Why not just have capital be individually owned but in a closer to uniform way? Wouldn’t this alleviate both complaints? People being free to do what they want with their stuff, and generally having stuff to do things with, and also free from the tyranny of the majority?
-
-
-
That's irrealistic because: -1. It has been demostrated historicaly that capital accumulates in the long run. Money is the best way to make money, you can even sell and it It's called "investement" or "loans".
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It kind of stops being democratic when a handful of people have a million times more votes than anyone else.
- 4 more replies
-
-
-
We need a sequel to the Marx/Rothbard stranded on an island comic, but this time with Henry George making an appearance.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Soviet-style socialism called itself democratic, but that's just because they also owned the news
-
...isolated in a backward country after the German revolution was crushed. Stalin led a political counter-revolution and bt 1928 was anti-socialist (ironically at the time he forced collectivisation to avoid his capitalist former allies taking power). USSR was never socialist.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Finally I can AGREE with somebody ^ THE thin connection between all minds is SUPER MARIO... EVERY ancient culture, greek, roman, western, eastern, all played SUPER MARIO as we know even ALIEN LIFE play it so PHYLOSOPHICALLY speaking ANY SELF consious BEING loves MARIO
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They'll own ashes
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.