From: video61atarisales@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 9:21:20 AM UTC-5, Jos Boersema wrote:   
   > On 2023-07-26, nickname unavailable  wrote:    
   > > On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:14:59 AM UTC-5, Jos Boersema wrote:    
   > >>On 2023-07-25, nickname unavailable  wrote:    
   > >>> On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 6:45:15 AM UTC-5, Jos Boersema wrote:    
   > >>>>On 2023-07-23, nickname unavailable  wrote:    
   > [...]   
   > >>> if you want to get rid of the parasites, or at least slow them down,    
   > >>> you must get rid of free trade, you are watching russia and to a lesser    
   > >>> extent, china doing that right now, and their standard of livings and    
   > >>> life spans are shooting past the free trade nations.    
   > >>    
   > >> What do you mean by "free trade". Capitalism is not "free trade", but    
   > >> rather dangerously restricted trade. Reducing border controls can be    
   > >> called more "free", but I propose to not use enemy propaganda slogans in    
   > >> a political / economic debate, due to the confusion it is designed to    
   > >> create.    
   > >>    
   > >> In general, reducing border controls and fees stimulates trade and    
   > >> efficiency, which can lead to greater prosperity. However, a possible    
   > >> rise in corruption needs to be subtracted from the result.    
   > >>    
   > >> If the corruption, the Plutocacracy, gets worse due to the market   
   becoming    
   > >> larger to such an extend it offsets and overshadows an efficiency benefit    
   > >> of open borders, the result would be negative. I suppose you are arguing    
   > >> that this is the case, which is probably true due to the high levels of    
   > >> corruption and bad if not criminal Government we see today.    
   > >   
   > > your failure to understand what capitalism is, is the reasons why what    
   > > you propose, is doomed from the start. free trade elevates capital over    
   > > sovereignty, labor, and the environment. once you unleash capital,    
   > > capital will scour the world for cheap labor, low to no taxes, and    
   > > environmental degradation.   
   > First you claim I do not understand Capitalism, but then you do not show    
   > how and why I fail to understand Capitalism, and/or to propose your own    
   > definition and understanding of this concept / system. I hope you will    
   > still do this in your reply, so that our discussion can have some    
   > meaning to it. Please do the same for "free trade".    
   >    
   > I already gave you my interpretation of "free trade", which has to    
   > include the freedom to have land, the right to land, within the context    
   > of a trade economy. Trade is not free, without free land. I realize that    
   > my use of words does not follow modern propaganda methods. I don't care    
   > about using enemy systems of propaganda in my vocabulary, I rather    
   > choose my own vocabulary and try to match it to the topic. Defeating the    
   > enemy starts with using words correctly. Much of humanity is basically    
   > ruled by word choice propaganda, in my opinion. It has a *massive*    
   > influence on the minds of the people.    
   >    
   > If you call something a "vaccine", right or wrong, they will happily    
   > inject themselves with dangerous substances, they will even clammor for    
   > it. If you call it what it is, an experimental medicine or an unproven    
   > form of DNA / mRNA therapy, it wouldn't surprise me if less then 1%    
   > would still want the injection.    
   >    
   > Words matter everything, because people usually do not want to use their    
   > heads at all. Almost everything is about face value perception and then    
   > immediately looking at people around to try to do the same and fit in.    
   > Therefore it is critical to use words correctly.    
   >    
   > If you think "free trade" as you use this words, results in    
   > dictatorship, repression, poverty (etc), then don't call it "free trade"    
   > because you are confusing people with that. You are using enemy    
   > vocabulary, you become a tool for the people you are against. People    
   > will think like this: "oh he is against freedom ! - next". Since you    
   > seem to refer to reduced border controls, tarrifs and taxes, calling it    
   > "open borders" seems fair enough ?    
   >    
   > Do not follow enemy language poisoning. They are extremely good at it,    
   > at manipulating people's minds. We / you will probably never match their    
   > capacity to propagandize and lie to people on a global scale, but we    
   > don't have to make it easy for them either. If we use clear wording and    
   > the enemy is constantly on with their propaganda, their manipulations    
   > and fraud, we at least gain a little moral high ground in the process.    
   >    
   > *    
   >    
   > The Soviet Union, inspired by a radical (and in my opinion, deeply    
   > misguided) policy of eliminating all trade on an Imperial scale (!),    
   > resulted in some of the worst environmental catastrophies ever.    
   >    
   > You cannot eliminate "Capital". The "Capital goods" are land,    
   > substantial factories / businesses, and large amounts of wealth in    
   > whatever form, for instance in gold or even fiat currency. It is also    
   > probably impossible to eliminate (excessive) greed in humans, or to wave    
   > a magic wand and make the behavior of humans much better than what it    
   > is.    
   >    
   > Trade is critical to the economy.    
   >    
   > The way to deal with Capital is to give everyone the same amount as a    
   > right (natural resources). If someone is good with it and wants more,    
   > he/she can try to rent some more from other people. If none is available,    
   > then he/she can not and has hit the limit of the market (or the Earth if    
   > you want to put it that way), or needs to bid higher.   
   > > capital will corrupt small or weak centralized governments. we want    
   > > less trade, not more. less trade means more self sufficiency, less debt,    
   > > less environmental carnage.   
   > If you are working on your land or other natural resource or even    
   > without much or any natural resources in the market (such as a traveling    
   > repair man or trader), you will find that you need to start    
   > specializing. Once you start specializing, you become better, faster and    
   > cheaper. You then need to trade your way to everything else you need.    
   >    
   > This is the absolute basics of economics. Sadly, the far left doesn't even    
   > understand this, which is their political doom and drives the population    
   > to the political right, into the hands of the Capitalists, the privateers.    
   >    
   > Trade is absolutely necessary, and it is so essential that you can try    
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)