Liberals often retort with a refutation of critiques of capitalism with: "capitalism has brought 1billion people out of poverty in the last 10 years, look here's a study done and funded by the IMF that says so"
Obviously this is bourgeois bullshit, but what are some good sources that succinctly deny this garbage?
Other urls found in this thread:
aljazeera.com
youtube.com
wsws.org
wsws.org
eprints.lse.ac.uk
twitter.com
Capitalism is the reason these people were in poverty in the first place.
Not entirely true, medieval peasants were poor but they at least had vacations, proles don't have vacations anymore and where they do it's disappearing fast. Poverty in capitalism is a different experience.
I was going to put that in the OP but I assumed it was a given.
No Marxist denies the fact that capitalism generates a large amount of wealth, the question is to whom that wealth goes
I just point them at the foundaitons of this "wealth". look at the sweatshops and child labourers in india and china, and then watch as they become apologetics for what is essentially slavery.
Amusing detail: the IMF is a credit union.
...
It depends on what is meant by "poverty." Say there was an Indian peasant living more or less self sufficiently in Hindustan. Most of what he makes, he consumes himself, and whatever surplus he has he sells for what amounts to maybe a hundred dollars a year. Say that this peasant is able to lead a relatively comfortable life.
Despite having all his needs provided for, because he has little to no income, he's categorized as living in poverty. This is one of the major tricks of the IMF/World Bank. They go to some non-industrialized country, tally up the population, income, etc, and lament the terrible conditions of all these poor people who make no money. So they give the government a bunch of money to kick the peasants off of their land, and then give them jobs working the land they used to own, where they now grow coffee or sugar or whatever other cash crop instead of food for themselves.
Through the alchemy of capitalism, dispossessing people of their land and ability to sustain themselves to instead make them dependent on a wage is "lifting people out of poverty." Nevermind that for a lot of these smaller countries, it's basically perpetual debt-slavery as paying off these loans from the IMF or whoever is basically never going to happen.
So yeah, that's capitalism "lifting people out of poverty."
Just take a look at the "micro loans" scam. A decade ago it was being hailed as the savior of impoverished people everywhere, come to find that instead it not only failed to ameliorate poverty, but exacerbated it.
If it were the Pioneer Fund or Fark.com you might have a point, but that literally isn't an argument.
Not everyone deserves to live comfortably. The threat of poverty is what motivates work, and contribution in a capitalist society. The reform that capitalism needs is towards creating opportunistic equality and social mobility, rather than something like a universal basic income.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Wrong
Yeah 90% percent of those lifted out of poverty are from China, wich is socialist.
Good thing communists are against UBI.
Industrial Society And Its Future
pathetic
wsws.org
wsws.org
wsws goes on and on about how capitalist poverty reduction is a myth
Entirely fair to critique a source. Aljazeera isn't producing peer-reviewed studies, they're a state funded news organization, framing data in the most skewed and biased way possible to fit their government's agendas. When you read Aljazeera you are essentially reading Qatar government shill pieces.
(CHECKED)
Once you're out of the house for more than a couple months you'll realize how motivating not having food or electricity is, and maybe once you do start working you'll feel less sympathy for the entitlement of your shit-posting comrades.
I watched your "GET ANY WOMAN YOU WANT QUICK WITH THIS SINGLE SECRET" vid, pretty silly.
It is true that capitalism does improve material conditions in pre-capitalist societies, but at the same time, what objectively constitutes poverty is largely arbitrary and tends to be defined by neoliberals that think markets are magic.
In other words, you agree with socialist principles, but still hate us because you think all leftists are trust fund children.
heh, lefturds btfoed again!
...
No, you claimed that the "fear of poverty" doesn't motivate work, I corrected to "fear of poverty motivates un-fun, useful work".
Nice double post, retard. I can only assume you're referring to my response towards . He didn't make a scientific post for me to refute with data. I explained to him why the threat of poverty is motivational, and threw in the insult that, the only people who wouldn't understand this is those who've never experienced it. The "WALL OF ANECDOTE!!!" is one line. Everything else is explanation. If you we're addressing my response to you, everything I said is common knowledge, try at least going to the fucking Wikipedia page and you'll understand everything wrong with trying to use Aljazeera as some kind of referential source.
The video cites actual IRS studies, look them up if you want
More anecdote? this is useless. He provided a source, which you where unable to respond to, except claim that in the "ReL WurLd" things are different. Your comments are of no use, and your opinions are silly and inadequate to use for an argument.
As for the Jason Hickel piece in Aljazeera
eprints.lse.ac.uk
Here's the original from a LSE blog.
Get fucked brainlet
Which is pretty useless when discussing a movement which seeks to reduce work hours.
I can see where you must have become confused, the user who posted the vid was responding to the silly post made by this nigger