands it. That's its response. Are you braindead?

1 month ago

LULZ They don't have to guess. There's a thing called math. Also, using AI for a debate and openely saying you used AI's response is actually embarrassing. AI takes from many sources. Not all sources are trustful sources. Some of those sources AI will take from are filled with propaganda. The AI isn't always right. It obviously isn't in this case. If you want to continue this littlr argument, I'd like to hear your own words instead of copy paste AI bot misinformation.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ So why did communism fail?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Math has to know how many resources there are, the math cannot calculate with broken resource coordination itself.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I was using my own words this entire argument, I then went on AI just to show you it understands. If AI copies from random sources though, and it's "wrong" then where do you get your sources about communism?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ If you do logic in your head, you can literally see how communism failed. The fact something that's so simple to comprehend and you don't understand makes you stupid...

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I'll do it simply for you. Ask me a question, do it short, and each question about communism I'll give short, logical words why it failed. Let's try that; don't disagree to the plan. You disagree, you only contribute to the expression you're giving a psychological defense.

1 month ago

LULZ I answered why communism failed like three times now. There's a thing called collecting data to know how many resources are available. Have you ever learned how to count? I get my sources about communism from trustful resourses and from documentaries and interviews from people who lived in communist countries. Do use AI so much in your life that you don't even know how things worked before it? Also, AI doesn't understand anything. AI just tells you what it's being told from other things. I'm not going to questions from someone who can't seem to get their facts right.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ So let me ask you a question so you can answer your own question first: A factory needs shoe materials to make shoes, they contact each and every factory. One factory also has other factories contacting them, how do they respond to all of the factories when they have limited resources? And without urgency levels, how do they pick?

1 month ago

LULZ they respond by responding?? You're making is sound more serious than it is. I'm also not sure what you mean by "and without urgency levels, how do they pick?" what do you mean by urgency levels and how do they pick what? if there's no urgency levels, wouldn't there be no urgency; therefore, less serious than ehat you're making it? I'm so confused on what you're trying to ssy here.

1 month ago

LULZ I'm gonna cry if I make one more typo oml.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Urgency levels means how urgent it is that the person is responding to you. Let's say you own a market (which communism doesn't allow but let's assume it does) you own food. People cannot obtain your food because there are no prices. The government has to choose and tell you how much food you sell to keep things equal - but the government is a central authority, not everywhere, they can't possibly calculate resources or human needs. Which the store collapses because you might not meet the deadline of selling enough food, or might sell to little, wasting market value. Does that make sense? If it does, I can go deeper to step 2 of why communism is bad.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Market value being like the rareness or common amount of the same food you're selling. People might not get that specific food anymore because they know they might not obtain it, or they want to protest against it because it's unequal. Wastes that foods market value.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The ecosystem slowly collapses as nobody get's a specific thing. But if nobody gets a specific thing then they'll choose something else, the government can't keep up with market value or inflation.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ With people not choosing that food anymore, only specific food will be on market. That perhaps one person still misses the old one, that ruins communism because that drastic outrage makes it so the some parts of the community don't get what they want.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ BTW this is still step 1.

1 month ago

LULZ I'm tired and can't comprehend words right now or type properly, so imma respond tomorrow or later idk

1 month ago

LULZ Like said before, they can collect data and do math... Why are we treating food as if they're BP rares? Sure some food is going to take longer to make than others or need ingredients that are harder to obtain, but people aren't going to protest over it?? There's going be a lot less food that would be considered expensive, but it's still going to be obtainable. There might even still be markets that you could go to that has specific things that others don't. How obtainable a food item will be will also be based on the region too. some places have more materials for a certain thing than others. Also just because the expensive food isn't as obtainable, doesn't mean the regular food is ******. There's still going to be food options. You remind me of a baby who isn't being allowed candy. oh, you can't have your candy? well now you're throwing a tantrum and revolting. What's better, not having to pay for school, health, and food, or having candy?

1 month ago

LULZ the word that censored was basically a synonym for low quality. I can't believe that censored.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The fact you're now thinking is a good step forward to being a reasonable logic person instead of making an unbiased opinion about communism because some website said it's good. Here's a short answer: So you just contradicted yourself saying communism is worse than capitalism, because you can't get specific things while capitalism allows coordination and successful trade at most.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ And you cannot just do math, again - math requires understanding the resource amount in the first place. Math cannot figure out something tangled if it's not already responsive. Instead of arguing through text which is hard to understand, maybe watch an educational video explaining the flaws of communism, and from there it'll be easier to make you understand.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Also, hope you understand this: You said the idea of just going to a different location for a resource you need. But that location also won't have it because the central authority cannot package to multiple locations at once, when one factory has tangled the entire ecosystem.

1 month ago

LULZ Bro I never once said communism is worse than capitalism. candy isn't important to me. If the math needs to know the source amount, you collect data like said before. I didn't say to go to a different location for a specific item, i said certain markets may have it, if it's not available where you buy all your other food. technically it is another location, but do you expect food to just be delivered to your bed? Don't tell me to watch an educational video about why communism is bad. I've already made up my mind. I'm not some greedy rich chud. Maybe I'll consider watching a video about communism is bad when you "the communist manifesto" and "the capital" by karl marx. Oh you know what, since you said Einstein was against socialism earlier, when he's not, why don't you read his book, "why socialism?" There are some other good books too, but I feel like those ones would be best for you.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The flaw is that "collect data" doesn't actually solve the economic calculation problem. Economic planning requires more than knowing how much of something exists. It requires determining relative values, opportunity costs, changing demand, resource scarcity, and how those factors should affect production. In a market economy, prices continuously communicate much of that information through decentralized transactions. A planner can collect enormous amounts of data, but the data itself doesn't provide the price signals needed to determine how scarce resources should be allocated. Likewise, citing Marx or Einstein isn't evidence that their economic conclusions are correct. Their writings are arguments to be evaluated, not authorities that settle the question.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ For example, knowing that you have 1,000 tons of steel doesn't by itself tell you whether you should use it for cars, buildings, machines, etc. Market prices provide information about scarcity and demand that helps make those decisions.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ That's part one why communism is stupid as hell. You want to continue step 2?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Part 2 is why communism has problems even beyond the data issue. If the government controls most businesses and resources, people have less reason to work harder, compete, or invent better things because they don't personally benefit as much from doing so. Competition also disappears, which can make businesses less efficient. And the usual answers don't magically fix it. "People will work for society" doesn't guarantee people will work as hard. "The government can control it" doesn't prevent bad decisions or abuse of power. "Technology can solve it" doesn't change those incentives. The problem is built into how the system works.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Even if everyone were perfectly unselfish, communism still has the same basic problem: **good intentions don't tell you what to do.** Math can tell you that you have 1,000 tons of steel, but it can't tell you whether those tons should become cars, houses, hospitals, or machines. Someone has to choose, and every choice means giving something else up. And if the answer is "just calculate it," calculate **what**? People's wants constantly change, resources are limited, and people value the same thing differently. There is no mathematical equation that magically turns everyone's preferences into one correct answer. Being unselfish doesn't remove scarcity or disagreement. It just means people have nicer intentions while facing the exact same problem.

