@georgespolitzer bro do you even Hayek?
Still waiting to see any communist even begin to answer how they'd solve the Calculation Problem.

@soundnfury hayek was a fascist foh

@georgespolitzer "Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’." — George Orwell.

@soundnfury george orwell was a colonial cop lol. keep digging that hole dude

@soundnfury let me give you a hint: basically everyone in the chicago school of economics was recruited by fascist augusto pinochet to run Chile's economy into the ground. I'm not being euphemistic.

@georgespolitzer Not euphemistic, no; just historically illiterate. Goes well with your economic illiteracy tbh.
(1) Pinochet's règime, while totalitarian, was not fascist.
(2) Chile following the writings of the Chicago school does not equal them being 'recruited' by Pinochet. (Where are you getting this notion from, Nancy bloody McLean?)

@soundnfury lol, all political systems are totalizing jackass. and yes, pinochet's chile was fascist, what else would you call mass mobilized anticommunism? well i mean you personally would call it heaven lmao. but no, believing in climate change is not "economically illiterate" and calling a person of color illiterate twice in the same post is pathologically racist, hope this helps.

@soundnfury but by all means please continue to call me "historically illiterate" because i know who the fucking chicago boys are lol. even wikipedia has it on record https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Boys

@georgespolitzer Chileans who studied at Chicago are not "basically everyone in the chicago school of economics".

@soundnfury okay can we get back to the part where you said climate collapse is economically illiterate lol

@georgespolitzer I didn't mention climate. But since you bring it up: economic estimates of the likely net impact of the level of warming predicted by the latest IPCC report *have confidence intervals that cross zero*. That is, we can't even reliably determine whether the warming across the 21st century will be a good or a bad thing for humanity.

@georgespolitzer @soundnfury

I cant imagine being as confident in my intelligence as this dork is while repeatedly being proven to be wrong

@Catsandcatsandcats @soundnfury hey eddie are you done publicly pissing your pants so i can block you now? you were funny to laugh at at first but if i wanted to hang around a racist who misgendered me to get a rise out of me, i'd fuck your mom some more

@georgespolitzer You know, if you had actual arguments, you wouldn't need to (a) throw playground insults (b) accuse me of racism on zero evidence (c) accuse me of purposely misgendering you, rather than *not caring about your fucking gender because the only people for whom the contents of your pants are relevant are your lover and your doctor*.

@georgespolitzer Oh great, he's brought out the racism card. Here's a hint: you're not stupid 'cos you're coloured. You're stupid 'cos you're *you*. Until you just mentioned it I had no idea what colour your skin was, so how could anything I say about you be racist?

@soundnfury i don't use he pronouns and i'm not a man, why are you talking to me in the third person except as an excuse to get in another microaggression

@georgespolitzer In my native dialect, 'he' has a secondary use as a gender-neutral pronoun, correctly used when gender is unknown and irrelevant (a situation in which some other dialects would use singular 'they'). I didn't know and don't care what your pronoun is. If you want to call that a 'microaggression' then you do you, but I'll keep speaking my language.
I was using the third person *for rhetorical effect*, to frame that remark as an aside to the audience rather than directed at you.

@soundnfury ah yes that's right, schrodinger's racist, saying something pathologically racist isn't actually racist because i was only 50% sure if it applied or not! my bad! - you rn

@georgespolitzer I never even at any point *suspected* you were coloured, nor even considered whether you might me. So please explain to me how your race could have — hah — coloured my opinion of you?

@georgespolitzer Share ownership is accessible to people well below the median salary even while maintaining a lifestyle that would seem luxurious to people of Marx's time. Not capitalism's fault if most of them choose to instead take still greater consumption in the moment.
Also, most workers today have a private pension, which (at least while they're young) has a large equities component.

@soundnfury your info is completely wrong and is basically this image. shut up right winger lmao. no, most workers do not have pension access, most workers in the united states can't even retire. "share ownership" does not refer to the means of production. but then again, you think everyone is bourgeois (definitional impossibility) and that the bourgeois isn't exploitative (lol) and the real exploiters are the political class (not a class and please just say jews next time, it's more to the point of what you and your kind mean ). dare I ask where youre getting any of this info or definitions from???

@georgespolitzer wait, you think I think the political class are *Jews*? The group *most* famed for being merchants and capitalists (and widely hated and persecuted by socialists down to the present day for just that reason)?

@soundnfury no, I'm saying that's basically what you're saying

@georgespolitzer So you're saying I'm saying a thing that I'm not saying 'cos it's the opposite of what I'm saying, and when I say that's not what I'm saying you say I'm wrong to say that because you weren't saying I was saying that you were just saying that was basically what I was saying? WTH are you trying to say?

@soundnfury you think the political class is a meaningful class and you think class is purely how much income you make. I think you are a confused neoliberal child who is simping for an economic system that is exploitative for the world and going to cause an extinction event unless humanity switches to a centrally planned economy.

@georgespolitzer OK, we've reached the "you ascribing beliefs to me that I do not hold" phase of this. I do not in fact "think class is purely how much income you make". Rather, income is one of the factors that determines your ability to enter some classes, but is generally neither necessary or sufficient.
You are essentialising and oversimplifying.

@soundnfury no, essentializing and oversimplifying is the notion that class is literally anything but your relationship to a mode of production.