â„–2430742[Quote]
>>2430737 (OP)This is why MQN^RCHY WQN
â„–2430744[Quote]
The only option i had in my country was a zionist kike lover candidate or a leftist nigger lover candidate
â„–2430747[Quote]
Election is bread and circus
â„–2430751[Quote]
>>2430742>>24307442 worst namefags hello. hmm yes these two posts seem like opinions you would have
â„–2430753[Quote]
Not saying single party state is any better.
â„–2430761[Quote]
>>2430753i'll rather be living in a society ran by monarchs than a society ran by politicians
â„–2430764[Quote]
>>2430761are you really this mentally retarded?
â„–2430767[Quote]
>>2430751how would i be a namefag , when i never changed my name
â„–2430772[Quote]
>>2430767eh I guess not u just are the only one from malta and always post the same crap
â„–2430774[Quote]
>>2430751Who tf are you tranny
â„–2430781[Quote]
>>2430775raising taxes is good doe?
â„–2430783[Quote]
>>2430778Are you that one aussie who got banned because he said Peter Scully won
â„–2430785[Quote]
>>2430781Average democracy kike
â„–2430787[Quote]
>>2430761I would be fine with whoever as long as it isn't someone who doesn't even understand what they're saying most of the time bought their degrees and got into their position of power purely by nepotism.
â„–2430788[Quote]
>>2430783I did not say this
â„–2430792[Quote]
>>2430785actually under liberalism it is more likely that capitalists get their way.
â„–2430793[Quote]
>>2430787Nepotism WQN
Also monarchs are more low time preferanced
â„–2430795[Quote]
>>2430791yes this is true!
â„–2430799[Quote]
>>2430792People who remove competition to boeurocarcy(or how ever you spell it) are capitalists
â„–2430800[Quote]
>>2430793>using low/high time preference unironicallyohno its niggercoal
â„–2430801[Quote]
>>2430793You just like the aesthetic do you
â„–2430802[Quote]
>>>2430785 (You)
>You know not every kind of theft is bad I hope you know that
â„–2430804[Quote]
>>2430799it makes no sense to call it capitalism if it is not what the capitalists want.
â„–2430805[Quote]
>>2430802yes this is also true btw
â„–2430808[Quote]
>>2430804>using a marxist definition of capitalistsoh no no it's nigger coal
â„–2430809[Quote]
>>2430808why is this definition wrong?
â„–2430817[Quote]
>>2430809Capitalism is free markets , regulation removes the right to do something with you're private property so no regulation isnt capitalistic
â„–2430820[Quote]
>>2430817why is capitalism free markets? that is not what the capitalists want so it doesnt make sense to say that.
â„–2430823[Quote]
>>2430822you cannot justify your position
â„–2430827[Quote]
why is capitalism free markets? we do not have free markets but the social relation to capital is still the same, so it is capitalism.
â„–2430830[Quote]
>>2430802Do you think taxation for land lords who only rent their land should not be taxed?
â„–2430831[Quote]
>>2430827Ok so why do you marxists want regulation to stop free markets
â„–2430836[Quote]
no you didnt, I provided a reason for why I am defining capitalism in the way I am. You did not, you just said capitalism is this because I say so.
â„–2430837[Quote]
>>2430830Taxation just increases the cost of rent for the rentoid
â„–2430843[Quote]
>>2430831because it is the same thing as regulation, changing the relationship with capital is the only progressive reform.
â„–2430844[Quote]
>>2430837Not if you limit the rent prices.
â„–2430850[Quote]
>>2430844Limiting the rent prices means nobody will have the want to build more houses making the housing market stagnant , making the prices never lower (due to supply and demand)
â„–2430852[Quote]
>>2430737 (OP)What do you want to be ruled by? Hitler's train of thought turned into a hyperintelligent LLM?