1 month ago

LULZ I love getting questions piled onto me. Yeah they need to figure out how much of what to make, but they can find that out from what people are buying and using the data and math to find how much of what they need. I never once cited Marx or Einstein, I told you read their books in response to you telling me to watch education videos on why communism is bad. I'm splitting this up. I'll say something for your part 2 in a sec.

1 month ago

LULZ Some people are actually passionate. Some people want to create. People will keep inventing. No competition is better than competition, because it'll only end up with both sides taking and taking until there's nothing left. What wants from the people will even be changing? They have everything they need. What will change? What are you saying they even want originally? Is this like a trend thing? You think they'll wanna dress preppy, but then wanna dress punk but there's no punk clothes? What will the fast fashion brands do? oh nooo. that was just an example. People don't have to get things from the same place all the time. There's going to seperate places for their own style. I'm really unsure about what you mean about their wants changing. If you mean like what type of food they want, there's still going to be a variety.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The issue is that “people are buying and using it” doesn’t solve the underlying economic calculation problem. In a market, prices communicate constantly changing information about scarcity, demand, opportunity costs, and what people are willing to give up to get something. If a central authority is deciding what gets produced, it needs some way to compare millions of competing uses for labor, materials, and capital- not merely data about what people currently consume. You can collect all the data you want, but data alone doesn’t tell you what should be produced, what resources should be diverted from one use to another, or what the opportunity cost of those choices is. That’s the core argument you’re overlooking. And I didn’t say you cited Marx or Einstein. I said you were defending an economic system whose historical theory and implementation have major problems, so reading the underlying arguments - including their strongest versions- is more useful than assuming the criticism is just “communism bad.”

1 month ago

~~hux~~ “Do the math” doesn’t solve the problem. The math needs inputs: how much labor, material, energy, factory space, transportation, etc. each good requires - and what those same resources are worth when used elsewhere. If 10,000 people want punk clothes, you can calculate 10,000 units. But then you have to calculate the opportunity cost: what resources could have produced instead? Multiply that across millions of goods with constantly changing demand, and you need a way to compare all those competing uses. Markets and prices provide that constantly changing information. Saying “just collect data and do the math” doesn’t explain where the values for those calculations come from. So if “do the math” is your answer, show the equations, inputs, and how your system obtains them.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ At this point, you have no logical contradictions. This is pure facts. Nothing can say this is better than capitalism without a psychological defense.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Before you say “they’ll just collect the data” again, actually follow your logic all the way through. Who collects the data? How often? How do they know it’s accurate? How do they decide between two different uses of the same scarce resource? What happens when demand changes faster than production can? What happens when people want contradictory things? Who decides what gets prioritized when there isn’t enough for everyone? And what tells them whether they made the right decision? If your answer to all of that is “more data and math,” then explain what numbers you’re putting into the equations and where those numbers come from. You can’t solve an economic calculation problem by assuming the information needed for the calculation already exists. That’s the exact problem you need to solve.

1 month ago

LULZ Oh shoot I messed up earlier and said they'd find out from what people buy. My mistake. I'm not in running a communist country, do I don't know what exactly they'd do, but they could create groups and centers where people can discuss what they need and then send off information to other places based off what the people want. You expect me to know every little thing. There's multiple ways a communist country can handle things. And you want me to show equations, imputs and all that stuff when there's not even a communist country to test on. I'm also not a mathematician.

1 month ago

LULZ Oh gosh I'm so bad at speaking

1 month ago

LULZ ignore the "in" in the second sentence and get rid of the "do" that's not too far after that.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You don’t need to know every detail of running a communist country, but you do need to explain why your proposed system would actually solve the problem. Saying “they could make groups and centers where people discuss what they need” just changes who reports the demand; it doesn’t solve how those reports get converted into production decisions. If one area wants more steel for housing while another wants it for machinery, who decides which gets it? How do they compare those competing uses? What happens when the information is outdated or people ask for more than can be produced? “There are multiple ways” isn’t an argument unless you can explain at least one way that actually works. And you don’t need to be a mathematician or have a communist country available to test it- you’re the one claiming that data, discussion, and planning can replace market coordination, so you need to explain the mechanism, not just say someone could figure it out.

1 month ago

LULZ "do" was meant to be "so"

1 month ago

LULZ wow you talked a lot while i was and now i need to respond to the things i didnt get to

1 month ago

~~hux~~ In short, communism would work if it was actually fair and people were happy. But if someone gets different resources than someone else, or something gets tangled, or you're not free because you get the same rewards - then it's worse than capitalism. Capitalism fixes the solution of all this with prices, monetary value. That's the reason you're living peacefully with no distress; capitalism.

1 month ago

LULZ "That's the reason you're living peacefully with no distress; capitalism." Oh yeah there totally isn't tons of people on the street or struggling with money when they already have three jobs. That's why tension is so high in the US, because everything's so perfect. If different people want different things, they can still have different things. There's still going to be variety. I really don't think the type of housing matters that much though. The groups and centers i suggested as an example could just do paperwork with all the information and send it to those production companies. Things shouldn't be outdated. Things should be updated daily. Genuinely making up a whole imaginary communist country and becoming the one in charge of every little system just for this.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You're arguing against things I didn't say. I never said capitalism makes everyone rich or that the US has no poverty. I'm saying markets have a mechanism for coordinating scarce resources, not that capitalism is perfect. “People can want different things” doesn't solve the problem. The issue is deciding how much of each thing to produce when resources are limited and competing. Collecting everyone's requests daily still doesn't tell you how to prioritize them or what those resources are worth elsewhere. “Send it to production companies” just moves the question: how do they decide what to produce and how much without prices or some equivalent system? I'm not asking you to design an entire country. I'm asking you to explain how your proposed system actually makes those decisions.

1 month ago

LULZ They decide what to produce based on what was discussed in the groups and centers i proposed... Then they'd use that math and data to decide how much of everything they need... I feel like we're going in circles.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You have no answer. Nobody does: communism is stupid - it'll never work, you won't be free in that system. Be glad you weren't born in a communist country, you would suffer more than the homeless.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ That's because we are going in circles- you keep repeating the process without addressing the missing part. The groups can say “we need 10,000 houses,” and the data can tell you how many materials are required, but neither tells you whether those materials should be used for houses, hospitals, roads, machines, etc. when there isn't enough for all of them. The problem isn't knowing how to multiply numbers; it's deciding the value and priority of competing uses for scarce resources.

1 month ago

LULZ Yeah, no, I'd rather live in a communist country. I've answered your questions to the best of my ability. Have a totally nice day.

1 month ago

LULZ communism is scarce over competing. necessities first.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ f you’d rather live in a communist country, that’s your choice. But you still haven’t answered the main question: you’ve explained how people would report what they want, not how the system decides what those wants are worth compared to each other. Resources are finite. One ton of steel can only be used for one thing at a time. People could want that steel for houses, hospitals, bridges, or machines. The data can tell you how much steel each needs, but it can’t tell you which use should get it when there isn’t enough. That requires a way to measure trade-offs. Prices provide that information by reflecting millions of choices about scarce resources. If you remove prices, you need to replace the information they provide with something equally effective. “They’ll collect data and do the math” doesn’t explain what that replacement is.

