If capitalism effectively allocate resources, why there are homeless people?

They have that right.

They just don't have a right to have it given to them when they let it go to shit and their landlord throws them out, or to have it paid for outright by the state.

Because of human rights/demagogy.
The market solution is that they would move somewhere else or eventually die of starvation or disease or killed by the police while trying to rob someone. Spare us your moral spooks and fake outrage. It's an efficient solution.

Deserve as in "have pruchased land and built a house on" or "have bought a preexisting house".

Don't strawman me pls.

If you're willing to work hard and follow the law, anything you buy is what you deserve to own. That's how our system works.

I bet you're serious. Idk what to do in this world when people are this retarded.

>enter a talk about who deserves what and why
>let me refer to a specific existing legal fragment. surely that fragment is what determines morality in this world

Evolution is a description of what happens.
This is a discussion about what we *should* do morally.

Feel free to deny that morality exists or some other stupid thing, but try to at least follow the basic plot. It's like I argued it's wrong to drop bombs and you said that I'm denying gravity exists.

Jesus Christ people, it was I who first uttered the word "deserve" in this thread and what I meant was specifically , in addition to "have rented a house and not turned it into a shithole".

Stop it with the strawmanning in here.

>Implying America isn't the entire world

You literally just used your premise to prove your premise. Try not to talk about logical fallacies.

>how do we decide who deserves a house?
>it's whoever gets one using capitalism

Even if America was the whole world, the constitution allows a process for amending itself. It must itself imply that it cannot be a final arbiter of morality.

I don't know why I'm even typing here everyone is so retarded.

Nobody deserves shit you entitled welfare leech. Get a job! I'm not going to pay for your stuff because you decided to waste your shot at a university in a shitty arts degree.

But how is that a fallacy? Makes perfect sense to me.

Just ignore him, he's an edgy kid who read some Marx and fell for the communism meme.

>by that's wrong
>BUT YOU ARE BAD
Ok kid. You sure showed me.

Realistically speaking, what job here is homeless person that pays enough to buy a fucking house?

>Nobody deserves shit you entitled

Do you think you deserve fair pay for your work?

Do you think your employer can enslave you with his private military if he was capable and not pay you a dime, or do you think you're entitled to certain liberties guaranteed by the state?

How do you feel about your employer outsourcing your job to some Chink who can do it 10% worse for 60% less money?

What?

>effectively allocate resources
What? Capitalism is about generating capital, doesn't matter why or how.

Interesting... Tell me more, Mr. Ancap meme circle.

Get a job you fucking wastes of oxygen!

Rley maeks me think

It implies that morality must either come from capitalism or be perfectly correlated with it. In case it's not clear why that's dumb, which capitalism are we even talking about? Current laws in America? Current laws in Sweden? Last years laws in America which were different?

Obviously there is no "capitalism" as such. There's an infinite space of laws and we use these words to vaguely describe the project. If you have absolutely no moral theory about why I should prefer some outcomes to others, then why prefer capitalism to socialism in the first place?

You have to be able to say that capitalism is better than socialism *for some reason*. So if someone says "why is capitalism good?" you can't just say "because it's capitalism", and that's what that post is saying.

It's a common argument in favor of capitalism, that the invisible hand ensures efficient allocation of resources.

That said as usual it's a case of "mostly effective most of the time" rather than "always effective all of the time". The trouble is when people refuse government intervention in the times it isn't effective.

Answer the questions my "Nobody deserves anything" friends. Do you mean what you say to the letter, or are there caveats where people deserve things?

>implying the games isn't rigged
I mean it would be as your described ideally I guess but there is so much interference with the marked, tax evasions, lobbying etc. that your """argument""" doesn't hold up to reality.

> Fuck, I missed for.
How can you buy a house if you are homeless and nobody in the sane mind is going to hire you?

>someone has different ideas about ethics and economics than me
>get out reeeee
Why so triggered? Maybe go find a safe space if you have no arguments to present.

Well, people like me will argue that the government is actually no good at fixing anything, puts an unfair tax load on people who contributed to the free market's success, and and prevents those to contributed to its failure from taking full responsibility for that.

You're reading way too much into a single word.

>commies so butthurt that Sanders lost they've resorted to shitposting on Veeky Forums
Really cheesing my broccoli over here.

Your rly activating my almonds

You are right but I always thought it was funny that people didn't get the metaphor of the invisible hand.
>all of whom thus derive from his luxury and caprice, that share of the necessaries of life, which they would in vain have expected from his humanity or his justice...The rich...are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life, which would have been made, had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants, and thus without intending it, without knowing it, advance the interest of the society...
The invisible hand is less about the market but about giving guidance to rich people (according to Smith).

SeeYou are literally just saying that "capitalism" defines the good. That is obviously wrong.

Because capitalism does not allocate resources
It is the market who does that.
Homeless people result from individual choices and chance rather than a dictation from markets.

