Stupid Capitalist Tricks

[The Architect Of Fate]

I didn't call you stupid . But if you use any of the above arguments then those arguments are stupid .

I'd call them positions, not arguments, but potato................

Then you are calling me stupid because I do agree with most of them, if only in part or with qualifications. I don't agree with most of your retorts. 

Have you sued your parents for being born yet? (that's about at the intellectual level that I consider this)

1. Some are arguments 

2. Well then i can't help you 

3. And i disagree

---

I think i already have told it. I am living in a country with a capitalist economy. 

Irrelevant so am i 

One which is fairly strongl yregulated, 

A slave economy can regulated as i already said 

resulting in what we call a "Free market Economy". Still its based on capitalism.

There is no free market and even there was a free market can still be a slave economy 

I work for a wage. I dont feel enslaved, and i am factually not enslaved. Noone forces me to work, not even indirectly.

Your feelings are irrelevant and poverty or socio economic degradation is a form of force

 If i wante dto stop workign i could do it within 3 months after i quite my job.

Yup and if you kept doing that for years on end what do you think would happen ? Unless you a stock baby then we have entered a new form of Capitalist issues .

 Sure i couldt keep my standard of living, but i would still have  aroof on top of my head and wouldnt starve.

Then you live in star trek because eventually you would need to work and i was using starvation in the sense of socio economic degradation etc 
(unless the stock market which is a whole other problem )

Your claim clearly fails, i am the very thing that disproves you.

I'm afraid anything but 

Where do you conflate? At the point where you conflate classic slaves who were property of their owners, all of them,

Accept it does 

 their well being notwithstanding, and on the other side are epeople (like me) who work for a wage and arent owned in any way by anyone,

The socio economic relation of labour is a akin to ownership were labour is sold and is owned 

 who arent all *enslaved*, only in certain places. You are conflating twice

They are all enslaved so no conflation

 once the situation where all are enslaved to where only some are enslaved, which is not the same. 

Accept they are all enslaved because YOU CAN"T LIVE YOUR ENTIRE LIFE WITHOUT WORKING !!!!

Then you conflate owning someone as property with someone selling his workforce. 

Ownership of someone's labour is ownership again no conflation 

I chose to work, because i like to afford certain things, not because i would have to starve to death otherwise. I also work because i like to be productive.

Once again keep doing that tell me poverty would not ensue (and for the last time i wasn't using that word in terms of food )

You cant because everything after the "if" just isnt, thats the issue. You just keep stomping your feet.

Its useless.

The if is the case and nothing you have so far refutes it 

Regulation not exclude as slave system 

Employer and employee relationship were one sells there labour is akin to ownership of labour 

Any form of poverty of possibility of poverty  is force 

Capitalism can only exist under these conditions 

That's not foot stomping its fact

---

capitalism is a heuristic system that has proven competitive in many cases in the sense it enables the society that adopted it to out compete rivals.  That’s it.  

There is no moral underpinning to it, as There could never be for any effective Practical social economic system because moral ‘underpinning‘ is never an underpinning, but always funded upon some ex post justification to those for whom it didn’t really work out, concocted by those for whom it worked out well.

Accept people do try and get it moral underpinnings and worst it's lack of morality is problem in itself