1 month ago

LULZ The whole point of the groups and centers I proposed is so people can figure out what is more important and what the resources are to go toward.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I sense something: you defend yourself when you have nothing to say and see I have all answers. Communism is a bad thing - you're defensive and it's psychological. Even if you know I could be correct.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I understand that’s what the groups are supposed to do, but saying “the groups decide what’s more important” just moves the question back one step. How do they measure what’s more important? If 10,000 people want houses and 5,000 want hospitals, that doesn’t automatically mean houses are twice as important. And if both need the same limited steel, how do they determine what society should sacrifice to get more of one? That’s the calculation problem I’ve been asking about. The group can make a decision, but you still need a reliable way to compare millions of competing uses for scarce resources.

1 month ago

LULZ I'm defense of communism, because it's something I believe in and you're piling millions of questions onto me.

1 month ago

LULZ Don't tell me what I think and don't

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I get that you believe in it, but believing in an idea doesn't answer the criticism of how it would work. I'm not asking you to solve every detail of a country. I'm asking one basic question: when resources are limited and people want different things, what mechanism tells society what those resources are worth and where they should go? If the answer is just “the groups decide,” then the next question is how those groups make that decision accurately. That's not millions of questions - it's the same question you've been answering by changing the wording.

1 month ago

LULZ The whole point of the groups is so people can DISCUSS.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Shouldn't you be believe something when you see logic in it? This doesn't; how can you believe this? Is this a brain disorder.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I understand that. But discussion tells you what people want; it doesn't automatically tell you what those wants are worth when resources are limited. If the group discusses whether scarce steel should go to hospitals or housing, they still need a way to compare those two choices and the cost of giving one up for the other. That's the part I'm asking about.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Communism failed EXACTLY because of these reasons.

1 month ago

LULZ Do you not know how discussions work? Oh right of course not. You're used to a leader telling you what to do amd believe in all the time.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Bet you saw someone talk how great it is - saw the great idea but not how it'd actually work. That's why you're so passionate about a "fair system." Sorry darling, this isn't fair, with these limitations, communism isn't fair.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I know how discussions work. The issue isn't whether people can discuss things; it's what happens when the discussion ends and they still have to choose between competing uses of limited resources. If 10 people vote for hospitals and 10 vote for housing, but there isn't enough steel for both, the discussion doesn't magically tell you the correct allocation. Someone still needs a way to make that trade-off. And the “leader telling you what to believe” comment is irrelevant- I’m questioning the economic mechanism, not asking you to obey me.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ It's fine if you genuinely have no answer. Don't be embarrassed; anyone can be brainwashed. Thankfully I wasn't, and I'm giving you the truth.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Talk to you another time, you can post here, I'll respond tomorrow.

1 month ago

LULZ The decisions are part of the discussion. There really shouldn't be a debate of hospitals vs houses though. There doesn't need to be too many hospitals and the houses are based on the population. And communism is equal. It's all or none. I'm gonna send this and hope there aren't three more paragraphs I didn't see before.

1 month ago

LULZ Oh wow I don't have a response bc it took me three minutes. that's such a long time. wow

1 month ago

~~hux~~ That still doesn’t solve the problem. Saying “the decisions happen through discussion” explains the process, not how the actual trade-offs are decided. Also, “houses are based on population” doesn't account for differences in location, size, materials, preferences, or changing demand. And “equal” doesn't mean resources are unlimited- if there are 100 units of something and people collectively want 200, someone still has to decide who gets the 100. That’s the exact decision-making problem I’m pointing out.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The issue is actually very simple: discussion can tell you what people want, but it cannot create more resources. If 1,000 people want something and only 500 can be produced, someone still has to decide who gets it and why. If the same materials could be used for two different things, someone has to decide which use is more important and what society gives up by choosing it. Saying “people discuss it and decide” doesn't solve that problem - it just says someone will make the decision. The real question is what information or system they use to make that decision accurately and consistently.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ “Communism is equal” is also an oversimplification. Equality can mean equal rights, equal income, equal ownership, or equal access to resources, and those are completely different things. Even if a communist system aims for economic equality, people will still have different abilities, jobs, needs, preferences, and circumstances. Treating everyone identically wouldn't necessarily be fair or even equal in outcome.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The 3 paragraphs were necessary for not bright people.

1 month ago

LULZ Okay so the first two paragraphs are nonsense about things I already answered that you don't seem to understand. I'm aware not every little thing about communism is equal. You seem to take everything very literally.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I understand you don't mean literally every single thing has to be equal. That's not the point I was making. The point is that you keep giving the goal- “equality,” “discussion,” “people decide what they need”- as if stating the goal explains how the system achieves it. Saying “people will discuss it” doesn't explain how scarce resources get allocated, and saying “communism is equal” doesn't explain what kind of equality you mean. I'm not taking you literally; I'm asking you to explain the mechanism behind the claims you're making.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ The level of stupidity you're acting on is below human-level. You even called a 14-year old an adult...

1 month ago

LULZ I didn't call a 14 year old an adult. I said that that's the youngest age you can be to have the maturity level capable of being an adult. I tried explaining the system the best I could. By the whole equal thing, I meant that people aren't going to be treated Identically. People will be treated from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I'm going to make this incredibly short for stupid people: If you have no answer for why communism is good, and how I extensively have good answers, then why do you still believe communism, when physics caused it to fail.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ And these aren't good answers - these are facts. If a person says "This will be great" why would you believe them without using your brain?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Are you missing one?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ A goal for a system doesn't mean it'll work. If the leader or the founder of communism says it's good, why is communism gone. If you blame it on the CIA, that's pure stupidity because you can use your brain to literally see how a system with no coordination fails.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I want 2 pairs of shoes, can I get them? No, the factory doesn't have resources. Factory asks for resources, they can't get them. The cause of this was explained above. Capitalism is definitely not perfect, you're very correct there - but it's real unlike communism because transactions have consistency, not RNG based. Monetary value coordinates you to make decisions, and helps you get personal attention, not "work for society" as that wouldn't work. Personal attention is also not selfish economically because every transaction still goes through, both people get what they want even if they think for themselves.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ By personal attention, it sounds bad, but look at this way: Communism - work for society, no one can fulfill their dreams. Capitalism, the harder or smarter you work, the rewards are based on you. If you pay for something, the other person gets part of your value, so it's still very fair.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ I understand what you mean by “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs,” but that actually brings us back to the same problem. You’ve described the principle, not how the system determines everyone’s abilities, needs, and what they should receive. Who measures those things? How do they handle disagreements or limited resources? And how do they know the allocation is actually fair? Saying “according to needs” sounds simple until you have millions of people with different and competing needs. The problem isn’t understanding your goal - it’s explaining how that goal actually works in practice.

1 month ago

~~hux~~ Also, isn't communism, in practice, not actually fair if you cannot own specific property and that a central authority owns it? Responding with your own proposed idea isn't what actual communism is, right?

1 month ago

~~hux~~ You would be showing ways to fix it, not how communism actually was. So then capitalism is better if it offers transactional value.

