I remember someone posted once here about an economist that proved that socialism is impossible

Friedrich August von Hayek or William Forster Lloyd?

>Economy
>Prove

HAHAHAHAHAH¨'

You can't prove anything in soft sciences like economy/sociology.

All.

t. never read an economist in his life

You probably mean Mises "economic calculation problem" i.e. there is no means by which it is possible to allocate resources ("efficiently" at least) without market prices. It's simply wrong though since allocation can easily be dealt with in a purely technical manner with input-output analysis in terms of raw quantities with feed-back inputs.
dcs.gla.ac.uk/~wpc/reports/hayek/hayek.pdf

>economists
>proving anything

top kek

I remember someone posted once here about an astrologer that proved I would find love in the coming week.

Who was it?

Loads.

>/pol/
>youtube
>breibart
>wikipedia
>mises.org

Sure thing kid

Physical books.

Uh huh sure

remind me how you felt when you read picketty's book and thought he had the answers to everything you crusty teenage pinko

Correct.

>ill post insulting pictures as my argument

>immediately goes for his /pol/ folder

Thanks for showing your hand friend

Is it a theory that people who spout the right's philosophy (mostly retarded) are mostly retarded?

No it's not. You're all mostly retarded.

it's my Veeky Forums folder actually

have another

That wasn't me.

Is your joke that ugly men use the internet too much. Because I would agree.

You too are probably just as ugly.

There is no good reason you'll find in classical or neoclassical economics on why socialism is intrinsically "impossible". The only group who really tried to push this notion was the Austrians, mostly in debates with neoclassical economists in the 1920-30s. Most of the issues like the principal-agent problem is just as equally problematic in a corporate economy as to a theoretically planned economy. Austrians cannot explain why corporations even exist as actually existing planning agencies when everything could just be subcontracted on open markets.

(you)

>the new right

>goes straight to his leftypol folder and accusations of far right/alt-right

makes you think

Why are there only less than ten of these and they're all that's ever used when someone disagrees with you retarded people

It's stale as fuck I've seen this for two years

>some /pol/tard was so insecure that he tried to force the neckbeard meme to fit his political views
thats just pathetic

why are self-described socialists always so defensive and bitter?

>right wing intellectuals

left wing cuckolds are kings of the fedora son

I've never seen someone more bitter than a mentally ill man on /r9k/ actually nu-right. There's no need to get defensive over them, unless you are them.

but they aren't
libertarianism/ancapism is essential to the fedora meme
that pic, this pic, and this one aren't fedora in the slightest
only is

The main argument is simply that without costs people can't make rational decisions. If everything was free, you wouldn't stop eating. And this argument has nothing to do with human nature, or strange socialist assumptions of the "new man" or whatever. When everyone has to pay for everything themselves (ie no democracy) they take on the most responsibility for they own actions and their economic output, only then can a true rational economy exist. Any amount of democracy creates the tragedy of the commons.

Thank you for posting the fourth image in this two year old set. However any venture to okcupid leaves you mistaken.

>says the ideology responsible for gamergate

pretty sure /r9k/ had a hard-on for bernie, that's not surprising when socialists appeal to lifestyle of crusty NEET manchildren living in their parents basements and living off handouts. It's /r9k/'s wet dream to have a socialist in office

>says the ideology responsible for feminist bootlicking

but thats fallacious because with costs people still don't make rational decisions

>If everything was free, you wouldn't stop eating.

Is this post satire? No one can be this daft

>>pretty sure /r9k/ had a hard-on for bernie
hahahahahahahahahaha

oh man

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You don't even try to hide

is that actually laurie penny or did they just cut away to someone else
does resemble her somewhat

r9k currently has a hardon for trump
thats a fact friend

>pretty sure /r9k/ had a hard-on for bernie

Wew
e
w

this is so painful

>in a TRUE free market, there would be no planning by enterprise at all!

note this isn't what Mises was saying at all

OP if you're still here, the economist you're looking for is Eugen Bohm von Bawerk

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugen_Böhm_von_Bawerk

Well done either not comprehending his post

its clearly shopped

Is this rightist faggot asking me to post okcupid strawmen from the right. Because if you want to play the broad strokes strawman game, the right would lose. Do you want to know why the right would lose?

Because all of you aren't very bright and cling onto any political movement first and adopt into your own without anyone's opinion on it.

You ruin it for everyone.

And everywhere you will find cringey politically illiterate people from the right, especially on dating websites.

