You must log in or register to comment.
If by “value” you mean income it isn’t even tied to individual productivity. It’s tied to how much power or leverage you have to demand more.
The only way to make money is to convince people to give you money. If you wanna do it by acting like it’s because of some skill you have, that can work.
In theory it’s both. But mostly the leverage one.
Producing value gives leverage. A salesman who brings in lots of revenue and profit can negotiate a pretty high commission, because controlling that level of revenue/profit represents some leverage.
Kindly reminds me how much value a salesman produce?
To the person he exercises leverage over, who makes money on each sale made, and pays his wages/commissions? Isn’t that obvious? He agrees to sell some stuff, in exchange for money that comes from the sale.
Imagine a society where those setting the regulations are wealthy in such a way that they face no money related consequences. If they stuff up, or get into a tight spot with money, they’ll be a subsidy, or bailout, or sweet deal with a bank loan, or a wealthy relative, or they sell a property or a stock holding, or a mega yatch, or they’ll just declare that shell company bankrupt. They’ll never have a monetary problem that can’t be immediately resolved.
…this class of people - those with essentially no financial consequences in life, are expected to make empathetic and caring laws, systems, and regulations for the rest of us, for whom money is behind literally everything consequential. For whom a small or temporary lack of money drastically changes us and our quality of life immediately and often with no real resolution.
We have all the consequences they do not, they have all the power we do not. Nothing about this system makes sense, and it’s enough to say we live in a kind of Capitalist Monarchy, posing as a democracy of, by, and for the people.
Maybe vote against it?
Voting alone is insufficient, because in captive systems where a limited number of parties hold all political capital, you can only vote for complicit parties.
Individual people have to run for office, and there has to be movements to get them elected, and those movements need to be more powerful than the existing parties who will attempt to suppress them.
Honestly, at the level of organization that would be required, you’d probably just be better off ignoring the democratic process entirely, because it would take tens of millions.
It does take tens of millions, that’s the point
I’m not saying you should only vote, but rioting while letting your opposition win every election sure isn’t going to work
Here’s a whole video about why that doesn’t work:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs&list=PLrttDbiWQ1XO1iHAszAsPobYSoR0uQg_1&pp=iAQB
Basically all governments are required to keep certain groups happy to even consider getting into power, and some of that involves… Certain kinds of payoffs and deals being made.
You can only vote for people who have already acquised to the system in order to get on the ballot.
You can vote for people who promise some slightly more progressive version of the status quo, but that’s as radical as the system is allowed to get by design.
Videos like these are meant to keep you down, or in your couch
You can get on a ballot. You just need enough people to support you
Not voting or voting against those who would change the system is what keeps these dorks in power
You just need enough people to support you
I don’t like people enough to want that
Maybe support causes that oppose it?
Think about all the money we funnel to twitch streamers and other influencers.
I remember back in like 2010s people trying to crowd source their election and it just falls flat.
Then you hear about pewdiepie buying his own private island or some shit and it’s dumb founding.
It’s so gross when I spit piss at the DNC I get heckled to hell but if we took the time dismantle that machine we could effectively build something that easily out preforms it.
Voting is the least we can do besides doing nothing. Which makes it pretty disappointing that so many people will be all like “oh voting doesn’t do anything, we should tear down the government instead” and then they proceed to do neither of those things.
It’s a machine right…?
What if I got a really big wrench to throw into it? 🤔
The trouble is, many people are in the machine and get crushed when the wrench breaks the machinery.
And that’s not even a joke. Helping people in this situation, without harming other innocent people, is possible - but it’s hard work!
Metaphorical problems require metaphorical solutions.
Sure, we are talking purely metaphysically here. No worries
Breeders: I don’t want to be alone in the soul-crushing machine. Let me add another soul to it.
I think of the hubris it must take, to yank a soul out of nonexistence into this meat; and force a life into this thresher.
- Rustin Cohle
pretty solid troll ngl 5/7
Is it really that soulcrushing? The system itself isn’t problematic, its our stupid primal brains and intellectual lessers who vote against their own interests and refuse to join peaceful organizations to acquire pay raises, breaks, sick leave, etc.
It could all work but we’re our own worst enemies.
“The system isn’t bad, it’s just that the natural reactions of everyone in the system are wrong”
Yeah, that is a sign of a bad system. If it only works for 1% of the people in it, you can’t say it is generally a good system.
A good and robust system would deal with the bumpy parts of life. Including human stupidity and our ability to easily fall for propaganda.
The natural reactions of everyone to everything are bad. Greed is a primary motivating factor for all humans, period.
Thats why we created a system. You’re not going to get to your idea of a good system by tearing the current one down, ever.