1 month ago

LULZ I've already answered all of these. I'm not repeating myself. Also, I just want to say this, but despite me being a communist, I'm not fully against capitalism. Ever so often there's a good president. There's still barely any good ones. I think that if there's a good president, things for their country will get better. There's not a lot of good people in our world though and there's not much a president can though, especially since they can only serve two terms. That's all I wanted to say. I'm not fully against capitalism.

4 weeks ago

LULZ "though" was meant to be "do" i wish i could edit things

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I get that you’re not completely against capitalism, but that actually makes your position more complicated, not less. A president being good or bad isn’t really an argument for or against capitalism because capitalism is an economic system, while a president is a political leader. A good president can influence laws and policy, but they don’t control every part of the economy. And if your position is that a system works better when the people running it are good, that applies to communism too- you still have to explain how the system works when the people making those decisions are wrong, disagree, or simply make mistakes.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'm aware presidents don't control everything. If the whole country works together, I believe that'd be better than a single president making decisions. Everyone makes mistakes. If a mistake is made, they'll find a way to fix it. And obviously not everyone is going to agree with everything, but they can still see both sides of things. If what they want to do is as good as they think, they can convince people to decide on what they think is best.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I agree that people should work together and that every system will make mistakes. But “everyone discusses it, considers both sides, and fixes mistakes” isn't uniquely communist- that could describe a democracy, cooperative, or market economy too. The problem is that millions of people won't always agree on what's “best,” especially when resources are limited. Communism doesn't remove disagreement or scarcity; it just moves those decisions into collective planning. You still have to explain why that gives people more freedom and better outcomes than letting individuals make more of their own economic choices.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ This stupidity is beyond my comprehension - you can't even answer logical questions, you just resort to basic ideas, not how anything would work in practice. You have no idea what communism is like.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It's a suffering system with no coordination if you use your head, however, you're missing a head.

4 weeks ago

LULZ You're just asking the same questions I've already answered and calling me stupid. I'm not the stupid one here. I'm so sorry you're not able to comprehend what communism is actually like.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I understand what you’re proposing. The problem is that your answers keep describing what you want the system to accomplish, not why the system can reliably accomplish it. “People discuss it,” “resources go to needs first,” and “people can still get other things” are goals and procedures, but they don't explain how the system handles conflicting demands and scarce resources. If you think you’ve answered that, then the disagreement is about whether your answers actually solve the problem- not whether I understand what you mean.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Also, these are proposals, not actual systematic responses in communism. So if you just said what *would* make communism a good thing (without actually realizing) then communism is stupid.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ These are literally what you said is going to happen on your proposals, but that's what people tried- and it still failed. Because of physics not the idea.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Whatever you say

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Can you answer my questions with working proposals? What. Like you said basic stuff and didn't actually show in practice how it would work, just the idea...

4 weeks ago

LULZ I did explain it actually to the best of my ability. You just can't wrap your head around it.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ And to the best of your ability? That's it? So if you tried, you admit it doesn't work. It simply doesn't work.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Communism doesn't work for basic physics, AND a little bit of it's idea: you're restricted to necessities the government says, not what you want. Which makes it unfree, it's the same as going to jail; necessities, not small values you want.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Everything can be equal, but not equally free to fulfill people's full needs. A trucker wants a blue phone, not white, but he cannot choose that.

4 weeks ago

LULZ You're acting as if no candy, no electronics, and no anime figures is taking away everyone's freedom

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It is though. Imagine having not what you want, and all has to be equal. That's completely unfree. It's not that you want to be rich and that's unfair, it's just small values and personal choices cannot be achieved with a restricted system.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Because everything has to be extremely equal. That's an equality ecosystem, moving to less restriction created capitalism; capitalism is then free. Correct.

4 weeks ago

LULZ There's stilll ways of getting items you want. Mentioned this how many times?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Yeah... now prove it.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ "Still ways"? Doesn't that mean there is less ways than capitalism?

4 weeks ago

LULZ no??

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It does. Capitalism offers you to have your own rewards based off your works. Communism is free, everyone gets equal ownership, which breaks the economy. There is less ways to get resources due to control over you. Even the government, the elite controller, would be limited without all-help.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Payment is rigged in Capitalism though. Some people are paid more or less based of their identity. Some people can't even get jobs because of eho they are. And is communism free or not??? You're confusing me here. One second it's free, the next it isn't.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That's true, and I never said it's the best. Any system can be exploited, the point is it's far better than communism.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I said it's free because of the economy, the design and the idea. The functionality of it is also free. If a statistical anomaly of people abuse it, in communism the government abuses, so that's another thing that's big.

4 weeks ago

LULZ In my opinon, communism is better. I actually have morals and want things to be fair.

4 weeks ago

LULZ You're acting as if capitalism isn't exploited. You're also saying that the design and idea of it is good just like communism. But is it really as great as what it's believed to be?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Equal doesn't mean fair. Fair is freedom depending on how hard or smart you work - that's capitalism. Communism gives everyone equal rewards regardless what they do, which destroys the need for people working or making innovative ideas, they get the exact same rewards. But that's a part of it, there are many huge stupide of it.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I never said it's as great as communism. I said it's a version of communism that's actually supporting the community with unselfish transactions. Monetary value shows coordination of a resources needs.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Yep there are many huge stupide of it mhm yep

4 weeks ago

LULZ Oh and giving people free necessities must be selfish then

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You must be braindead, did you forget our last convo?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ How about you tell your dad who supports MAGA about your view on communism, he'd drool. "Son, you're like those hysteria of millions of people who are stupid enough to jump off a cliff."

4 weeks ago

LULZ Which one?

4 weeks ago

LULZ Oh yeah and people who are MAGA are a GREAT way to view America

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ So he doesn't work for MAGA? Hm, you must've lied to me on a convo to prove your illogical views on communism, so you could win even though you don't know anything you're talking about.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Huh???

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Huh because your Einstein example has nothing to do with the argument. Einstein having a small brain doesn't mean he was stupid, because brain size isn't a measure of intelligence. Just like believing in communism doesn't automatically make the system logically sound. A person can be intelligent and still believe a bad idea. The question is whether the idea itself makes sense, not how smart the person believing it is.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ The simple point is this: communism sounds good because it promises everyone what they need, but it doesn't magically create more stuff. There are still limited workers, materials, land, energy, and time. So you have to decide what gets made, how much gets made, and who gets what. Saying “everyone works together and everyone gets what they need” describes the goal - it doesn't solve the hard part of actually making that happen.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I used the thing about his brain as a joke.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Capitalism doesn't eliminate scarcity- it gives people a way to coordinate around it. Prices act as signals: if something is scarce and people want more of it, prices rise, encouraging producers to make more and buyers to use less. If people don't want something, producers have less reason to make it. So instead of one group deciding what everyone needs, millions of people make separate choices, and the market coordinates those choices through prices, supply, and demand.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ "I feel like hux acts smart, but he really isn't. He educates himself in random topics, but he blindly falls for the first thing he hears. I feel like he'd believe it if someone said that Stalin and ****** secretly visited each other's houses every Friday at exactly 23:00 and smoked cigarettes together to take a break from politics and get away from their wives. I feel like he's also the type to mourn Charlie Kirk's death." Lol.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Oh yeah cuz that's so much better

4 weeks ago

LULZ No but I made this post from a hunch. I hit the nail tight on the head, didn't I?

