irmoz

Oh, but your argument before was that 10 days isn't long enough. Was that just a trick?

Sounds to me like you're one of those people that says, "I'm not against gun control in principle, it just has to be done right", then disagrees with every gun control proposal. Because you actually are against gun control.

So, you're in favour of 11 year wait times?

10 days is more than 0. Is that maths too hard for you? a 0 day waiting time would stop NOTHING. 10 days would at least stop spur of the moment killings. Is that not worth something?

What would you prefer:

• A higher number of killings
• A lower number of killings

If your standard is 0 killings, you'll agree with nothing, because nothing will get it to 0.

Sounds like you don't own any private property, then.

It's like you're ignoring everything I say. Unless you're a landlord or the owner of some business, you probably don't own private property. If you can sit back and let other people make money for you without your input, you own private property.

Your comment reads like a copypasta. Why are you callibg me lazy? Did I say I don't want to work? Of course I want to work. You're not paying attention. There are huge barriers to people being able to succeed, and getting past thrm requires immense effort, luck or privilege. And the last one is the only guaranteed win.

Manifesto of the Communist Party - Marxists Internet Archive https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

Capital Volume I https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf

Your opinion is all feelings and no solutions

So try actually reading the Communist Manifesto - get it from the horse's mouth, it's very short. Then, if you still feel like there isn't enough detail and that the reasoning isn't detailed enough, try Kapital. And then, how about the decades and decades of theory that came after? You can keep claiming that socialists "don't have any solutions", but please realise that this is an absurd claim when the field of socialism has so, so many detailed and comprehensive theories based on observation, experimentation and further research - scientifically so.

And what system do you think is keeping the workers too poor to do that?

What system makes it so that work must involve the buying of private property in the first place?

Also, here's a perspective you might not hear often: why should the owner bear that burden and risk alone? That seems like too much pressure for one person. Poor capitalist. Doesn't he realise he needs help?

Let's start with your first assumption. Why must a factory have individual owners? Why not instead have it owned by the workers who are the ones actually producing?

Also, don't conflate private and personal property. If you are indeed talking about private property, it is very unlikely you have any to begin with. The vast majority of private property is owned by a few billionaires.

Lastly, people do not need money to incentivise work. Boredom, creativity and the desire to help and or contribute to society does that well enough. Given a stable level of comfort, people will seek work that matters to them.

You can't call an idea with 200 years of history and hundreds of books on the subject "half-baked" without explaining what about it you think is unfeasible. Either you have never actually talked to a socialist, or you've simply never listened.

So, a few questions:

1. Why is it "half-baked"?
   • What ideas does it propose?
   • What is wrong with those ideas?
2. How is it "impossible to implement"?
   • What methods are proposed?
   • What prevents those methods from working?
3. What do you mean by "destroy society"?
   • What exactly do you define as society?
   • How would socialism "destroy" that?

Don't try and split hairs now, when you didn't originally.