As long as that thing doesn't violate anyone elses rights, you should be allowed to have that thing.

>implying the market isn't the essential part of capitalism
You bring nothing new to the table with your hair-splitting.

>the government is actually no good at fixing anything

I tend to agree, it's highly inefficient, but the trouble is it's one of the only institutions that's even capable of stepping in at points where the free market doesn't give a shit or can't address it naturally.

This is important for stuff like environmental regulations and monopolies.

Things like welfare are more controversial, but they're all parts of a sliding scale of government responsibility in filling in where capitalism is either unwilling or unable to solve the problem.

>oh shit I have no real response to that argument
>you're a commie! Reeeeeee
So triggered.

>M-m-muh evil rich people
>Money is the root of all evil guys Stalin said so!

No, user, you're just realizing you have entitlements you don't want to lose and think you deserve.

Don't become homeless in the first place.

Because capitalism cannot force participation.

No, I'm just explaining to you the basic tenets of our socio-political system which you don't seem to understand.

That isn't a solution to homelessness.

"I'm homeless, how do I get a home?" "Get a fucking job!" "I'm homeless, how do I get a job?" "Don't be homeless!"

You are a commie tho

> Don't become homeless
Say that to fucking nature.

Are you seriously going to start preaching about white privilege?

Those aren't separate ideas. Rich people are always the whole problem.

Let's put it this way. If we could design perfectly motivated and compassionate people with CRISPR, wouldn't socialism become good?

Nobody asked for a solution to homelessness itt.

> non-market capitalism
> non-capitalistic market
Do they even exist?

>explaining tenants
You've totally lost the plot my friend.
Are you *describing* how the world works? Or are you talking about how things *should* work ethically?

You seem to think these are the same project. I understand how capitalism works. The question is whether it's good and why. Maybe it's very good, but first you have to explain what makes anything "good" in the first place. So far the answer has been "capitalism", which is circular.

>Choose to live in an area known for natural disasters
>Woah dude wtf how could I have predicted this

Also that's a different circumstance than if you're homeless because of an eviction or something like that.

I haven't even advocated a single thing in this thread. All I've done is point out that it's not an argument to say that capitalism is good because capitalism is good. You fags are so wrapped up in your dogma that you don't even know how to answer the most basic questions about what I'm even trying to accomplish with capitalism in the first place.

Capitalism is good because it provides everyone with the opportunity to earn a decent living. Whereas with communism there are no chances to rise above others, as no matter how much work you put in youre living in the same government issued slum.

>has free unsed homes
>muh you got to please my standarts to deserve them
This is why capitalist all deserve to be shot in mass graves

>white privilege

I didn't say a thing about white privilege, you triggered /pol/tard, the fact that you immediately went there on your own is interesting. Are you trying to shift goalposts to argue against the usual plethora of SJW nonsense because that's what you're used to doing, while ignoring the examples I provided?

Political rights are entitlements. Protectionist policies preventing outsourcing are entitlements. Fair wages are entitlements. You think you deserve these things. Normalized entitlements, certainly, but talk to someone a few hundred years ago and they'd probably have different ideas.

To my landlord I deserve to live in his house because I'm orderly and I pay rent in a timely fashion.

To my employers I deserve to be paid because I bring valuable skills and they make a net profit by employing me.

And that's how I effectively managed to deserve a house. Huge sense of entitlement, yes.

Didn't I tell you not to strawman?

>I deserve a handout and if you disagree you should literally just die

> with communism there are no chances to rise above others
Not true. You can enlist into party, rise up here and goverment grants you a better house after years of nomenclarute power gaming.

Jesus Christ. You didn't even read all the follow-up posts, did you?

But sure, if you're so eager to find an excuse to shoot large amounts of people, to take that one.

Privilege is a fine concept when it's not misunderstood by feminists.
Some people have inherent advantages. This has to be clear to you.
But then you want to design a system where those advantages are amplified. Why is that good?

>spoiler: there are good answers. Here's one "even though inherent differences do matter and produce unfair outcomes, the result is still a net improvement over our other alternatives. If you think you can produce more net well-being with another system, you'll need to describe it, and all systems will incur inefficiencies."
Here's a bad one. "YOURE A COMMIE RREEEEEEEEE"

You really think you're protected from disaster by your good choices, don't you?
There's no talking to some people des

Not an argument.

Oh cool, so I can either spend 20 years doing clerical work for the government in hopes that papa stalin will take notice and give me a house for doing such a great job, or I can go with capitalism and actually have choice in my career path while still making a healthy amount of dosh and eventually purchasing a home.

Evolution is a process that allows the genetically gifted to flourish and the weak to die off. Homeless people have ample amount of government assistance to get then out of poverty. If they are to lazy, stupid or insane to use them, then they deserve to rot and die in the street.
It's not morally right to allow the genetically weak to live, produce similar offspring and continue to leech off the future of our species.