4 weeks ago

LULZ right*

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Actually, yes, because the point isn't that capitalism is perfect. It's that no single person has to know everything. If steel becomes scarce, the higher price tells thousands of businesses and consumers to adjust without one central group having to collect everyone's requests and decide everything. Capitalism spreads those decisions across millions of people. It can absolutely produce inequality and failures, but saying “capitalism has problems” doesn't make a system that removes those market signals automatically better.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ But about the post part - you didn't hit the nail on the head. You shown how you're missing braincells.

4 weeks ago

LULZ If that's what you think.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ On the other hand, communism tries to replace those market signals with collective planning, which means someone still has to decide what gets produced, how much, and where resources go. Saying “people will discuss it and figure it out” doesn't magically solve that. Capitalism has problems, but that doesn't make removing the mechanism that coordinates scarce resources a better idea.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Both Russia and the USA are capitalist countries and they're just doing so great right now.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That sarcasm is incredibly stupid. They may be having some problems, but a lot less than that of communism.

4 weeks ago

LULZ uhuh definitely

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I never knew somebody can be as stupid as you; we've been talking for days straight and I've shown everything how communism is worse than capitalism. Yet - somehow you still think the opposite?

4 weeks ago

LULZ We've only really talked about how communism is worse. We never really talked much about how capitalism is worse. There's a lot wrong with capitalism, and I've tried to summarize everything, but there are still a lot of things I haven't said that makes me think the opposite.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ TL;DR - Communism - discuss resources while data changes at the speed of light. You will fail no matter what. Capitalism- price tags show you everything steadily, no discussing what we might need, but rather everything.

4 weeks ago

LULZ And everything is overpriced and nobody can afford anything because of all the AI data centers we built, all the electricity we use, and power plants, and fireworks, and all of those other things that ruin our planet... yay, capitalism!

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Those are real problems, but blaming all of them on capitalism doesn't prove communism would fix them. AI data centers, electricity, land, and materials are all scarce resources that any system has to allocate. Capitalism can create bad incentives and pollution, but you can change those incentives with prices, taxes, and regulation. Communism doesn't magically make resources unlimited- it still has to decide what gets produced and what gets sacrificed.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Is it maybe the complex words I'm using where you struggle to comprehend how capitalism is better?

4 weeks ago

LULZ You're saying capitalism has ways of managing things. If that's the case, then why had nothing changed? Everything I said is a current day problem.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That's not true - things have changed. The fact that problems still exist doesn't mean the tools failed. For example, U.S. emissions of major air pollutants fell 78% from 1970–2020 while the economy grew, and sulfur dioxide emissions fell about 94% from 1980–2024. Vehicle pollution has also been reduced dramatically through regulation and technology.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Nobody could coordinate in communism, while capitalism slowly changed better decisions with understandable coordination.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Things have been getting worse since AI has been evolving actually

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ So the argument “the problem still exists, therefore nothing changed” is like saying medicine doesn't work because people still get sick. Problems can remain while becoming much smaller. The real question is whether the proposed solution improves things- not whether it makes every problem disappear.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ AI-related problems can get worse, but that doesn't prove capitalism can't respond. “A problem is getting worse” doesn't mean “nothing can be done.” Prices, regulations, new power generation, and investment can all change how resources are used. Capitalism never promised every problem would disappear; it provides ways for people to react when problems appear. A problem still existing doesn't prove the system can't address it.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'm saying that it got worse, not that it's the same.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ "I'm saying that it got worse, not that it's the same." Because of evolution, not the economic system.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Just because it can be fixed, doesn't mean anyone's making efforts to do so.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That's what I'm saying, they are doing efforts. Communism tries that too but can't because no coordination.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ So communism is stupid.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Uhuh sure. Also AI is only a problem for capitalism, not communism. Is the economic system not also at fault?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Instead of defending yourself when you have nothing to see but repeat ideas in circles that didn't exist, and the ideas in practice wouldn't work, just admit you're wrong.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ say*

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'm not admitting that I'm wrong to something I believe in

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That argument doesn't follow. AI isn't a “capitalist problem” because the same physical limits exist under communism: computers need materials, data centers need electricity, and workers and resources are still limited. A communist system would still have to decide whether those resources go toward AI or hospitals, housing, food, etc. Changing the economic system doesn't make scarcity disappear.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Belief is not a truth. When you see logical answers you still resort to defending your reality, instead of admitting. Because you were hit on the head at birth (allegedly).

4 weeks ago

LULZ Let's be real here, communism isn't wasting stuff on AI. Also AI does a lot more damage than regular materials and electricity. Communism also uses a LOT less electrical stuff.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I do know how to admit when I'm wrong actually

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That's not accurate. A communist system wouldn't magically “not waste” resources on AI; it would still have to decide whether AI is worth the electricity, chips, land, workers, and money it consumes. And saying communism “uses less electrical stuff” doesn't prove anything- it would depend on what that society chooses to produce. In fact, China is communist-led and is actively expanding AI data centers and electricity infrastructure for them.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ The simple flaw is: you're treating “communism” like a magic switch that makes unwanted technology disappear. It doesn't. People would still want AI, and producing it would still consume real resources.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You don't know how to admit when you're wrong. You psychologically defend your reality because a deluded tribe indoctrinated you at birth - that tribe is the people wanting to jump off a cliff friends or whatever.

4 weeks ago

LULZ In a true communist country, nobody execpt for factories and other major places uses electrical devices unless someone already had one beforehand. People don't use electrical devices for personal use. And I'm pretty sure all communists are against AI, so the country wouldn't use it.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That’s the part that makes your argument fall apart. You’re describing a hypothetical communist country where people barely use electricity and everyone simply agrees not to use AI, then treating that as proof communism solves the problem. You can’t define away the problem and call it a solution. People would still want phones, computers, appliances, entertainment, medicine, factories, and better technology. And “all communists are against AI” is simply an unsupported assumption- communist-led Vietnam, for example, is actively planning to use AI, including for government propaganda.

4 weeks ago

LULZ China and Vietnam aren't true communist countries though. Even if some people may want electrical devices, they don't need them.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Very simply: resources are limited. There is only so much metal, electricity, land, food, machines, and human time. Communism says society should decide how those limited resources are shared. Capitalism lets millions of people make separate choices, while prices show what is scarce and what people want. If steel becomes scarce, its price rises, businesses make more, and people use less. If something isn't wanted, businesses lose money and make less. Communism doesn't make scarcity disappear- it still has to answer the same problem, just with more central control. Capitalism isn't perfect, but it has a built-in feedback system for dealing with scarcity instead of assuming everyone can simply agree on what should happen.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That's moving the goalposts. Saying “those aren't true communist countries” doesn't prove your version works; it just removes real examples you don't like. And “people don't need electrical devices” doesn't solve anything- not needing something doesn't mean people don't want it. You're basically saying communism works because people would simply have less and want less. That's not proving the system works; that's changing the assumptions.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Admit you're wrong; it's not embarrassing when I already see stupid.

