You want a true capitalist meritocracy? Abolish inheritance, and provide universal health care. Starting off a round of monopoly with daddy's money does not a meritocracy make. Having to struggle with health problems you can't afford to mitigate does not a meritocracy make.
I am not trolling. Capitalism will reach its final and most unstoppable form if you abolish inheritance, and provide universal health care.
Other urls found in this thread:
What about people who make poor health decisions?
No
I want my property to go to my children, I don't want it to go to 350 pound Shaneequa with 7 niglets and critical stage of diabetes.
>Abolish inheritance
If you did all that would happen is that the rich would give more money to their children during their lives and especially in failing health.
It's not like free healthcare means magic medicine. If you fuck up yourself you will still face consequences. But they will exclusively be health related as it should.
Then just give it to them when you're 50. Hopefully you raised them to not be cunts and they won't put you in a home so they can sell the property and buy a car with the money after they split it.
If they do then you did a shitty job raising them and they turned out to be cunts Now suddenly Shaneequa doesn't sound like too bad of an idea just to piss those ungrateful little shits off.
Where are you people when the military budget is getting discussed? You don't whine when your tax dollars are toppling democratically elected leaders in countries you've never read about.
>"Waaah I won't stand for 3 cents out of MY glorious pocket because some drunk loser might get it."
It's amazing you think of them before kids with cancer, or something. You're that worried about a loser winning something he didn't deserve, more than you care about a winner missing out on something he deserves. It's amazing that you think you're personally being wronged when everyone else would have to pay it too.
But hey, let's have a glorious ancap land where no one pays taxes and the people who horde the most weapons and goons win.
Do you have an argument for inheritance?
Then you don't believe in meritocracy. You believe in feudalistic hoarding of wealth, and you're willing to conjure up some loathsome negro stereotype to defend it.
That is inheritance too.
>Then you don't believe in meritocracy.
I literally never said I did. Meritocracy is a pipe dream and pretty much like communism, it can only exist in theory but never in practice. In practice human will always be nepotists.
Two choices
>Your best and brightest work to provide for their children
>Your best and brightest don't work, and instead focus on burning through all their money before they die.
What do you think would make a better society?
>meritocracy
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJ
Would that be ancap socialist?
So its forbidden to give my wealth to my children / family?
Interesting. Meritocracy is a pipe dream.
Then why is the chief defenese of inordinate capital accumulation meritocracy, i.e. the egoistic "I earned that" "I built that" "I own this, so I deserve its productive output."
Are these not really meritocracy, but the cries of an animal defending something he or his ancestor took by force in a chaotic power struggle? Is it an orc clutching a bloody heirloom?
Without making an argument that hinges on merit: is Bill Gates earning billions for what his employees and his machines any different than your loathsome Shanaynay caricature applying for some food stamps?
Why do the owners of the means of production deserve the wealth produced by the means of production.
idk. Ideological labels annoy me, but categorization is necessary. I'm not the right person to ask this, probably. But then, none of us are because we're on a Canadian anthill sculpture enthusiast forum.
>OP wants to steal my family home so he can get free gibs
>That is inheritance too.
No, it's a donation.
I am donating it to my child because it's my money and I felt like it. Alternatively I'll purchase a sheet of paper from my child for $10,000, because it's really really good paper.
OP BTFO!!!
youtube.com
Ask people who believe in meritocracy that.
The crux of Capitalism is, if I work hard for something, I determine what happens to it. If I forge a corporation out of the ground with my bare hands and give it to my weak-willed son who has never done manual labor a day in his life, I have the right to do so.
In my ideal world, it would be. They should have to scrap for their wealth like you did. It would teach them character and discipline.
I expected more leftypol on Veeky Forums
We are lefty but this is just retarded.
Inheritance works because blood is everything. There is no substitute for the family and blood. Not even the most autistic forms of communism were able to break this most primal bond. The fact is that no one wants their kids to start from the bottom of the shitpile because of some retarded humanist idealism. I want my blood to have access to the most resources and not someone else's.
Outlaw charity and inheritance.
Everyone scraps for what they get, but if they get sick, they're protected.
Could I at least give them a nice cottage house for them to use when they have a job and children?
The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb.
>being this much of a shameless semnatics whore
Have some sense of propriety you little tart.
>Outlaw charity and inheritance.
Ok, then I'm buying sheets from his notebook for 10 grand a piece until I'm all out of grands.
If I gave you a knife and told you to stab your brother or your friend to death, which one would you stab?
Stop using terms like "deserve". Nobody deserves anything.
The fact that no one uses this cliche according to its original meaning proves it wrong.
