- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politicalmemes@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
It works for the top and that’s all we count evidently
A healthy, broadly educated population, which feels safe and secure, is incompatible with, and toxic to, conservative and authoritarian ideologies.
They need you to be sick, stupid, and scared.
Nah, it’s working EXACTLY as intended. It’s intended to make the rich richer and the poor poorer
The system works perfectly. It’s a democratic system in which the majority of people decide. And they decided they want to get screwed by billionaires. What’s the problem?
The system does work as intended. Sadly, it was not designed for us.
There is a nuance to make here.
Children staying at home longer isn’t a bad thing per say. Most of the world is like that.
Children staying at home because they have no choice is a big issue, because it was possible before.
But like 7 white dudes have all the money on the planet. Things seem to be just fine.
The system does work. Perfectly. For those who installed it. Which are the top 5%.
Exactly.
Maybe you did everything you were supposed to. I didn’t.
I fucked up big time too.
I fucked up bigger time.
I feel like I was lied to all through school. Work hard, get good grades, and everything will work out.
Nope, unaffordable rent, suckass job market. I feel like I’m being exploited every day I’m at work, even when I like the job and the people.
I finally got into a proper career path in my 30s, and it wasn’t because of my degree or my skills.
It was because I had an old friend working for that city that told them to pull my resume from the stack for a low-level position that I was way overqualified for. That got me an interview. That got me the job. I kicked ass once given an opportunity which lead to my promotion within 6 months. I quickly became known in the area and was poached by another city a little over a year after that.
Getting my resume pulled by a friend lead me to more than tripling my income within 2 years. I still don’t make amazing money, but I no longer have to worry if I’ll be able to pay the bills.
By explaining that you got to it thanks to nepotism, you just highlighted another failure of the system.
Yes. That’s what I’m saying.
That depends on who you ask. Billionaires think it works great.
Working precisely as intended.
the system works exactly as it’s supposed to, which is why it must be destroyed.
33 here.
At least I get along with them really well
- At this point I may as well stay and make sure they don’t kill themselves by being old.
They sure make the attempt.
44 here. I’m happy to have my son at home as long as he needs but I do understand the brokeness of our system because I wasn’t even able to buy a house until my late 30s and my parents were able to in their 20s. Unfortunately my parents lost their houses (divorced) in the 2008 Great Recession and died with nothing. These disgusting oligarchs need consequences for the destruction of everything American people need to survive.
STOP. ELECTING. CAPITALISTS.
Yeah this is way beyond voting. Even in the context of just voting, it’s often necessary to vote for a lesser evil. Case in point, all the “Kamala didn’t earn my vote!” dipshits who handed Trump the presidency on a silver platter.
You gotta make strategic choices with voting, and sometimes that kinda sucks.
So do that. But also break out the guillotines when the people you voted for start behaving maliciously. That’s what we’re failing, and that’s why things have gone so far shit.
They have you in a check mate. Some people still don’t see it.
From the voting angle? Yeah I’m as tired of picking the 2nd worst candidate as anyone else. When I push for voter turnout and encourage folks to vote for the least evil option that has a realistic shot of winning, it isn’t with any expectation that things will improve as a result of that person’s policies, it’s to pull the parachute on our freefall into human rights violations, locally and abroad.
From the guillotine angle? ‘They’ don’t have us in jack, we just don’t have a spine. We could turn this shit around practically overnight, but no one (self included - I’ll own my share of the blame here) wants to get their hands dirty.
If you have a spine shows once you organize.
I don’t. I literally acknowledged that in my previous post. I’m in the same boat as everyone else who isn’t willing to risk their life or freedom over this.
There’s a reason I say “we” in these types of criticisms.
That’s normal. Change will come with food scarcity.
Case in point, all the “Kamala didn’t earn my vote!” dipshits who handed Trump the presidency on a silver platter.
That line has been dead for over a year, you need to find a new scapegoat.
Not sure what argument you think you’re making. If we had a 100% turnout and still had enough people waste their vote on some protest candidate or even directly for Trump as some kind of accelerationist nonsense, the situation would still be what I’m griping about, which is people failing to vote strategically (and failing to behead malevolent people in positions of power). Nonvoters are only part of the issue.
…and not that it matters, but I don’t buy that article’s pitch for a second. High voter turnout trends blue. A study can hypothesize to the contrary, but a single study doesn’t prove shit (in any context - peer review ftw).
“Stop voting for those you have no choice but to vote for”
Hey! There is usually an honest Christian nationalist further down the ticket you can give your vote.
/s is mandatory
Sadly it is only the tone and not the facts that are sarcastic.
I agree. But also, they’re all capitalists. Even the so-called Democratic socialists are capitalists.