4 weeks ago

LULZ It's pretty well known that people can't have electrical devices in a communist country though. That's bot something that can be changed. People are going to want things they can't have, that doesn't mean it's a bad system.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok, enlighten me on how that would play out?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That actually raises the question you should ask yourself: if people wanting things they don't need “doesn't make the system bad,” then why is the system deciding they can't have them in the first place? Wanting a phone, computer, appliance, or other personal item doesn't stop being a legitimate human choice just because it isn't necessary for survival. And historically, communist societies absolutely did have electrical appliances and consumer goods; they were often scarce or difficult to obtain, not universally forbidden.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ But difficult to obtain sucks when capitalism makes everything, including life, fair, and easy.

4 weeks ago

LULZ You said it yourself, people would have less and want less. People will know that they can't have certain things. They'll be greatful that everything they need is paid for.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That’s exactly the problem: “people will have less and learn to want less” isn't proof the system works - it means the system is lowering people’s choices to fit its limits. Being grateful for food and housing is good, but why should having your needs met require accepting less freedom to choose what else you can own or pursue? Historical planned economies show the issue: East Germany provided basic necessities while still having major shortages of consumer goods and electronics.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Calling capitalism fair and easy is a huge understatement

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It actually is an understatement. Capitalism isn't “easy” because everything is easy; it's powerful because millions of people can make separate choices without one group controlling the whole economy. Prices, competition, and profit give constant feedback about what people want and what resources are scarce.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Oh yeah and it was so bad that they had to build the wall to stop people from crossing over into east germany

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You don't need a PhD on reality math to understand...

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Yeah, and that's exactly the point: people were willing to risk leaving East Germany for the West, so the government built the Berlin Wall to stop them. If the system was genuinely giving people the freedom and quality of life they wanted, they wouldn't have needed a wall to keep them from leaving.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Capitalism isn't as good as what you think. Are you a nepo baby or something that doesn't know what capitalism is actually like?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Yeah - and we're both living in capitalism, it's great. 💀☠️

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You don't have to be a “nepo baby” to understand capitalism. Capitalism isn't supposed to be easy or perfectly fair; its advantage is that you have more freedom to choose what you buy, what work you do, what you create, and what you build. Prices and competition also help coordinate scarce resources without one central authority deciding everything.

4 weeks ago

LULZ So great that I became a communist

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ And yes, capitalism has serious problems like inequality and market failures. But pointing at those problems doesn't prove communism is better.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ America - free country because of capitalism.

4 weeks ago

LULZ It doesn't prove capitalism better either

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Every other country: fails because idiots are attempting to turn it communist.

4 weeks ago

LULZ America isn't even that free as people believe it to be either

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That doesn't really prove anything. Becoming a communist proves that you prefer communism, not that capitalism is objectively worse. Capitalism has serious flaws, but markets use prices, competition, and individual choices to coordinate scarce resources without requiring one central system to decide everything.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ America is so free that's why they allow you to literally do plastic surgery to become a "different gender."

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ America isn't perfectly free, but saying “America isn't that free” doesn't make it equivalent to an unfree system. The U.S. Constitution legally protects speech, religion, assembly, press, due process, and protection from unreasonable searches.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Or maybe they allow that because it gets them paid. People of color, women, people in the LGBTQ+ community aren't as free as others are.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ The world works on money, wdym. Obviously they get paid - JUST LIKE COMMUNISM.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You're confusing two different things. People can absolutely face discrimination or unfair treatment, but that doesn't automatically mean they have fewer legal freedoms. If you're saying women, people of color, or LGBTQ+ people aren't as free, then you need to point to an actual freedom they're legally denied. “Some people treat them unfairly” and “the government gives them fewer freedoms” are not the same claim.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Peoe don't get paid in communism bro??? Medical care is free too. Are we forgetting a few things?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ People absolutely got paid under communist systems- so that's not the point. The point is who controls the money, wages, and resources. “Free healthcare” also isn't literally free; doctors, medicine, hospitals, equipment, and electricity still have to be paid for somehow. The state pays through the economy and taxes/resources. Cuba, for example, had wages alongside state-provided healthcare, while shortages of medicines and supplies were still a problem.

4 weeks ago

LULZ There's no currency in a communist country

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'll give you reasons on why some people aren't as free in a minute

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok, cool, show me.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You have no answer, admit it. You're searching rn on Google or something for theories or brainless fools saying it's good.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Firstly, how can people truly be free when people treat them differently for who they are? They're constantly being affected by other people treating them differently. People are arrested and killed just because of their race, sexuality, or gender. People will refuse them jobs just because of who they are. People have a lot less opportunities because of who they are. People can't even dress the way they want to dress. Schools will say people need to wear certain certain things. Is that really free? People in schools also can't even have phones anymore. What if someone needs to contact their parents about something important and aren't able to use the school phones in front of their whole class for it? Is taking away someone's contact to the outside world not taking away their freedom? People are also legally forced to go to school and get an education when schools and even the food there costs money. These are only a few reasons. I'm sure if you gave me time, I could think of more.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ I struggle to comprehend your logic. That has nothing to do with communism or capitalism, people will make fun of you either way if you're weird. Hell, communism forces you to dress in a specific way, not as a law, but as because resources are so uncoordinated you yourself have nothing to choose from.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'm so sorry I don't have things ready at the top of my head and it takes me a while to type

4 weeks ago

LULZ I was pointing out how AMERICA isn't as FREE as you think it is

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok, move to a different country.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Let's see how free it is compared to America.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Oh, maybe you aren't in America to begin with... sucks for you.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your logic defeats your argument. If you hate discrimination, forced conformity, and a lack of choice, communism is the worst system to support. It prioritizes the collective, meaning historical communist regimes strictly banned non-traditional dress, alternative sexualities, and personal expression. Complaining about minor school rules like phone bans is a massive contradiction; if you find a temporary school policy intolerable, you would find a system that dictates your job, bans travel, and controls communication unlivable. Objecting to compulsory schooling also makes no sense when communism relies entirely on forced labor and mandatory state programs. You are using the flaws of restriction to argue for total state control.

4 weeks ago

LULZ I live in New Jersey actually and I'd rather move to Germany or China, but I'm also actually still a minor and can't move unless my parents do.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok, please move out of America we don't want you here. 🙏

4 weeks ago

LULZ Where are you getting this communism propaganda from?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Where you getting European propaganda from?

4 weeks ago

LULZ ???

4 weeks ago

LULZ You're the one saying things about communism that isn't true

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok. But who are you to judge? You never experienced communism, my ancestors have and told me stories.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ They suffered, largely.

4 weeks ago

LULZ What country?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Hell, why did Independence happen? People want to be free, not extremely equal.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ The Soviet Union.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It's fine if you want to be a robot in a classless society filled with absolutely nothing that interests human biology. Go have fun, enjoy. Please move to one!

4 weeks ago

LULZ Maybe because America starved them out....

4 weeks ago

LULZ If there was a classless society, I would

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Nope it didn't - it saved them. Hell, my great grandpa was in the war, he was on some bridge he stated he just wanted to run into America, he wasn't scared if they'd shoot him dead.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ He didn't, obviously. But he wanted to.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ No one wants a classless society, it means you're worth nothing

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Can you please move to a different country? Thank you.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Maybe your great granpa was just greedy like you

4 weeks ago

LULZ A classless society won't get rid of who you are as a person

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ No. My grandpa lived in an apartment with absolutely nothing, he starved for basic needs. My great one had nothing also. My grandpa bribed an officer in Russia not to take him to clean up Chernobyl.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ That, the bribe was my genetics last values. They didn't care of "greed."

