Additionally, historically the capitalists have been quite good at class solidarity between one another, even between factions that are unaligned in their own self-interests. You don't get to the point of ruling over hundreds or thousands of employees and making millions or billions off of their surplus labor value without realizing that if you let those same workers ever figure out that they don't need you and outnumber you 1000:1, you are beyond fucked and it is worth it to ally with anyone in the same boat as you to keep that from happening.
DefinitelyNotAPhone
joined 5 years ago
The non-billionaires are part of the capitalist class. They're on the same side as the billionaires; there isn't some magical divide that pops into existence once you cross the threshold from eight to nine digits in your net worth. The problem still remains.
Yeah there's nothing evil about the palantir inherently, just the fact that an evil demigod is currently shoving his malice through them at all times.
Reading through your positions, your heart is very much in the right place but you seem to miss the most important detail: who actually holds power in our society, and how does that power manifest itself?
If we lived in an actual democracy, these changes wouldn't be worth discussing because they would've already been put into place ages ago; it's intuitively obvious to anyone paying attention that there is no world in which it makes sense for a handful of people to own something like 90% of the wealth a society creates. If government policy was driven by sound reasoning and a desire for the greatest possible outcome for the most people, all of this would already be in place. If the media were free to put forward information about key issues that affect everyone and the best paths forward to resolve those issues, you wouldn't have to type any of this out.
None of those statements are reality, nor are they anywhere near it. Our society (speaking specifically about the US, though this is applicable in any western-aligned nation) is, has always been, and will continue to be dominated by those with wealth. This country was founded by plantation owners who sought to exist in a society with zero oversight on them, driven by factionalism between them and their British counterparts and fear of a rising sparks of abolitionism within the British government. When that first attempt at as true of a laissez faire society fell apart in the face of slave revolts and antagonism from the former soldiers they failed to pay for their part in their revolution, they circled the wagons and created a stronger central government completely bound to their wills. You don't even need to read between the lines, they flat out admitted in the Federalist papers they were terrified of true democracy because the "mob" would overrule their enlightened perspective.
Our modern society is even more consolidated under their rule. They unilaterally own TV, radio, the internet. A single individual writes a check to bribe a senator that outpaces what ten thousand smaller donors can scrounge together collectively. Judges are drawn from billionaire-funded think tanks so regularly you could safely bet money on who the next Supreme Court justices will be. And most importantly of all, the means by which 99.9% of the population survives is, without exaggeration, a dictatorship by their bosses, the very people you're opposing. Any resistance to the status quo will inevitably result in the relevant workers being blacklisted from society and left to starve to death.
A political movement whose objective is to place a wealth limit on the people responsible for the above system would only succeed if that movement amasses enough influence, organization, manpower, and popularity with the common people that they can overthrow the entire system. This is where I think you're wrong: if you can reach this point, why would you treat the symptom instead of the disease? Every compromise the capitalists have ever given the rest of us will be and has been undone; the vast protections given to workers through mass unionization has been eroded, civil rights have been rolled back, and wages have stagnated as the existing real threat of socialism disappeared at the end of the Cold War. This same trend has occurred all across Europe and Asia, it is not a fluke but rather an inherent and obvious action of capitalism.
Don't settle for half-assing it, break the system that allows for ten people to dominate all of society and build a more equitable world instead.
Every now and again Roborocks will go on firesales for like $200, which is an absolute steal if you can afford it.
This is what they deserve for loving such an unnatural sport for their climate /s
It's an understandable position to hold for someone who hasn't gotten over the hump of understanding that these issues are structural to capitalism. If you feel that reform is a possibility then UBI makes a lot of sense, because from the ideals that liberal democracies tout it seems like a win-win: workers get money to live off of as automation and outsourcing put them out of work, and capitalists get a more consistent flow of money through the economy to stimulate growth that offsets the cost of UBI itself.
The issue is that capitalists aren't interested in the long-term vision required to build factories that take 30+ years to pay for themselves, they want maximum returns right now and don't care if that tanks the economy in the long term because they'll already be fantastically wealthy and insulated from the effects. They also will not, under any circumstances except having no other option, ever give concessions to the working class, because if people start remembering that's an option they're liable to remember they outnumber the people in charge 1000:1 and might push for more.
That's why the US will not reindustrialize and why UBI will not happen; they'd rather pump-and-dump another AI/real estate/micro financing loans bubble than build anything of real value. When all that matters is the accumulation of wealth society fundamentally breaks.
Because the money for UBI fundamentally has to come from the upper echelon of capitalists, and they don't want it because it both reduces their hoards of capital as well as relieves the structural stress on the working class that keeps them desperate enough to work for dogshit wages in order to continue surviving, and we do not live in a democracy that cares that 95% of the population would be better off for it because those same capitalists own all major forms of information dissemination, lobbying, and campaign funding.
Which just circles back to the core problem of UBI: if you somehow managed to unite enough people willing to buck the current system to get it instituted against the wishes of the ruling class, then you've also reached the threshold to end capitalism outright and bypass the half-step of making the ultra wealthy give back a tiny percentage of their ill-gotten gains in the form of UBI in favor of just building a society where the collective wealth generated by the workers is spread among the workers.
I know they're propagandists and tailoring their complaints to make sure the intended message gets across, but I find it disgusting that these ghouls look at a grocery store and have their first thoughts be "Gee, I sure hope their sales figures look strong and they're extra pliant for some nightmare customer whining that their chicken went bad after sitting on the counter for two days after purchase!" instead of just hoping they feed people in the most efficient way possible.
Extremely critical support to CEOs having AIs give their quarterly earnings only to have it hallucinate its way into becoming a third-world Maoist and calling for the shareholders' executions.
Men read Foundation one time and suddenly start predicting the downfall of empires /s
While there is something understandable about partially wishing for it, I don't think anyone is going to lead a genocidal strategic bombing campaign against the United States to level every manmade structure taller than knee height before promptly having 95% of the planet embargo them for 75 years, so I doubt the US can emulate the DPRK's economic situation too well.