I'd stab you.
yes but abolishing inheritance would also get rid of one of the biggest incentives to make money and would therefore stifle economic growth overall
I don't have a brother but I have a cousin and I would definitely stab my cousin. I have a sister and I love my sister because she's cool, not because she's my sister. If she was a bitch I would stab her over my friends.
I would stab you
Good job copping out, brainlets
>If I forge a corporation out of the ground with my bare hands
Great man mythos, here we go again
>and give it to my weak-willed son who has never done manual labor a day in his life, I have the right to do so.
This makes an inefficient society.
If you inherit machines and employees from your father, you aren't working for anything.
Your myth here relies on a self-made man, but EVEN the self made man likely purchased means of production with money he inherited from his laboring father. Only large businesses and essential businesses like agriculture get subsidized and ... wait a minute, that's octomom shaQuanda's welfare all over again, innit
Capitalism's crux is feudalistic because it centers on dynastic familes doing good for many generations in a row so they can tread on others. If your dad is a lazy piece of shit, you will not get enough dadgibs to start your own sonbiz
I knew a woman who gave all her money to her piece of shit drug-dealing son but gave none to her daughter in nursing school. Capitalist inheritance is inefficient. It is secular divine right, left largely up to the favoritist whims of the stupid.
>Abolish inheritance
Yeah, because all of my labor should go to people I don't know and am not invested in after I die, redistributed via the state. L I T E R A L L Y the opposite of meritocracy.
>universal healthcare
I work in an ED. I see the fattest, nastiest people come in daily with the same complaints all stemming from lack of self control and self care.
Go away Anthony Weiner, your political career is over.
"If we improve our (blank) system, people will use it more"
Brainlets think this is bad
It really isn't. The friends and alliances you make in life out of your own experience and bonds you form through trials are more important than simple family relations. That does not mean that you cannot form bonds with family just that being family should not automatically trump friendship just because.
Family can be dicks but you didn't pick them. You picked your friends and hopefully you didn't pick dicks, no one likes a dick picker.
>biggest incentives to make money and would therefore stifle economic growth overall
>economic growth for its own sake
Really makes me think
>would you rather drink Pepsi or Coke
>neither, I'd rather drink water
>THAT'S NOT WHAT I ASKED!!!!
Ask stupid questions... You're the brainlet here.
>the opposite of meritocracy.
How is it the opposite? Equality of opportunity is impossible with inheritance
BEHOLD, the true enemy of capitalist meritocracy!
>Start off in poverty, scrape and save all you can in the hope that your children will enjoy a better life than you did
>a bunch of wealthy upper class jewish liberals steal all your money and give it to Shaniqua and her eight crack babies
Get fucked.
>Equality of opportunity
But it isn't a meritocracy since it is given by the state, taken from others who earned it.
Large families break up family fortunes and in 3 generations it will all dissipate into nothing
KYS jewboy
Which is why an inheritance tax is unnecessary.
Speak for yourself. You are correct that this is animal instinct, but someone of us think beyond that, and in increasing numbers.
Society built to keep animal instinct in check. Taxes themselves do horrible things, but every society with representation through taxation and some sort of social safety net (even the horrible kind reserved for members of the military only ) does better than past societies with inheritance alone. There was a time where there were no public schools. Then there were public schools, and what do you know, literacy shot through the roof. Now they're regarded as inefficient because of the internet and shitty bureaucracy, but it doesn't take a genius to see how public schooling is better than everyone growing up an illiterate turd in bumfuckistan.
It is no coincidence that those who most strongly defend inheritance, are those who have something to gain from it. But it's only gibs if it's Reagan's "strapping young buck" and "welfare queen."
Bitch please, the State is the only barrier that keeps the poor from taking whatever they want from the rich so whining that the State does it is not an argument.
Answer the question. How is removing inheritance the opposite of meritocracy?
spotted the public school teavher
Fine. This is a fair request. I'll ask the same of you.
Make a case for inheritance and capital accumulation without using "deserves," the concept or the word.
I bet it'll boil down to "might makes right."
And while you're at it.
Make a case against welfare that doesn't use the concept/word "deserves."
Bonus points for that.
A tax for when I die? Well lets just tax me when I fart or eat while we are at it. How about a birth tax too. Or maybe a sex tax since some people can't get any and they're being denied access to sexual experiences. Why should the 1%er sexually attractive chads horde the sex! We need it redistributed equally for equality's sake while giving ugly people access in a meritocracy.
Because the person who makes money deserves to choose who to give to when he dies.
>Capitalism's crux is feudalistic because it centers on dynastic familes doing good for many generations in a row
Nothing wrong with that user, thats how society, and ultimately civilisation are built
This is a fair argument. I like this better than most in the thread. Really lays bare the shitty, narcissistic nature of people though.