4 weeks ago

LULZ Cool story. Again, maybe if the usa didn't cut them off from everybody, there wouldn't have been people starving. Also there are still a lot of people who enjoyed living in the soviet union

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Who do you think you are judging communism when you never experienced it? You also have the time of your life in America, FORMED as a free country with legal rights.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Nah, my family hated communism itself not "usa" stuff.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ *NAH*

4 weeks ago

LULZ Who are YOU to judge communism without experiencing it? I also hate living in America and would rather take my life.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument ignores basic economic reality and the actual history of the Soviet Union. First, blaming the USA for Soviet starvation makes no sense; the USSR was a massive, resource-rich empire that collapsed from its own structural economic failures and forced collectivization, not external trade embargos. If a system is so fragile that it cannot feed its own people without relying on capitalist nations, it proves the system does not work. Second, claiming people "enjoyed" living there completely ignores why the state had to build physical walls, use secret police, and ban independent travel just to keep citizens from escaping. Nostalgia for a superpower status does not erase the breadlines, rationing, and absolute lack of freedom that the average citizen endured daily. You are defending a system that literally collapsed under the weight of its own inefficiency.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Plus, my bloodline experienced it. THEY TOLD ME STORIES.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Your bloodline could've exaggerated things too. I mean, you don't even fully understand what communism itself actually is. The USSR didn't rely on capitalist nations, other parts lf the world just has meterials it doesn't. Imagine the US being cut off from the rest of the world. Most of what the US has comes from other countries. The US would also probably have to rely on famines after it runs out of it's own resources.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ No. I can tell if my bloodline exaggerates. Who are you to assume what my family told me? "could've" is not reality; it's a theory.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument shows a major misunderstanding of trade and history. First, dismissing documented history as "exaggerated bloodlines" ignores mountains of official Soviet records, declassified state archives, and mass graves. These are historical facts, not family gossip. Second, the USSR controlled one-sixth of the earth's land and possessed unmatched natural resources. It did not starve due to a lack of imports; it starved because of catastrophic state management and forced collectivization. If a system has that much land and still cannot feed its people, the ideology is the failure. Finally, your US comparison is economically backward. The US is a massive net exporter of food and energy. It trades for global market efficiency, not basic survival. If the US were cut off, it would have a surplus of food, not a famine. You are inventing fake scenarios about capitalism to excuse the literal, proven collapses of the system you are defending.

4 weeks ago

LULZ that's why I said could've. also you said they weren't greedy, but they really must've been if they blamed everything on communism

4 weeks ago

LULZ Let's be fr, most of things from the US come from China, and partially Vietnam

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument confuses consumer goods with survival. Yes, the US imports electronics, clothing, and toys from China and Vietnam because of cheap labor costs, not because it needs them to survive. This is called market efficiency. When it comes to critical resources like food, energy, and medicine, the US is entirely self-sufficient and a massive global exporter. If trade stopped tomorrow, Americans would lose access to cheap smartphones and fast fashion, but they would have more than enough food and fuel. On the other hand, the USSR starved because its government controlled agriculture so poorly that it couldn't produce basic bread. You are equating a lack of cheap gadgets with a lack of food. The fact that capitalist nations can freely trade with communist-labeled countries for manufacturing efficiency completely destroys your earlier point that the West "cut off" communist states from the world.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You hate borders, dress codes, and forced state rules, so your solution is a communist state that controls your job, bans travel, and dictates what you wear?If capitalism is so bad and communism is so great, why did the USSR have to build a giant wall just to stop people from escaping? Curious.

4 weeks ago

LULZ But if the US was cut off from the rest of the world, people wouldn't be able to have things they want. Isn't people not being to have the things they want one of the main reasons as to why you're against communism? Also if people weren't able to have things they want in the US, wouldn't that destroy their system a bit? They'll try to make more of what people want and things may get mlre expensive from not being able to trade with other countries. There would still be a lot of damage.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Going to start deleting messages rn.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Too far to scroll down.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Communism is not the same as a dictatorship. They built the wall because the USSR was suffering at the time and people couldn't stand the living conditions

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You hate communism because the state decides what you get, yet you think a voluntary capitalist trade embargo is the exact same thing? Under capitalism, a trade cutoff means things get more expensive and you wait longer for an iPhone. Under communism, a state supply failure means you wait six hours in a breadline for rationing stamps. You are equating a lack of luxury items with literal starvation. If your system collapses into mass famine just because it can't trade with capitalists, maybe your system isn't the solution. Curious.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Doesn't even take that long to scroll down and you type fast. You sure you're not trying to get rid of your old embarrassing messages that you were wrong about?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Idk. Anyway, don't switch the subject. Answer me, I'm curious.

4 weeks ago

LULZ A huge percentage of the US is already struggling with money. People will face way worse consequences than you think

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Ok.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ More than communism? Sure buddy. Please get out of America.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your statement mathematically proves the system's failure. Let X = Economic Value of Communism. Let Y = The Berlin Wall. If X worked, net migration would be positive. Instead, it was negative, requiring Y to trap citizens. Between 1949 and 1961, 2,500,000 people (14% of the East German population) fled voluntarily. From 1961 to 1989, after the wall was built, only 5,000 successfully escaped while hundreds were shot by their own government. If a system requires a 155-kilometer concrete barrier, 302 watchtowers, and a shoot-to-kill order just to keep its workforce from escaping suffering, it is a dictatorship by statistical definition. You are admitting citizens had to be physically imprisoned by the state because the economic model failed to provide basic living conditions. A system that must lock its own population inside a border to prevent total collapse is an absolute failure. That is undebatable math.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Already told you I can't. Love how you're trying to deport me though.

4 weeks ago

LULZ The USSR wasn't even a true communist country either, so I don't know why we're even using that to represent all communist countries

4 weeks ago

LULZ Never said 14 was an adult. You just misunderstood

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument is the oldest logical fallacy in political science: the "No True Scotsman" defense. If every single attempt to implement an ideology results in a massive humanitarian disaster, the problem is not the execution; it is the blueprint. Let's look at the raw data. By definition, communism requires the total abolition of private property and absolute state control over all resources. When you mathematically centralize 100% of an economy, you eliminate supply-and-demand price signals. Without these signals, it is mathematically impossible to calculate the value or necessary quantity of goods. This is why every single country that attempted this model (whether the USSR, Maoist China, or Khmer Rouge Cambodia) suffered catastrophic economic collapse and state-enforced rationing. The data shows that the closer a country gets to true state-controlled communism, the faster it collapses into authoritarianism. The theory itself is built on a mathematical impossibility.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Countries also tried converting to communism too fast.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument completely ignores the math behind the economic calculation problem. Speed is entirely irrelevant when the fundamental mechanism is mathematically broken. Let's look at China's "Great Leap Forward" as a data point. In 1958, the state attempted a rapid conversion to communism by centralizing all farming resources and abolishing private property. Because the government eliminated market prices, it had no mathematical way to gauge actual supply and demand. By 1961, this structural blind spot resulted in the starvation of an estimated 15 to 55 million people. Whether you transition over three years or three hundred years, the mathematical reality remains unchanged: you cannot efficiently allocate millions of complex resources without supply-and-demand price signals. If a blueprint requires perfect information that a state cannot physically possess, the system will always fail. Slowness would just drag out the starvation process.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Can you politely show me the stuff where you'd explain in a few minutes how capitalism is worse magically?