>I have a house
>therefore I deserve a house
>therefore whoever doesn't have one doesn't deserve one
Airtight moral theory there.

Because market economies presume a basic equality of ability and rationality in market actors. When you consider that most homeless people are also usually mentally ill as well as drug-dependent, you realize such people are not likely to succeed in market systems.

>Evolution is a process that allows the genetically gifted to flourish and the weak to die off.
No.

I'm saying that if you choose to live in an area with a higher percentage of typhoons or whatever per year than other places, you need to be prepared for that disaster to strike, and if you're not it's your fault when you have nowhere to go when shit hits the fan.

You aren't responsible for the system that provides you a house and not others. You didn't choose not to be born in Congo. But you're trying to explain that your system is the most moral because you managed to just take an obvious career path that was offered to you and now you think your moral worth is higher than the people whose place you could have occupied of not for sheer luck.

>muh 1880 social Darwinism
Pathetic bro and not scientific at all.

>Didn't I tell you not to strawman?

No?

>To my landlord I deserve to live in his house because I'm orderly and I pay rent in a timely fashion.

And he's allowed to kick you out at a second's notice because it's his house. Take your shit, hit the curb. Oh wait, there are laws about that.

>To my employers I deserve to be paid because I bring valuable skills and they make a net profit by employing me.

And he deserves to tell you you're working 20 hours overtime this week or you're fired, he's writing your checks and if you can't do it he'll find someone who can. We talking net profit? Let's see how quickly we can train up some plucky Indian to do it at a fraction of the cost. $5 an hour goes a long way in some places, son. Oh wait, there's laws about that.

>And that's how I effectively managed to deserve a house. Huge sense of entitlement, yes.

So you're saying people do deserve shit?

All I'm saying is the government in the civilized world guarantees you entitlements all the time, and this isn't a bad thing. Just don't act like they don't when they do.

Holy shit do you really not think this describes capitalism for 98% of people?

Why should any of those 98% care that the 2% who win in their system win on a different basis than the 2% who win through party loyalty? If anything, the party loyalty is more accessible to everyone.

They are not free. Various people put in time and money for the land, design and construction.

>i got thousands of abandoned houses
>i got thousands of homeless people
>yet i refuse to give them those houses and let them be miserable because helping my fellow man doesnt give me profit

I'm saying that we live in a world with uncountable chances for disaster. Are you telling everyone that they should move from California and Florida and anywhere with any substantial risk and all try to crowd into Idaho or something? You don't see how this might actually cause more problems than just sharing the community risk for inhabiting this planet?

Youre starting to sound a little Orwellian with all this "party" nonsense

You leftist not believing in Science is worse then the bible thumping right wingers.

Neither is yours, because we didn't even exchange arguments. You just kept asking semantics questions.

>haha your not a communist like me?
>oh you must be an ancap XD

Who said anything about morality?

>I have a thing
>You want thing despite not working to earn it
>You don't get to have thing
Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

>capitalism

no u

l don't want some random poor subhuman around in my neighbourhood

You just simply didn't understand how evolution works (for Darwin). Let alone the state of evolutionary theory today. You think "survival of the fittest" is a concept introduced by Darwin, don't you? BTW by your definition Stalinism would be very effective because it certainly rooted our the weak with a breathtaking speed.
Also "you leftists"...Marx was probably the biggest Darwin fan of the 19th century. Read a book instead of Breitbart bro.

What if you live in a place with a low chance of tornado and your house still gets totalled by that once every 40 years 'what are the odds' tornado? There are so many disastrous factors no matter where you live that are not particularly preventable.

Also
>choose to live in an area known for natural disasters

What if your great great great grandparents chose to live there and you're busy, I don't know, making a living and 'just move lol' isn't a viable option? What if 'just move lol' changes you from 'I have a house' to 'I don't have a house'? What if the disaster free place you moved to has no jobs? Or housing is more expensive? What if you can't afford a house and now you're one of those homeless people and broke that tenet 'you shouldn't have become homeless it's your fault'?

>muh pseudo science
Pathetic bro. Take a look in the current debate on epigenetics or read Darwin but please don't pretend to have a clue about evolution.

>I live in southern California which is known for earthquakes
>Better keep some money tucked away in case of an earthquake
>Woah an earthquake happened! Good thing I have some money here for food and shelter!

>user goes back in time
>I don't work even though I'm not a cripple but you should give me the food you put in time and effort to grow because otherwise I'll starve! You wouldn't starve your fellow man because of mere profits would you?

>haha your not a communist like me?

If you're not the guy I'm arguing with, your post is shit.

If you are the guy I'm arguing with, you were just crying about strawmen. I'm not a communist, I think the system we have is perfectly functional, I'm also aware of the existing government entitlements I have in a liberal democracy and to say "nobody deserves shit" reeks of ignorance when I live day to day on the back of shit we have societally agreed I as a citizen / human being deserve.

See