• 0 Posts
  • 124 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 16th, 2024

help-circle


  • The studies around this are very often heavily biased.

    The main reason it was pushed in the states in the first place was because of an anti-masturbatory craze.

    Growing up (like 25 years ago) it was a bit weird how lotion was so strongly shorthand for masturbation in American TV and movies. Didn’t really get it until I learned a lot of circumcised guys prefer or even require lotion for masturbation.




  • This definitely.

    Exceptions on exceptions on exceptions, on top of grammar rules that vary based on what language the word you’re using was originally from, except even then you can’t know because it can be a word came to English from French even though it’s originally Latin and then the way the French pronounced it carries over to the English.

    As someone who’s native language is Finnish and you literally know how a word is pronounced when you see it. If you know how to use the phonetic alphabet, then you basically know how to pronounce Finnish. Compare English words and their IPA to Finnish words and their IPA:

    hevonen = [ˈheʋonen], hernekeitto = [ˈherneˌkːei̯tːo]

    VS English

    ‘geography’ = ʤɔ́grəfɪj, explanation = ek.spləˈneɪ.ʃən/

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Finnish

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chaos

    Dearest creature in Creation, Studying English pronunciation,

    I will teach you in my verse Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse. It will keep you, Susy, busy, Make your head with heat grow dizzy;

    Tear in eye your dress you’ll tear. So shall I! Oh, hear my prayer,









  • When you won’t agree with the most basic of definitions by going “no, not true, I know better but I don’t have cite anyone just trust me bruv”, then me citing who thinks that the very basic definition is actually the very basic definition, but you then continuing to disagree with it without being able to provide any sources at all… what use is trying to have a discussion? You’re not ready for one. You’ve made up your mind and you just haphazardly try to equivocate. Like I said, I’ve had this exact same conversation hundreds of times.

    So, to address your link… “maybe keep reading”?

    Types of socialism vary based on the role of markets and planning in resource allocation, and the structure of management in organizations. Socialist systems divide into non-market and market forms.

    Almost as if market economies weren’t all capitalist. Almost as if equating market economies to capitalism was as silly as equating cell growth to cancer. As established by me earlier, and the link you provided, modern socialism includes market socialism. Of course you might be oblivious to something like that if say, you were just pretending to understand the subject.

    So now that you realise that you can’t possibly back up your “social democracy is actually capitalism” garbage, you start shifting the goalposts, trying to equivocate on what socialism is in general. (Again, been here, done this, 2000000x)

    You’re now making the exact argument that I said you were, the entire time. You’re directly saying that there is no private ownership under socialism.

    Do us a service. Go to Google and type in “define socialism”.

    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned OR REGULATED by the community as a whole.

    Again, thanks for the laughs.

    Edit, oh right, please do cite a source or any support for this “social democracy is capitalism” bullshit, why don’t you? I’ll wait here. :)


  • “I never came close to saying that”

    The fact that you don’t understand your own implications is pretty much the problem here. Whether consciously or not, you conflate the terms “market economy” and “capitalism”, which is quite as silly as thinking cell growth = cancer.

    I’ve read actual literature on this, and I’ve this exact “discussion” literally hundreds of times. Stomp your foot and cry all you want, that’s not going to change the actual literature of economic theory.

    Are people able to use capital to buy into those companies and be in charge and reap the profits?

    See, this is exactly the implication that all socialism is somehow some authoritarian communism. You just can’t understand how poorly you’ve perceived this. So you write things which argue that using currency makes a place capitalist in some way? That’s the real name for what people used to buy things; currency. Not capital, as when you’re living from paycheck to paycheck, you don’t have capital.

    “My source, Communist Manifesto”

    Your source for what? The modern definition of social democracy? You’ve never even held a copy of Das Kapital let alone have read it. I can assure you, Marx does not write “oh and social democracies are forms of capitalism, bruv”.

    Because they aren’t. And you’re arguing that modern actual literature on the subject, which is quoted on the very first sentence on the article about social democracy actually don’t matter, but your haphazard pretentious Lemmy comments should be taken as fact?

    Thanks for the laughs, big guy. :D


  • Maybe actually try to understand what you’re reading?

    You have this idiotic notion that all socialism is somehow government-planned economies and that all market economies are automatically capitalist.

    I honestly can’t express my sincere disappointment at how common that shit is.

    You can also look at European countries which are social democracies, and you will see they are all capitalist countries.

    I’m Finnish, and we are a socialist country, by definition. This isn’t even a remotely controversial thing to say in Finland, but weirdly when one engages people on mainly American forums, the black-and-white “no that’s communism, you’re capitalist countries” red-scare garbage comes out. And yes, I understand you’re Portuguese, but that doesn’t prevent you from having these asinine notions.

    You’re literally arguing that the very first sentence on the Wikipedia article on this exact subject, “social democracy”, is not only wrong, but in fact the truth is actually the polar opposite of what it says. I… I just fucking can’t with you people.

    Here are literary references to back up the statement in economical theory literature that social democracy is indeed a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism:

    Eatwell & Wright 1999, pp. 80–103; Newman 2005, p. 5; Heywood 2007, pp. 101, 134–136, 139; Ypi 2018; Watson 2019.

    Now I’ll wait for you to source your “social democracy is capitalism” bullshit, which you won’t, because there are no sources for anything remotely confirming that.



  • Socialism is defined as the government owning or regulating the means of production.

    When there’s an actually well regulated market, like say, we have here in the Nordics, you’ll tend to see other socialism alongside it. We have good social security and labour laws. Exactly because it’s regulated market economy we utilise.

    Capitalism does not have aa monopoly on market economies.

    Capitalism is to market economy what cancer is to cell growth.

    Even the US employs socialist policies. As in the policies themselves are socialist in nature. Antitrust laws. Because without them, capitalism would fuck over the economy in a heartbeat.

    If something has been shown to not work it’s capitalism.

    Capitalism is the antithesis of a well regulated market and will always fight regulation in any form, because it’s harder to make profits if you can’t sell unsafe garbage and exploit workers to their death.