Indiana Moderate

@Ezra4Liberty Look at that. Moderate libertarian. Who would have expected that?

@citadel212 @based_mike__ @PeterMcCormack Singapore is ranked as the most capitalist country on both of the top economic freedom indexes. You're not using a consistent definition of "centrally planned" in your comments.

Yes they adopted parts of capitalism but they remained far more centrally planned than countries like India which weren't nearly as successful at reducing poverty. Singapore went from $500 per. capita income to $100k in one generation with a high degree of central planning to. 80% of their population lives in public housing, they nationalized key industries and had heavy handed industrial policy set at the top.

Central planning creates poverty.

@citadel212 @PeterMcCormack They reduced their poverty by becoming more capitalist. But they are still much, much poorer than countries that are more capitalist. You're using a different defintion of "centrally planned" for China than you are for Tesla and SpaceX.

In 1980 China was one of the poorest countries in the world. Poorer than Africa and India. Since then it leap frogged 140 countries and was orders of magnitude more successful at poverty reduction than those 140 countries that were way less centrally planned. Tesla and SpaceX are centrally planned organizations.

@_Ryan_Larson_ @cremieuxrecueil There are several different indexes that compare countries and prosperity, quality of life, standard of living, etc. & the specific rankings vary by index. But the most capitalist countries rank high on all of them, and the least capitalist countries rank low on all of them.

@cremieuxrecueil This looks like it says capitalism creates GDP. Does GDP equal prosperity or is there a better measurement?

Capitalism creates prosperity

@tjmussett @LPNational @ACPMain You're projecting. Economies with strong property rights and lots of free trade have high immigration rates. People want in. Economies with weak property rights unless free trade have net negative immigration. People want out.

@LPNational @ACPMain

You hate Communism because the Epstein pedophile regime told you to.

@coebalte25024 @AlisDekay If you want to prevent individual freedom and voluntary exchange of goods and services, you're the boot.

@AlisDekay Awww, who's a good bootlicker? You are! Yes you are! Such a good bootlicker yes you are!

Fixed.

@Gamesquidable @cafreiman It's not even remotely the same. The poorest people in the US have a higher standard of living than most of the world, even most of Europe. justfacts.com/news_poorest_a…

@cafreiman Well it kinda is the same. If your neighbors have more money the cost of living goes up.

What goes unmentioned—all households are getting wealthier! Wealth inequality is not the same thing as poverty.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Me? You're the one who is trying to equate authoritarian collectivism with Nordic countries. You can't just say "I want their results without their policies." If you have high taxes and centralized government but with US type immigration, you get something else. Brazil maybe?

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial So racism is your retort to why we can’t have social programs and higher taxes cool, good bye

They don’t want permission to acquire it voluntarily They want to use violence and take it by force

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial ?? FDR didn't advocate for less centralized, more competitive government, and neither do any other socialists. Nordic countries also have very strict immigration and citizenship laws to protect the cultural homogeny that American socialists oppose.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial That’s FDR governence, those are the evil socialist policies people actually want. And it saves capitalism from itself

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial ?? They're not socialist. Compared to the US, they rank higher on economic freedom indexes, their private & public sectors are more competitive, & their governments are less centralized and less corrupt. They spend a higher % of GDP on social programs, but they are not socialist.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial Explain Nordic democratic socialist countries

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Sorry, I was trying to avoid using the word "capitalism" because we aren't using them the same. The countries with the least free trade are more corrupt and much poorer than the US.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial I agree that the US has too much government-corporate collusion. But that's not due to free trade. The economies with the least corruption rank higher on economic freedom indexes than the US, and the least capitalist countries are more corrupt and much poorer than the US.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial We don't need authoritarian government to save us from freedom.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Again, you're arguing with your imagination, not economic reality. Good luck with that.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial You're arguing with your imagination, not real economies. People in economies with strong property rights and lots of free trade can afford much, much higher standards of living than economies with weak property rights and less free trade. This has always been the case.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial He saved capitalism, what happens in a society when most of the population can no longer afford to buy the goods it produces. To many gains have gone to the top and since goods can no longer be bought “free trade” no longer can take place. It’s a downward spiral.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Free trade is not going to collapse, free trade doesn't require authoritarian government to maintain it, and FDR didn't save free trade from free trade. None of that makes any sense.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial Of course we are, but that’s not gunna help when the system collapses or turns authoritarian to maintain the system. I’m just calling for some FDR save capitalism from itself stuff.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Then don't do business with big companies. You don't have to work for or buy from large corporations. Of course the government will give large corporations your tax money, but I think we're both against that, right?

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial It’s all good until the top gets to heavy

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial That's fine, if you do it voluntarily. What you can't do is force it on to other people who don't want to live collectively. Voluntary collectives are allowed in every free country in the world.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial Property rights are given by government not an economic mode. And free trade existed before capitalism so putting them together does not create a new thing. It’s just do we want the laborers to have a piece of what the production or does it all go to shareholders

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Again, you can use whatever terms you want for free trade. But it doesn't make any sense to argue with people who are using different definitions for your terms than you're using. Most of the world calls strong property rights and free trade "capitalism."

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial That’s just mercantilism, not capitalism

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Again, call it whatever you want. But in voluntary exchanges, there's no such thing as excess value, because both parties agree to the terms of the exchange. Any alternative to voluntary exchange requires authoritarian govt to prevent voluntary &/or force involuntary exchanges.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial That’s not being a capitalist tho is it. Both models definitions break down for self employment. Since you are the labor and owner. Being a capitalist is just owning the production and taking excess profit from your laborers.

@CaptJaybles @heresyfinancial Call it whatever you want. You can own the means of your own production if you choose. Or you can exchange your labor for money from someone else if you choose. What you can't do is take labor or property from other people without their consent & without them agreeing to terms.

@IndianaModerate @heresyfinancial So that’s just being in the labor class not the capital class