I'd rather give money to someone I don't know who displays critical thought, gumption, and intelligence than someone whose main quality is that they came out of my dick.
I want my children to inherit my property. That's my case.
Because meritocracy itself is an artificial idea describing the value of labor, essentially as a baby you were born and provided everything up until your late teens to early twenties, you earned nothing, no one has. The foundation of the family has always been the method of providing for means to children, why should that cease upon my death?
You're just using a major life event and my inability to represent myself as an opportunity to strip myself of wealth and where I should determine it to go.
Not an argument. Whether or not a dead person still gets to own property and able to delegate them doesn't make it any less or more meritocratic
Let me repeat my question one more time, how is removing inheritance the opposite of meritocracy?
>I'd rather give money to someone I don't know who displays critical thought, gumption, and intelligence than someone whose main quality is that they came out of my dick.
You don't have children then, because if you did you would understand what it means to invest your heart and 18+ years of your life rather than describing it as "out of your dick". I mean, you've surmised raising the next generation of Americans as merely a sexual act, you are either a nigger or a teenager.
Fine, but honest capitalists would own up to Capitalism's feudalistic nature. It's nearly always marketed as "meritocratic" and built on "rugged individualists." Perhaps this is part of the consolidation of power by the dynastic people.
>Bitch please, the State is the only barrier that keeps the poor from taking whatever they want from the rich so whining that the State does it is not an argument.
So I guess they have full communism in Somalia? Since state doesn't exist.
Well, feudalism is the way to go, and always was the way to go. Both capitalism and communism were invented by bourgeoise jews hiding behing the pipe dreams of merit (capitalism) and ending exploitation (communism).
Well if you are willing to admit that the current system we live in is not meritocratic nor do captialists like yourself ever want it to be so then there is no issue. I am sick of those advocates who pretend that meritocracy exists now when it doesn't and never going to be under current conditions
>Capitalism's feudalistic nature.
Unless you abolish the family unit every government system with have a "feudalistic nature" seeing how children will always be born and raised under the opportunities their parents provide.
>Not an argument.
How so?
>Whether or not a dead person still gets to own property and able to delegate them doesn't make it any less or more meritocratic
Of course it does. Since you are literally depriving him from his merit after he dies.
>Let me repeat my question one more time, how is removing inheritance the opposite of meritocracy?
Well read the post you just responded to, brainlet.
>The friends and alliances you make in life out of your own experience and bonds you form through trials are more important than simple family relations.
>Your drinking buddies are more important than your children.
No.
[whataboutism intensifies]
itt: OP realizes the arguments regurgitated on reddit are dumb and merely political propaganda.
> You don't have children then, because if you did you would understand what it means to invest your heart and 18+ years of your life
Any number of things can and do happen to interrupt this intimate and important process. Many of which involve stress and fatigue brought on by being a wage laborer earning someone else's profits for them.
> I mean, you've surmised raising the next generation of Americans as merely a sexual act,
Forgive my flippant speech.
>you are either a nigger or a teenager.
Always with the contempt for blacks. Anti-virtue signaling. "I am an intellectual, behold, I condemn Jamal and the swarthy hordes. Lavish praise upon me. If you disagree with me, you MUST BE one of them."
You "must be" a cockroach. You haven't the courage to approach one of those niggers you have so much contempt for.
One of the very goals of communism is to abolish the family and have children raised communally by the state.
confirmed what I already know, you literally have no idea what the concept of merit is. Meritocracy is not self determination, but a system of equality of opportunity that rewards the best. Read the Rise of Meritocracy by Micheal Young by spewing your ignorance in a discussion thread
It's not a stupid question moron, it's a binary question that seeks to establish which of two undesirable outcomes is least desirable.
>Would you rather die in your sleep or be torn apart by wolves?
>HURR I'D RATHER NOT DIE
Congratulations you now get to be woken from a sound sleep and pleasant dreams by a pack of wolves tearing you apart, enjoy your doubly unpleasant death you indecisive faggot.
You are retarded.
Stop being that way.
>confirmed what I already know, you literally have no idea what the concept of merit is.
Not an argument.
> Meritocracy is not self determination, but a system of equality of opportunity that rewards the best.
Not really, meritocracy is not a centralized "system", it's just the idea that men should be free to own what they build.
>Rise of Meritocracy
His book was satire you retard, you're not supposed to agree with his view of meritocracy.
Go get a lobotomy, it might make you smarter.
