And then he said the free market will fix it

>And then he said the free market will fix it

Attached: Guffawing_with_Primates.jpg (727x639, 115K)

Other urls found in this thread:

aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/08/exposing-great-poverty-reductio-201481211590729809.html
medium.com/@UnlearningEcon/seeing-like-a-neoliberal-part-1-blinded-by-the-data-a134a7026d87
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why are so many on Veeky Forums so uneducated on economics?

>privatization is good and wealth trickles down!
>all jobs are voluntary and the free market will mean there's more competition
>your wages are equal to how hard you work!

they legitimately have the conceptions a 13 year old would have.

*fixes almost everything*

Sorry, we're not omnipotent, we'll keep trying.

Attached: capitalism.jpg (600x587, 44K)

>muh trickle down meme

>*fixes almost everything*
Right.

Attached: Valley of Despond.jpg (592x417, 60K)

And imagine how much better that graph would be if employers paid workers fair wages.

>actually using the $1 poverty rate without realizing that it is basically irrelevant to most of the world
>not realizing that decreases in poverty mirror industrialization not capitalism (capitalism predates industrialization)
>not realizing that poverty is caused by capitalism, and saying it’s “curing” it is like trapping a bunch of people in your basement and then letting them out one by one and calling yourself a liberator

*brings billions out of poverty*
*saves the world*

I agree. Capitalism is garbage. Trade in of itself is ghetto, just look at the silk road, everyone except China was poor. And even they were slaves.

>poverty is caused by capitalism
Yeah, people in feudal societies and command economies don't go hungry or naked.

the perfectly engineered post, not a single correct thing

don't say things you can't back up

I hope that graph considers inflation and purchasing power.

same4ubuddy

Capitalism produces more then enough wealth to end basically every poverty related issue practically overnight, it’s entirely a question of distribution which capitalism fails miserably at. We produce more than enough food to feed the entire world, and yet millions starve to death every year.

quote that part where I said they were slaves

It doesn’t, the current IPL of $1.90 is actually lower than the original IPL of $1 because of inflation.

aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/08/exposing-great-poverty-reductio-201481211590729809.html

>poverty is caused by capitalism
Poverty is the base state you fucking retard. Anything that adds wealth onto poverty is not the cause of poverty.

The free market gives consumers voting power if they come to realize how to be picky about where they spend their money.

I don't bother voting in politics, but I take my spending habits seriously. I support small, local businesses as much as I can while avoiding large corporations whose business models I disagree with. I am voting for what businesses I want to succeed.

That doesn't invalidate any problems a free market does have, and I definitely think some sort of mixed economy is key, but consumer choice is a powerful thing in my mind. Unfortunately most people don't realize it and dump tons of money into the very companies they complain about.

>And even they were slaves.
Done. What's my next task master?

>it’s entirely a question of distribution which capitalism fails miserably at.
Capitalism doesn't try to do it, so it doesn't fail at it, dunce.

nothing. you're free to go

That'd be great, if those employers felt like it. Maybe their employees don't care enough to organize to demand such things, or aren't valuable to get higher wages.
Unions exist for a reason.

And imagine if workers insisted on having higher wages. Why should the employers shoot themselves in the foot and pay more money than they want to?

Our statistical methods tend to strongly underestimate poverty: medium.com/@UnlearningEcon/seeing-like-a-neoliberal-part-1-blinded-by-the-data-a134a7026d87

One customer doesn't mean shit nigger

Those multinational corporations don't care about you and they never will, because youre irrelevant to them. Who cares if user the Faggot fails to buy this weeks hot new product, Ching Pang the Chinaman will happily do it and basically erase your "vote" by filling the gap you left.

No shit. I'm not trying to bring down corporations by not giving them money. I'm supporting small businesses who do rely on individual customers. I myself work for a small business and notice it wouldn't be a thing if people weren't deciding to support us because they like our model. Each person adds up.

It's about leading from example, and I'm tired of the defeatist attitude people have as they fail to acknowledge how their decisions influence the world around them. It usually leads to crying to the government and giving them tons of power and then you have some annoying struggle between big business and big government.

No one should be either a Marxist or a free marketist. The free market, just like Keynesian investments or quantitative easings, is a good tool if used properly, but it does not solve everything. Look at how expensive healthcare equipment is for example. That is the free market unchecked

This, some Ancap nutcases and Marxist numpties are two flip sides of the same crazy coin.

The truth is that optimum economics is free market with appropriate levels of state regulation and intervention and total taxation levels of 25%-50%.

>Being reasonable

Pick a side faggot.

Pardon my brain let question, hopefully one can answer for me: how are these graphs affected, if at all, by the value of the fiat currencies? Ofr example, the $1/day, at face value looks great, until you consider the decline of that actual value of that one dollar. Would it not then look more like a plateau, it even slope up slightly?

It's measured at dollars while considering inflation and purchasing power parity so the statistics make sense.

Thanks

Nice dubs man

Attached: 1411084032447.png (626x461, 349K)

I'd like you even more if you voted, but I like your dedication. I also try to be a socially responsible and green consumer.

The thing about Capitalism is that it is inherently less democratic the more inequality exists in the system.
You may "vote" for small businesses through your purchasing decisions, but your "vote" is tiny and meaningless compared to the "voting power" of a rich person. This effect is magnified the more areas of human life have been commodified, and the more parts of the economy have been privatized into the market.
If you truly believe in a principle, you would assumingly want to see it applied, correct? At the very least, you'd want to have your opinion in support of that principle voiced in society. So why would you have your voice heard less loudly than another person's?
Unless you are some anti-humanist monster who truly believes that rich people have more human worth poor people, and thus rightfully deserve a larger share of societal decisionmaking power, there is absolutely no excusing this sort of imbalance. You can not and must not view your use of your money as a form of "voting" or a participation in a "democracy of the market", because without constant redistribution of wealth that path leads to a very dark place.

(btw, having everything reduced to market decisionmaking, and then DO apply constant wealth redistribution to achieve true democracy on all societal levels is actually a real ideology called libertarian socialism)