The Federation doesn't have capitalism either (well, again this depends on the writer, but Picard was quite clear about it in one episode).

"Team restructuring" is so much fun, you never know what you're going to get.

Your boss's boss now reports to a slightly different VP? Everyone is getting fired? No way to know which it's going to be, until the end of the meeting.

34, Slovenia, same story.

Ginger is a root and ale is a beer, but ginger ale is not root beer.

It's all Starfleet's fault, the Federation has expanded too much and has encircled Borg space for decades. Plus the Borg are good for making a multipolar galaxy, we should support them.

Also what you're used to.

Australia? Normal day. Norway? Catastrophic.

Do really think not giving in to an invader will bring peace? Hmm, I don’t know. Kind of a dumb question if you’re not going to examine any context. Also, do really think setting some kind of precedent matters. Capital will pursue its interests even while you gasp in horror and clutch your pearls about the violation of what you decided are the norms. Grow up.

Yes. Precedent matters, not in the legal sense, but in the sense of what a possible invader expects to happen. Capital will pursue its interests, but only by fighting back do we show that it's in their interest to not invade random countries.

Do you think the richest countries in the west that already pillaged Russia in recent history, ruining over 100 million lives, stealing so much of the former Soviet Union’s collective wealth that they cratered life expectancy, should be supported as they expand a military alliance in Russia’s borders so they can do it again?

Now that's the most loaded question I've seen in a while. It's not the "west" being supported here, it's Ukraine. You may be confused as to which way the money flows, and who requested it.

Second, you are similarly confused about how the west is expanding (by which you probably mean NATO). The US did not invade and conquer Poland, instead Poland was begging to join. Same with Turkey. Same with the Baltic countries, and now Sweden and Finland. Do you know why they all wanted to join?

Oh, and finally when did the west pillage Russia? And more importantly, how did they pillage Russia? If you believe that the US was able to control Russia so well in the 1990s, how do you know Putin is not their puppet now?

Do you really think that giving in to invaders demands will bring peace? Just like it did in 2014, like it did in 2008, and like it did in 1938?

And yes, before you bring up the US, the same applies there. We should have been more firmly against Bush's wars. Because this stuff does transfers - letting one invader invade without punishment will only encourage everyone else (including the US) to do the same. Do you really want to send a message to the US, to France, to China, to Israel, that they can invade other countries without repercussions? Because if you advocate for peace with Russia, that is exactly what you're doing.

BRICS is not an alliance or anything, it's just a grouping of countries with (very roughly) similar development status.

Also state capitalism, the economic system of the USSR.

Everyone will call you a market socialist because that’s what you want.

Yes.

And despite all your railing against anything resembling a free market, I still don't see any downsides of that.

"free markets", the fundamental ideology of capitalism

Wrong already. The fundamental ideology of capitalism is that people with capital reap the profits (through control of means of production, but also means of living). You can shorten that to "rich get richer". But nothing related to markets.

In fact, there were several instances of capitalist economies without a free market. Nazi Germany comes to mind - the government bought weapons, supplies, and everything else, but they were contracted from private corporations controlled only by "desirable" individuals. Other wartime economies apply here too, to a lesser degree - with rationing but still private ownership.

And yes, capitalists are always afraid of a genuinely free market, because they don't want competition.

The two cases were "do (meaning 'emulate') their economy and policies" and "do (meaning 'have sex with') their people". No "have" anywhere.

Do you understand that a law banning slavery is a piece of regulation? Would you agree that society is more free with that regulation, or less free?

The same logic applies here. The market is free when everyone can freely participate in it. Which means that we have to stop (regulate) those who want to prevent people from participating (i.e. monopolists).

Read the comment that I replied to. It does not say "have", but "do".

I actually don't know, neither happened so far. Let's find out.

Do you mean their economy and policies, or their people? In either case, I agree.

Market != Capitalism. You can have a free market without capitalism, and capitalism without a free market.

The hexbears will attack me for saying that a regulated free market is good and a planned economy is bad. The others will attack me for saying that capitalism is bad and that we should have market socialism instead. But if we can't have that, a capitalist free market has proven much less bad than any planned economy, as long as it's regulated enough that it stays free.

Can confirm, not in retail but a fully remote programmer, managers are still very often concerned that "everybody has something to do" much more than "everything gets done".

USA and Russia are waging a proxy war

It's not a proxy war for Russia, lol.

You should be happy because if Ukraine did not fight back, if it did not receive western supplies, the war would be fought in your country, and in mine. And trust me, you do not want Russians in your country (but if you're just two countries away and older than 12, you know that already).

these people aren't allies and have never been.

Ah, yes, billionaire oligarhs are totally not allies. No, they each only have the best interests of their working people at heart. And these two specially, their chat without transistors was just about football, Trump getting billions in loans from Russian state banks in just good business, and that Manafort guy was just a coincidence.