That's not whataboutism. You're saying that the state is the only thing preventing the poor from killing the rich. But there's a place called Somalia where the state stopped existing and this didn't happen, instead the rich got even more powerful. You're basing your opinion on theories and moral values, I based mine on empirical facts that happened.
>why is the chief defense of inordinate capital accumulation meritocracy
your definition of inordinate and decision to strawman are the only things that needs defending
>his ancestor took by force in a chaotic power struggle
you really don't understand what labor is huh?
>It is no coincidence that those who most strongly defend inheritance, are those who have something to gain from it
[citation needed]
>Lel you're all operating on le animal instinct! Not me xD I'm RATIONAL
I didn't even argue against taxes proper. I understand that investing in society will increase the total economic output, especially one where there has been successive centuries of growth in infrastructure, technology, and institutions which creates stakeholders across all levels of society.
Btw better performing students will be from wealthier families who can afford the best tutors and private schools like American WASPs AND families which are actively involved in their children's education, like South and East Asians and Nigerian diaspora.
Good thing the real world isn't just binary choices then. And I agree with those guys, you give me a knife to stab people I love and I would stab you instead, straight up.
>Always with the contempt for blacks
A contempt well-earned, much like my contempt for Red animals like yourself.
>it's just the idea that men should be free to own what they build
>a society governed by people selected according to merit.
So very wrong
>you're not supposed to agree with his view of meritocracy.
Whether or not you agree with him, it doesn't discount the fact that he invented the word and his criticism of it is valid, satirical or not
>the State is the only barrier that keeps the poor from taking whatever they want
why do you assume poor people are morally bankrupt? Is it your implicit elitism?
>Many of which involve stress and fatigue brought on by being a wage laborer earning someone else's profits for them.
So you expose your communist bent
> "I am an intellectual, behold, I condemn Jamal and the swarthy hordes.
Racism and intellectual understanding are not mutually exclusive
>Forgive my flippant speech.
No can do, it offhandedly confirms this user's post Communism IS feudalism, in capitalism at least you have the opportunity to advance, in communism eventually the state is what offers you any chance at advancement. The politburo becomes the new aristocracy, the intellectuals the new clergy.
>Whether or not you agree with him, it doesn't discount the fact that he invented the word
So what? Libertarian used to mean leftist, liberal right wing, and now the meanings have switched. Get with the times.
Also do you not agree with his dystopian view of meritocracy? Then why are you busting my balls, you fucking nigger?
>Somalia
The State didn't stopped existing but got vastly weakened. Did the military, police, courts and other institutions suddenly disappeared?
>Did the military, police, courts and other institutions suddenly disappeared?
Actually yes it did. For most of the 90s the Somalian state existed only on paper and was represented only by some random faggots in exile.
>Good thing the real world isn't just binary choices then.
I'm afraid you'll find quite a bit of it actually is user.
>Quick or dead
>Male or female
>Winner or loser
>words means whatever what I want to mean now to win arguments
wew lads.
I argee with his criticisms of those who preach and pretend that meritocracy is achieveable under captialism. Young himself admitted that he approved of the concept, but found those who often use it in their rherotic are merely paying lip service to the idea and undermines it
>>words means whatever what I want to mean now to win arguments
No, they mean what the general consensus is about their meaning. I can claim that the word "blue" means red, but I'd be an idiot if I demanded everyone to accept that, just like you're being an idiot to want everything to subscribe to your very narrow definition of meritocracy, which is not the standard definition.
Now go kill yourself, Jew.
It's not possible, people would just give their offspring stuff before they died
A billionaire's parent would just build a whole sham business that only exists to pay their kids ridiculous salaries
It largely isn't. I'm just saying that if you want your descendants to live on a similar level of affluence, you keep your wealth largely centralized. Of course, this means your other children will get fucked and your main heir will get almost everything.
>Male or female
>a choice
Who could be behind this post?
So literally the military was disbanded and their weapons destroyed, their administrators quit their jobs and burned their offices? The apparatus of the State still exists and taken over by other fractions from the incumbent
Yes, literally all of that happened. How many times are you going to ask? You insufferable reddit faggot.
I literally quoted the dictionary defintion and refered you to the person who created that word. It seems that the 'general conseus' includes you and only you. Now either shut the fuck up or present me an arguement. How is abolishing inheritance the opposite of meritocracy?
Then why are there still armed and orgnaized conflicts in that region and automous regions formed? You are probably right in that the Federal Repulic of Somalia is non-existent but that doesn't mean that Somalia is stateless
Liberals were originally considered left wing. I'm talking about (((classical liberals))) like Smith and Bastiat. Right wing used to mean monarchist while left wing were all these egalitarians, liberals, capitalists and other fucking sodomites.
Because anocracy usually develops in an anarchy.