Cmon… Imposing tariffs on your allies is not the way you build economy.

fucking finally

Well, obviously every attempt at communism results in a dictatorship. To achieve communism, you firstly need a dictatorship but since it’s impossible to achieve communism, you will end up with socialist dictatorship. That’s why it sucks.

Yes, it’s done with tax money, so it’s not free.

Yes, USSR became a superpower where most areas were without toilets…

Will you develop medicine for free? Will you do 8+ hour long surgeries for free? Will you teach children at school for free?

Nothing is free, buddy. If sth appears to be free, it’s only because someone sponsors it.

Okay, move to Cuba or North Korea where they still try to pursue communism and where they still have not realized how broken system it is. You will surely enjoy life there :D

Why? I think businesses should be left alone to decide.

Elon?

I think he should start with burning himself

You can buy a part of company. If you buy 0.00001% of that company, you surely won’t take part in the decisions as your vote does not matter. From the other side, if millions of people owning 0.00001% of the company were making decisions, it would have been very slow to respond to the competition.

It’s all quite simple. If you disagree with company’s management, just sell the stocks. And no one is saying that company’s stock will be worth more next month.

Imagine calling stocks a casino xD

Sure, if the CEO is replaced by someone else who can manage the company, sure. But you cannot generally expect people to manage themselves. That’s why communism never worked and never will.

Also, what is according to you a glorified casino?

So if I have a small computer repair store and want to make it more successful, I should employ at least million people, so the ratio goes up?

Company is not a charity. There is a difference.

Suppose that dropbox employs twice as many people as other cloud providers. Would you be willing to pay them the twice amount for the same product the competition offers just because they employ more people?

You know, we live in the world of competition where you need to be ahead your rivals, otherwise your company fails (and all employees lose their jobs). So cutting costs where it’s possible makes perfect sense, especially if the employees can be replaced by computers or sth.

Well, if dropbox can exist without those 500 employees, then it’s logical. You don’t judge success of a business by how many people it employs

Tesla and Elon are one of the reasons why I don’t but individual stocks but I rather get indices… It’s just the lack of consistency and the fact a single person can make you lose money…

I do not really see why this is bad. If they can exist with 10% less, why not.

If someone says, “I support this because I am conservative,” you actually mean, “I support this because I am a cock.”

“God doesn’t make mistakes.” This has to be the best argument I have ever seen. Just wow… Can’t god also solve the 3x+1 problem? Would be useful.