You have two images from a ten year old set. Maybe 6 if I'm being generous. The left has hundreds of examples to chose from.

babby socialists having yet more meltdowns

remind me again why basement dwelling NEETs wouldn't vote for their interests and support a candidate who would subsidize their lifestyle?

Face it, you're the ideology for losers, pseud-intellectuals and virtue signallers.

oh I wasn't looking at the nametag

"Fedora" is, in the final analysis, a smug cunt that thinks they have everything figured out, that they are smarter than everyone else, and that everyone that disagrees with them is fooling themselves or brainwashed or whatever. So LITERALLY marxism.

except it is necessarily libertarian/ancap. thats literally what the meme is. you can say all that about marxism and it may be true but its not part of the meme

>>babby socialists having yet more meltdowns

How many times have you retards had a meltdown on Veeky Forums

You made a scene so loud to ruin a joke for political purposes, you made the anti defamation league bring it up and now everyone who uses it has to be associated with you

Have you ever, for an instant considered, just shutting the fuck up?

>jumped to straight up raging on feminists
>claims to not associate with /r9k/

>So LITERALLY marxism.
pfpfpfpfffftt

You saying it is without explaining why won't make it so. It's an atheist meme, left wingers are FAR more likely to be atheists than anyone on the right, they are far more likely to be effeminate limp wristed arselickers, i.e. the sort of people who would wear a fedora

It's hilarious how desperate you are to appropriate the meme

Because we live in a socialist system, ie the government. We don't pay the full costs of our actions.

Free stuff is the main selling point of socialism. Free means being paid for by someone else, ie socialism is the weak ruling the strong.

Oh yeah that doesn't perfectly describe /pol/ totally describes all those Marxist professors, artists, intellectuals, film makers

the fedora meme is at least as anti-feminist as it is atheist

>>Because we live in a socialist system, ie the government. We don't pay the full costs of our actions.

I just explained what it was, and how it adheres exactly to leftist ideals and stereotypes.

Exactly.

>anti-feminist

the sort of people who say m'lady and act chivalrously are not anti-feminists, they're feminist bootlickers you utter tard, see

>It's an atheist meme, left wingers are FAR more likely to be atheists than anyone on the right, they are far more likely to be effeminate limp wristed arselickers

What you're seeing right now is delay. It happens within the right.

The right tends to suck people up the that are stupid. And as most stupid people are, they tend to be late.

The left has sucked the atheist phase dry, moved on. And now you, and your right wing associates, are sucking the crowd still attatched dry. Making any poor stupid socially awkward sod who fucks with old crowds and old jokes, and simple people, be associated with you because all your opinions are so general and broad and stupid you could fit them on a comic on your grandmother's fridge.

You are going to find more inept useful idiots on the right, I can guarantee it. You have to be around long enough to see it though. I don't think you have been.

but it doesn't
the libertarianism is part of the meme, like it or not

You realize people stop eating when they're no longer hungry right?
I mean maybe not yourself but most people who don't read mises.org

>>the sort of people who say m'lady and act chivalrously are not anti-feminists

Don't complain about my use of strawmen when you asked for the strawmen

So when was the last time you poured concrete, painted a house, tiled a field, or did anything? Through the government, you've allowed to appropriate the labor of others every day. Ie socialism. The weak ruling the strong.

I'm using eating as a metaphor. I have yet to participate in the insults here, so keep those to yourself.

>because all your opinions are so general and broad and stupid

this summarises your post very well, completely devoid of any substance and nothing but shit flinging attempts at armchair psychology

and theyve been specifically pitted against feminism in recent years

But its not. Libertarians are dudes with bowties.

and fedoras

Yeah and it applies to everything. People had a perfect capacity for making rational decisions long before prices exist and they'll continue to make them after prices are gone.

What you miss is the fact that consumerist Capitalism is the true force that not only allows but actively promotes people to eat more than they need. There is no such motivation in Socialism

>in recent years

By whom? when? where? has there been an announcement?

>this summarises your post very well, completely devoid of any substance and nothing but shit flinging attempts at armchair psychology
>devoid of any substance

Compare the ratio of Marxists and National Socialists, left v right in classical idiotic internet community terms, in 2008 and now, in the Atheist community.

Then compare the Christians.

You'll see the ratios have flipped. Time has gone by, the left has found new things.

The right has found the creative skeletal husk the leftover left has, left, and came to roost in it. It too, wanted new things.

You even agree with me.

In general culture?

>So when was the last time you poured concrete, painted a house, tiled a field, or did anything?

When have you

>Inequality
>A problem

Why do Marxists keep pushing this stinky maymay?