The natural reactions of everyone to everything are bad
All of them? Some of them? How much humanity will be left if we get rid of everything that doesn’t fit into the system?
You’re not going to get to your idea of a good system by tearing the current one down, ever.
I never implied I was intending to tear down the system. Well as long as it remains democratic anyways. A system that can’t change has a shelf life one way or another.
All I implied is that the current system isn’t good. Not that small changes couldn’t make it better.
My message was about reforming the system and your response was
“The system isn’t bad, it’s just that the natural reactions of everyone in the system are wrong”
It’s hard to see that as anything but advocacy of tearing down the system, which is something far too many people unironically believe.
You: “I smell great!”
Me: “I think you smell bad”
You: “You think an aspect of me is bad, this must mean you think everything about me is bad. You must hate me the most”
Me: “No… you just need to take a shower.”
You: “I can’t see how telling me that I am smelly doesn’t mean you hate me.”
I don’t what to tell you, it’s not that hard to get.
Me: “The system needs a shower.”
You: “This entire system is bad.”
Me: “You’re an idiot to think the system is unshowerable.”
You: “I was the first person to suggest a shower!”
You’re a fucking loon, mate.
Why don’t you just take a day and re-read your reply and see if it still makes sense to you in the context of our conversation.
Publicly traded corporations are the system that is the most problematic. they comprise the entirety of the stock market and the majority of the economy.
The fact that some guy running a hedge fund out of some economic center in a major city elects a c-suite who will actively harm people in any given locality America by dumping pollutants, tying up water rights, raising prices without a corresponding cost for production, or whatever other unethical business practice you want to fill the blank in with, just because it marginally increases profits is the problem. That hedge fund manager is actually required to do that or he will be fired, sued, or held criminally liable.
Greed is the primary motivating factor in this country and it is killing us.
87% of US companies who make more than $100M revenue (not net, gross) are private according to Advisorpedia.
But yes, ending Citizens United and enforcing maximum political donations would be a huge step forward and fix so many problems.
That says nothing about the amount of money passing through public companies.
Political donations suck, but the real issue is the absolute fiduciary duty of company runners.
It just refutes the statement about the “majority of the economy” is all.
The economy is the money/capital not the number of business
Kind of weird that I should even be bothered to ask at this point, but…
Alright, ignoring the number of employed workers and other economic indicators like actual product, whats your statistics on money/capital of private vs public firms?
It’s like the last election. We are all talking about 100 different things that all matter tangentially but couldn’t focus on the one thing that would probably solve a lot of it.
Americans want financial independence. No one wants to tackle that issue head on, though. They will skirt around it saying, if we had this or that social program but won’t ever commit to making it their platform.
Think of all the children being bullied that could be counseled if parents had time away from work to counsel them. Think of all the children getting pregnant that could be taught about safe sex and responsible relationships if parents had time away from work to parent them. Think of the long term health effects of being constantly stressed about work. Think of all the communities you could build if people had time away from work to build them.
Financial freedom = actual freedom. The GOP and DNC both want you to be wage slaves so that they can place themselves at the top of the hierarchy creating the problems you want them to fix.
Oh look, Mr. Both Sides is here to ignore that GOP keeps giving tax breaks for the rich and raising them for everyone else, here to ignore that Kamala Harris promised all kinds of tax reforms like unrealized gains tax for people with more than 1M USD in holdings, return of child tax credits, return of student tax credits, and forgiveness of student loans, and here to ignore that the DNC wants to end Citizens United and make unfair election maps illegal.
Fuck off, Mr. Both sides. You’re who I was referring to as our intellectual lessers.
Yikes. this isn’t giving off the vibe you think it is my dogg
my dogg if you disagree with DNC taxing the rich then I don’t care about your vibes my dogg, because clearly you’re the enemy of us all my dogg.
ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh 😩
This is absolute bullshit. The DNC made zero effort to address the finical instability of working class people and you’re perpetuating a lie. I was told 100x that the biden economy was a successful economy while inflation wreaked havoc. This was in 2021, 2022, 2023. Was it bidens fault? No. At the same time don’t lie to my face and tell me I should be grateful for this economic environment. Shit could have been worse but tell me you recognize it is bad and give me a platform to believe in.
The DNC won’t, they rely just as much as the GOP, on the economy only serving their needs.
Don’t make me pull out the fucking graph of popular policy passed vs policy passed that benefits the wealthy.
TL:DR you’re full of shit.
Edit:
https://act.represent.us/sign/problempoll-fba
Ah yes you’ve brought up such great points such as that one bill:
And also the other piece of legislature here:
And lets not forget:
All such great points, you’ve really got the facts on your side.
Sorry?