4 weeks ago

LULZ Not if they did it right

4 weeks ago

LULZ what does "Can you politely show me the stuff where you'd explain in a few minutes how capitalism is worse magically?" mean?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Your argument relies on pure blind faith, completely ignoring the economic calculation problem. "Doing it right" is a mathematical impossibility under state centralization. Let C equal the number of economic decisions a state must make daily. In an economy with millions of citizens, C represents trillions of constantly changing variables, including weather, consumer preferences, supply chain delays, and crop yields. A capitalist market solves this instantly via decentralized price signals. Without market prices, a central government must manually calculate C. If the state miscalculates the cost of a single bolt or the yield of a single wheat field by even a fraction of a percent, it creates a compounding shortage. No amount of "doing it right" can fix a system that requires a government to possess infinite knowledge. This is why the USSR had massive surpluses of left shoes and zero right shoes. The math says it fails every time.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Can you rephrase the message you sent after my last one? the left and right shoes make absolutely no sense to me. i also don't know if you sent any more messages after

4 weeks ago

LULZ I'm going to sleep, so I won't respond to any messages til tomorrow

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ But then you won't remember anything.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ The shoe example is a documented historical fact of how central planning fails. In the Soviet Union, state planners set quotas based on weight or total pairs rather than consumer demand. Factories churned out thousands of identical shoes (like all left shoes) just to meet government targets on paper, leaving citizens with unusable products. Here is the rephrased message: Your argument relies on blind faith while ignoring the economic calculation problem. "Doing it right" is a mathematical impossibility under state centralization. An economy requires trillions of daily decisions regarding weather, supply delays, and consumer needs. Capitalism solves this instantly through shifting market prices. Without prices, a central government must manually calculate everything. If bureaucrats miscalculate the need for a single resource by even a fraction of a percent, it creates a compounding shortage. No amount of good intentions can fix a system that requires infinite knowledge. The math says it fails every time.

4 weeks ago

LULZ If that's what you think. I think communism will work if people keep trying.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ "if people keep trying" buddy the math literally says it fails twin.✌️

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You cannot disobey the laws of physics.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Plus, it's also embarrassing because if a communist economy needs trade from a capitalist nation to survive, and cannot alone or will collapse as explained above, then communism itself doesn't work. Not just the practice of it.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Also the block of text about shoes isn't what I think, it literally happened, it's an undebatable history that happened.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ It's not that only by mistake you'll calculate a fraction of a percentage on nothing, a human cannot calculate at near speed of light or possibly speed of light. Data changed extremely fast about consume needs or even resource allocation country-wide. Market prices help you understand those smoothly, without them, it's unpredictable completely. If you support an already failed, evil ideology, then at least understand physics won't allow it.

4 weeks ago

LULZ There's not even that many examples of communism actually failing. Do you know how many attempts it took to make the lightbulb? They kept trying and now we have an invention we can't live without. Also they don't need to CONSTANTLY calculate things.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ In communism you do need to constantly calculate things, I've shown proof and logic. That's just how the world works. You need to always calculate in an economy. A lightbulb is different, it requires science we didn't know exist, but knew it can someday. Communism cannot because science literally says already it fails, and capitalism is more free either way and no sane person would choose communism.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ A person might choose communism, but a person who has a head, or a person who has a PhD, would see it's impossible mathematically, and the idea is unfair.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ But about the creation of it, not how it's bad: The science needed for communism would be fiction, it's like trying to invent portal travel. No matter how much times you try to break existent laws of physics, you won't invent portal travel rationally. A lightbulb says science that we didn't know, but nothing told us it cannot be done rationally.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Completely incorrect. "There's not even that many examples of communism actually failing." Very incorrect. Communism has failed before, literally. And if it cannot sustain because of the economic calculation problem, then it'll never work unless a billion years later. And even then, if you need a capitalists' trade to survive, that's a failed system, it'll never work. Your blind faith would practically be deluded mathematically.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ But to say something, if you search on Google, it says you don't need to always calculate everything; correct. However, that's for a capitalist economy because it solves everything.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Genuinely tired of arguing now. Anything I say is wrong according to you. I'm still not wrong and I'm not admitting otherwise. Have fun with capitalism. I'd honesty prefer a democracy over whatever capitalism's got going on.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Capitalism allows you to vote for a leader. If democracy makes it so the people vote, how do you make sure the person voting in democracy isn't insane?

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ A leader is already qualified so an insane leader would still understand economy optimization for a more fair system.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ An insane person can vote from a chosen select though.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ So then in makes more logical sense capitalism is less risky than democracy, and communism completely stupid. The point is, no system is perfect, but compared to all other in history, capitalism is. In any system, a person could still be homeless and will be no matter what the idea is, the practice of a system still exists. This debating argument your giving is not from objective reality, you're presenting from emotion.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Even more logically, if all systems say they're fair, how do you know you aren't falling for propaganda when communism says it's good by a quote from the founder? The current life you're living is capitalism, if nothing is happening to you, then you're fine. If you see a homeless person on the street, you shouldn't judge the economy, only their choices, if your parents specifically are doing fine.

4 weeks ago

LULZ My parents are struggling a lot actually. Nice of you to assume I'm doing perfectly fine. Also we're not debating about democracy here. I'm just saying that I would prefer even that over capitalism, because of how bad capitalism is. I never hear the British complaining, only the Americans.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Yeah, but I'm saying logically democracy would make more sense to be less good than capitalism, not the idea, that's nice to give power to civilians to choose something faster, but dangerous if some of the civilians are not normal people.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Also communism everyone is living in a poor home due to resource allocation, and multiple people are ignored when homeless due to a classless society, communism would make more homeless problems, not capitalism.

4 weeks ago

LULZ Communism guarantees everyone has the necessities to live. Homless people are not going to be ignored.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Homeless people are generally ignored, and that was historical. My ancestors had their friends suffer being drafted into war, and homeless was a large thing.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ Also, in a classless society, no one is special, everyone is extremely equal, which removes fairness and quality of life. You may be the same value of everyone else, but that caused problems: less wants to work hard, request things when resources are limited, government control.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You're worried of school phone bans when communism appoints you your job, ignores you, gives you no legal protection, you don't own private property, you have to share a cheap apartment or home with someone else. The home part happened to my grandparents.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ You can't change the history of breadlines, even if you think it was caused by the CIA, if a communist economy needs capitalist trades to survive, then it doesn't work, it's a failure.

4 weeks ago

~~hux~~ This is completely different than inventing the lightbulb, this is an economy that killed people, not a harmless invention.

4 weeks ago

About

Net Worth

Games 1

Achievements 2

Friends 2

Groups 1