They don't. If you read Marx you'd know that inequality is simply sympthomatic of the real problem

The marxists and leftists have grown up and become conservatives. Look at Veeky Forums. It used to be an edgy, anarchic mess in the 000s, over time it has matured and moved to the right. Veeky Forums is a microcosm of society at large. As people become older and wiser, as they gain more responsibilities they become more conservative. Looks like it was you who was left behind

did you even read the thread
no one has mentioned inequality

Because it is a social problem and social problems are the nastiest sort of problem that blind people to the rational level headed choices to keep things in balance and civilization to stay structured.

Left without a way to organize social situations, you see what you see on the internet, mass confusion and mass manipulation.

People being blinded by social issues while claiming they aren't blinded by social issues and claiming they're rational level headed people fair and honestly. People like you.

The left understands the nuance that this needs to be equated, the right does not.

An example of many things the right can be easily manipulated from.

>>The marxists and leftists have grown up and become conservatives

PTFFFFFFFFF

>Look at Veeky Forums

A new host of high school students has arrived who don't agree with their older more socially competent leftist parents.

Oh how I dreaded this Freudian day would come.

>Veeky Forums is a microcosm of society at large

Do go on.

>As people become older and wiser, as they gain more responsibilities they become more conservative. Looks like it was you who was left behind

The only thing that hasn't changed is younger people pretending to be older people and wiser people, to older people who are wiser than they are.

>Because it is a social problem
It's not so much a problem as a reality of life.

Talent and intelligence is unequally distributed among people, which leads to inequalities in the outcomes of their actions.

You mustn't let your passion for equality delude you into thinking men are equal in capability.

Once again you've managed to write a number of sentences and say literally nothing. No one has learnt a single thing from your posts aside from how much of a retard you are. How can you be this inept?

>Veeky Forums is a microcosm of society at large.

I never seen an argument self destruct so abrubtly, even one that was bad to begin with

>the real problem

That is?

Thought I would try to get it back on track desu

>People being blinded by social issues while claiming they aren't blinded by social issues and claiming they're rational level headed people fair and honestly. People like you.
>Muh false consciousness

Sorry bud, but false consciousness is limited to the minds of those deluded Marxists who believe in it.

>The left understands the nuance
>The left understands nuance

Le Seinfeld faec

>>Talent and intelligence is unequally distributed among people, which leads to inequalities in the outcomes of their actions.

It isn't.

>You mustn't let your passion for equality delude you into thinking men are equal in capability.

Have you ever heard the phrase "Too each according to their ability, too each according to their need?"

This sums up what I'm saying, and is not equality. It is to each according to their ability and need.

Which is a more competent way of organizing society to stop letting social situations, the situations you're using, to get out of hand, to the degree you're using, and the degree the internet is now using.

>That is?

The Capitalist mode of production, predicated on control of firms via private property
You should have the most basic clue about a thinker before you try to criticize him

>>Sorry bud, but false consciousness is limited to the minds of those deluded Marxists who believe in it.

Define false consciousness. It sounds like something you just grabbed to sound more apt and intelligent when you are not.

If you need an example, as to why you are not, your next sentence does perfectly well to get my point across

>Le Seinfeld faec

Le Seinfeld faec

>It isn't.
You live in a fantasy world.

>Have you ever heard the phrase "Too each according to their ability, too each according to their need?"
Yes, I've heard of it. I think anyone with at least two neurons and a synapse connecting them realizes that it is entirely unfeasible method to allocate resources when resources are scarce.

>It is to each according to their ability and need.
What if I have no ability whatsoever and I need a Ferrari?

>A new host of high school students has arrived who don't agree with their older more socially competent leftist parents.

nah, younger generations are more liberal than ever. But now I'm sure you'll fall back on the vacuous argument that Veeky Forums is a contrarian place, so to maintain its contrarian nature Veeky Forums had to lurch to the right. But of course the simple explanation is that as people on Veeky Forums have grown up, as they've gone to college and graduated and earned themselves an income they've started to invest themselves in society and government more than they used to, hence they've grown right leaning tendencies. I know because I'm one of them. In fact if you look at self-reported board demographics it's right-leaning boards like /out/ and /pol/ that have the highest average ages. It's not a coincidence

>breaking posts down into talking points because he's too much of a lightweight to handle coherent arguments

Yep this is /pol/ alright

As Foucault said, Marxism is to the 19th century as a fish is to water: it can't survive beyond it.

You were the one tacitly implying 'false consciousness' on my part in claiming 'people like me' are 'blinded by social issues' even if we say we aren't.

You think we have false consciousness. You define it.