Well?

B they made it and haven't put it up for sale or received payment for it and seem upset with the idea of losing it.

B of course

Lol fuck them little niggas

Child B. Tell me I'm fucking wrong faggot.

I break the flute , then go buy 3 saxophones and give them to the kids free of charge and as a bonus I will learn them how to play it just because I am that nice.
There , now they can sing to a real instrument and not look like abused kids at their first blowjob

Attached: real_music.png (1080x1280, 25.62K)

I don't see how this is relevant to the post user

How is this even a question?
It isn't even ours to to give, it belongs to child B.

Y would be ever produce another flute if she knows that having it taken and redistributed is the likely outcome?
How do we know that she in fact has access to the resources to even produce another one?

Except you just broke B kids belonging. Even if you replaced it with a sax, she's now out of an instrument and the time/materials it took to make said instruments, whereas A and C just get free saxophones. B is getting a shitty lot in this.

.... You know communism is a workers movement, right? B is the most communist option user, are you retarded?

A is capitalist (didn't make shit but takes advantage of workers).

A if she gives me some cash that I split 65/35 with B. Just because I am that nice , I give 15 to C to buy a big black dragon dildo for himself

Why should you have a brand new car when I am the only one here who knows how to drive and you are unable to drive? That car should be given to me.
Cars were meant to be driven not sit in a garage in your million-dollar + home gated Golf Community. I'm also poorer than people who live in places like that.

But, like any argument that is not in favor of child b the arguments I just made are all retarded. They have the cars because they belong to them. My ability to drive or play the flute or relative wealth to theirs has no bearing on on the situation

Attached: Retard.jpg (460x140, 7.49K)

A doesn't own the means of production and the raw materials B does.

fuck all three

>her belongings
retard

If only someone invented a value system in which value could be transferred between individuals

the flute belongs first to the child that pays for it. conveniently, it's also the child that made it. if it was like, someone paid for the materials for the flute and taught some child to make one, the child doesn't deserve the credit but since "child b" not only made it but ALSO provided the materials, they own it.

my answer is that it is not my place to decide whether "child a" or "child c" deserve it. besides, child c's argument is weak; how would having the flute improve their life? child c is a fag.

B after I rape A with it.

Well it's my fucking flute and I'd like to keep it. I might pawn it later for grocery money. Maybe if those girls suck my dick I'll let them play with it for a bit, though.

A = fascism
B = capitalism
C = communism

Interesting how when you simplify the argument, everyone's a capitalist. In this case, I too would go for B. However, in real life, I would go for B almost fully, spend a tiny fraction on C (less than what western governments are currently spending) so unlucky people wouldn't starve, and in extreme conditions, such as war time or epidemics, I would temporarily go for A.

Hello fellow saxophone player, it is truly the best instrument

A question of entitlement versus Entitlement™.

>none of them, they are way too whiny and annoying. maybe I'll let them share it later.
or (after a little thought)
I buy it from B and give the first flute to A. I tell B to build two more flutes, and I buy both. Now A can teach B and C how to play. I leave knowing I just threw a shit ton of money away.

Attached: 1565386807063.png (1353x1032, 1.32M)

A
>wants to take the flute because she thinks her skills make her eligible for free stuff without even giving anything in return

B
>flute maker who did 100% of the work and studying so the flute could exist, not asking for anything but still gets her flute taken away?

C
>has no skills and no intention to even use the flute, doesn't even know how it would improve his life - he just wants it to have something, might as well give him something else and he'd be just as happy

....definitely B, who can then exchange temporary flute ownership for other services.

Attached: 4e6f5400.jpg (604x395, 40.21K)

you are 100% wrong. re-read it you bernie faggot.

I looked up how much they cost. They're about $200 each. I can easily buy 3 flutes from B and give each kid one flute. I think they'll have fun playing the flute.

Attached: 1565387425074.png (480x498, 229.51K)

A because based imperialism.

It really is , isn't it. Look at this sexy little thing and tell me you are not hard as a fucking diamond.

Attached: best_boy_Sax.jpg (1100x1100, 91.96K)

Flutes are cheap enough, give everybody a flute.

B and A could probably come to an arrangement, and child C can go cry in a corner.

>and child C can go cry in a corner

Yeah! Like Hitler! That little fag boy...

Who would make the flutes?

I thought I was the only one who thought like this. I'm glad I am not alone

fuck you communism

Wrong. Child B has no rights to anything, including possession, because they're a child. I can take as I please, don't try to stop me.

Adults.
Child B probably doesn't know how to make a real flute, let's be for reals here.

Never accept the premise of the question. That's how you fall into the cognitive trap they set for you with that framing, which aims to plant the idea that a force or authority outside these three parties has a special role to play in "distributing" the flute. You know, like the fucking UN.

The real question should be: Who the fuck appointed me the Flute Allocation Authority?? The B chick made the flute, she gets to decide what she wants to do with it. Any other answer sucks Soros cocks and gets cucked by jew niggers. /new nigger myself

Pedo detected

Only logical choice is B, others cannot reasonably be defended.