â„–2430853[Quote]
there are already enough houses for people that is stupid
â„–2430855[Quote]
>>2430853No the houses that aren't sold , are in the process for the to be legally sold through permits
â„–2430857[Quote]
>>2430850The housing market isnt driven by landlords in urban areas you stupid kike.
â„–2430859[Quote]
>>2430855they should force them to be sold then. problem?
â„–2430866[Quote]
>>2430864what is the point here?
â„–2430869[Quote]
>>2430866Who will buy them? The state?
â„–2430870[Quote]
>>2430859There are gonna get sold , they just need permits for them to be sold dumbfuck
â„–2430871[Quote]
They*
â„–2430872[Quote]
>>2430869yes why is that a problem?
â„–2430873[Quote]
>>2430870why do we need more houses than we have people?
â„–2430876[Quote]
>>2430872The state shouldnt own to many such building, it is too inefficient for maintenance.
â„–2430879[Quote]
>>2430873The more supply there is , the lower houses cost. Do you know basic economics ?
â„–2430880[Quote]
>>2430737 (OP)usually just gaslighting most just want to believe that some new chump will do something
â„–2430881[Quote]
>>2430879if we have enough houses for every person, it should be very cheap. currently that is the case, but houses are expensive, your solution? build more houses kek.
â„–2430882[Quote]
>>2430879Not necessarily large conglomerates could buy up many buildings and force higher pricing.
â„–2430886[Quote]
>>2430879why would it be cheaper if there are more houses than there are people? those houses would literally be irrelevant because there is no one to live in them.
â„–2430887[Quote]
>>2430881yes, in texas they did that and the average house went from 500k to 400k
â„–2430888[Quote]
>>2430887wow should be zero dollars
â„–2430890[Quote]
>>2430888You disregard the workers who have built it. They should get a fair pay.
â„–2430891[Quote]
>>>2430887 (You)
>wow should be zero dollars
You know in any society you should work for a house
â„–2430892[Quote]
>>2430887this is happening because new houses force horders to rent or sell houses they already own. there is no need to build more houses than is nessesary because no one can live in them, it is literally retarded.
â„–2430898[Quote]
>>2430892Evendoe thats literally what housing babbles are about.
â„–2430900[Quote]
>>2430899Not necessary are you like 6? People often buy land because it is aggod investment.
â„–2430903[Quote]
no they did not. was there a sudden boom of homeless people buying houses. these people already lived in a house.
â„–2430905[Quote]
>>2430900yeah but homelessness decreased in that area due to that
â„–2430906[Quote]
>>2430903You know that maybe there was an influx of immigrants or something
â„–2430907[Quote]
>>2430898yes people build many houses to hoard as assets. how does this contradict me?
â„–2430909[Quote]
>>2430905there should be no homeless in the first place.
â„–2430912[Quote]
>>2430905You talk about this specific example but just look at the housing market of california in the 70s and 80s people just bought houses for value not zo live in. Homelessness saw a drastic increase and most people couldnt afford houses anymore leading to them moving away from LA and causing stagnazation.
â„–2430914[Quote]
>>2430906true, but these people also already live in a house. The point is building more houses when there is already enough houses for everyone doesnt remove the system that caused venerable people to be without a house in the first place.
â„–2430916[Quote]
>>2430909What if , they don't work?
â„–2430917[Quote]
>>2430912This is also why Cali remains blue until today
â„–2430918[Quote]
>>2430912look at the housing market of today and its the same but everywhere in america now.
â„–2430921[Quote]
The housing crisis would be solved if we killed all the useless eaters. 80 percent of the human population. Quit this cuckservative debate.
â„–2430922[Quote]
>>2430918I dont know much about america today but the housing market where I live is also in a pretty bad state.
â„–2430923[Quote]
>>2430921TRVKE but one still has to determine an economic system in the aftermath
â„–2430969[Quote]
>>2430923Or, hear me out. You can relax. With all the economic supply and demand chain reconfigured, and ample time gained, the rest could be figured out with ease.