Yes, and capitalism can work if it’s well regulated. And that means the people have to control the government, not the corporations or billionaires. Thats what’s very wrong in the USA now.
capitalism
can workis somewhat more the tolerable if it’s well regulatedFTFY.
I think we’re well past the idea that capitalism is the “end of history”. The profit motive is always gonna lead us back here.
I think if donations to political parties were limited to a couple of hundred dollars per person and no corps or other funding allowed - or better yet, paid for only by a public fund based on the number of votes last cycle, then the system would have a chance. We’d need much more anti-corruption systems for politicians too. And this stuff would have to be constitutionally protected. The goal would be to make it so the politicians can only game for votes from the people. And Corp/capital owners could only game the system writhin the rules set by the government which is actually beholden to the people. People could innovate and take reasonable risks/work hard and be rewarded for that. Of course decent education is part of the equation too.
The entire fundamental goal of capitalism is to commodify any potential source of profit. That means something like a “well regulated government” which is a guaranteed negative profit engine will always be amongst the first things to be commodified.
The only way that “works” is if the government treats corporations and billionaires with a equal or greater level of contempt than they treat the government. At which point it is, by any reasonable definition, no longer capitalism.
I think this is just a larger cycle of history that has nothing specifically to do with capitalism.
In every society, there are levers of power. In ever society, access to the levels of power grants you more power. Eventually, every society is ruled by a few people who can trivially put their own interests ahead of the interests of everyone else. Eventually, doing so for long enough makes everyone (but the powerful worse off) and the society collapses, at which point the guillotines come out and society resets (best case scenario) or it enters a stable state of serfdom.
This has all happened before. This will all happen again.
I think this is just a larger cycle of history
Yes.
that has nothing specifically to do with capitalism.
No. Capitalism is because we have learned some lessons from that long history of power struggles but we are currently stuck in a rut and have a good 50-100 years of knowing better but refusing to do anything about it, which itself is another larger cycle of history that we know better but refuse to do anything about.
Can you explain how capitalism is in some way consciously well-intentioned, as you seem to be implying?
Well, the idea is to use people’s greed to drive growth and progress. If the government can shape profit forces to drive life quality improvements of the population, then it can work. This basically boils down to taxing bad shit, or making certain practices illegal. People will always try to game the system and find holes, and the government needs to constantly watch for this and plug the. Then competition within those rules can lead to positive outcomes.
The government doesn’t need to treat corporations or billionaires with contempt, it just needs to ignore their wants and prioritize on the people.I understand the idea, I’m saying the idea is inherently contradictory and stupid.
The government doesn’t need to treat corporations or billionaires with contempt, it just needs to ignore their wants
A corporation only exists as a legal fiction. A corporation can not exist if a state “ignores their wants” because the state is the one granting the desire for the corporation to exist in the first place! Billionaires function similarly via the concept of private property but that one is a bit more roundabout.
They exist because the state intrinsically cares deeply because “billionaires” have every incentive to ensure the state does so. The state “ignoring their wants” does not come close to matching the incentives of the “billionaires” and as such the Nash equilibrium will ALWAYS favor the “billionaires” without equal, or greater, incentives for the state.
You set up a system based inherently on ‘winner takes all’ style conflict and are surprised when the most ruthless and least moral people end up winning?
Any system will break down when the most ruthless and least moral people take control. You could argue that a communist system is no longer a communist system when the ruthless take over, buts that’s just the same as saying a well regulated capitalist system gets fucked up when the ruthless take over. I know capitalism is based on competition and that maybe makes it particularly fragile in that respect, but the competition part also makes it efficient and with the right regulations i think it can be efficient in terms of things that are good for humanity.
The entire philosophy behind capitalism is to reward those that are the most ruthlessly greedy.
That is not true of communism, socialism, anarchism, syndicalism, etc.
To use a sports metaphor; sure a ‘win at any cost’ approach results in fiercer competition and yes a little bit of sportsmanship would make it so less people die. But sportsmanship is diametrically opposed to a win at any cost mentality.
Freedom of “choice”.
I normally view them as community-first capitalists. Still better than any kind of totalitarian (no dissent) government.
This is also evident in germany where most teens live separately from 17 yrs of age and up. Anybody not doing so used to get ridiculed by their friends group. These days teens are increasingly living with their parents again in germany just due to rising costs and lower job opportunities. But hey, AI is cool!
Seriously, it was common? I knew only one person who lived by themselves at age 18 and it was someone who went to Hauptschule and became a kindergarten teacher by that age and his step dad paid for the apartment.
At 17, I was still in school for two more years and no one in my school (Gymnasium) lived alone. This was like 15-20 years ago. In my sister’s year (she graduated in 2003) I also don’t recall anyone living by themselves.
it seems common everywhere theres hcol. also sometimes thier siblings that did launch from home rag on thier other siblings who dint,likely dint account for potentials like AUADHD.
