Let the engine of capitalism generate wealth (as it does so better than any other economic system) … but then make sure that wealth is going to the people who generate it.
If the top is getting more than their fair share, redistribute it through government programs that benefit the workers and their families.
We need to do this nationwide so that tax cheats can’t just run away to a different state… And we need to do it at much higher level that recognizes the reality that no one has ever EARNED a billion dollars. They’ve only stolen it from their workers because of a rigged government and legal system.
And by the way, the rich should be super happy if we able to get this done, because the alternative is that we keep heading down the current path until the working class gets so poor that they can no longer feed their kids… and at that point, history tells us, the guillotines come out.
Capitalism, socialism, communism, etc. are just mechanisms for the distribution of finite resources. Allowing market forces to drive production is great for some things like consumer products, but not so great for things like healthcare, education, environmental protections, and kid’s lunches. Capitalism needs government restrictions more than capitalists like to admit.
Well the USSR did also have a huge industrial machinery. But one thing that seems to emerge as a lesson from its downfall is that it is really hard to steer an economy with quotas and plans from the top.
A good market usually gives better incentives for people at every level. The problem is getting a good market which is definitely not the same as the libertarian dream of a super free market. Without good regulations it’s really easy for markets to get captured or become exploitative.
Some thinks should never be privatised(like infrastructure). And I think lots of industries would benefit from a state run (mostly nonprofit) competitor.
Take a look at why communism failed: When resources are distributed by a central authority, it doesn’t matter how well intentioned they are, at best they can only approximate which goods will be valued most by which individual at any given time. People would end up with an abundance of stuff they didn’t want, and a deficit in things they needed.
In a free market, supply and demand are constantly adjusting on an individual level with every transaction. Can’t get flour at the price I want? Fine, I’ll get potatoes. Can’t get flour or potatoes? Maybe a communist government thinks rice would be a good substitute.
But if it’s money in my hand, maybe I know I’ve got some other carbs and starch, and if I can’t get flour or potatoes, my money would best go to medicine or shoelaces… the point is, I’m setting my own priorities, and they aren’t always related or predictable.
Maybe I really want shoe laces, but they aren’t worth $6 to me. Maybe I’d pay 50 cents for them, otherwise, I’d rather use butchers twine, for a fraction of the cost, and just resign myself to retying my shoe.
Capitalism allows people to be nimble and adaptive. Communism was a: you take what you get, and that’s IT.
So people were getting things they didn’t value, and highly valuing things they couldn’t get, and it was just … inefficient.
They won't be happy about it. You are right, they should be. But, they don't have that kind of perspective.
Being rich isn't about money, it's about ego. They think they could solve this with better outcomes and efficiency themselves, even though they will never actually do it.
It's why union busting is so popular from otherwise "good" companies run by "socially minded" executives. It's why companies will continue to amass wealth to the point where it negatively effects customers ability to purchase their products. It's why rich individuals continue to amass wealth when it doesn't really improve their quality of life, they could just stop working.
Because to them it's just a contest. They just need to show they are better than someone else; first one person, then another, then another, real world outcomes and everyone else be damned. They will take it as far as they're allowed until no one is left and everyone's lives and the planet are catastrophically ruined.
The idea that we require children to go to school but don’t feed them healthy food automatically when they’re in class is insane. We’ve got money for all the fighter jets but can’t feed kids.
Hunger is a terrible motivator for kids in school. How the hell are they supposed to know what The Scarlet Letter is talking about when they haven’t eaten?
Well at the moment the revenue is not paying for the school lunches, the text says it will in 2024. I wonder if this will work out, or if the rich will leave as many opponents of rich-taxes often argue.
Under no circumstances would I go public with such a discovery let alone inform any government of my findings. Why the fuck would anyone obey such a law?
It’s a piece of history that survived this long and deserves to be appreciated by everyone. Priceless. Definitely worth more than a gold -shit alloy that you’d try to sell at a loss.
Exactly why the state should be paying market price for the gold if they’re going to have a law like this. These ol kinds of finds should be on display, not melted down and hawked at a pawn shop.
The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is “engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion.”
Who tf does the catholic church think they are talking about “ideological colonization”? That’s the whole point of religion. Catholics are masters of “ideological colonization”. They’re just bitter it’s not working for them anymore.
That’s what masters do: dominate the game to such an extent that people don’t even know they’re doing it. And cry out if anyone else even tries to play, without irony.
“Ideological colonization” makes it sound like the law encourages California doctors to leave the state, commit what’s considered a crime in another state, but then be shielded from prosecution. According to the article, the law does not apply in such cases.
California just wants to protect their doctors from the crusades of far right wackos. Good for them. Red states are doing everything they can to alienate people like doctors and teachers. It’s a race to the bottom.
Anyone who reads my full comment will understand I’m pro-choice but I understand the need to preface comments like this. Otherwise I’m repeatedly downvoted after a sentence.
So:
I am pro-choice.
I get what you’re saying, but unfortunately if you’re looking at this through the catholic worldview/lense of thought, the doctrine they were raised to believe is the only right way to live, so it’s the same as someone saying to you “citizens who don’t want to murder can just… not murder people. Like, that’s not that hard. We don’t need laws against murdering people though”
Thanks for the preface, but the ending is exaggerated. Abortion does not equal murder. It causes no harm to society or others, unlike murder or guns. It would be more accurate to say it’s like gay marriage. If you don’t agree, don’t get gay married.
You say it causes no harm to society but they’ll argue it causes immense harm to God’s plan, or whatever. They can also point to the plummeting birth rates which are now almost below the level to maintain the American system. It’s a problem that is being debated amongst the highest members of the house and Congress. Of course the reason isn’t abortion and is much more complex and societal and due to uncertainty about the environment and wanting to raise children when the parents are a decade a way from buying a house on two full-time incomes now and how much worse it’s going to get for their hypothetical children.
My point is you have to see it through their worldview, and understand how they believe it affects them, now only see it through yours.
I think you’re zeroing in on an example when it was meant to be an overarching example.
But to continue with your argument: if the workers aren’t being born, the class war will get seriously real, and that’s the last thing those at the top of the wealth inequality pyramid want.
They were trying to explain the religious view. For those groups abortion is murder of an unborn child. It doesn’t matter that there’s no harm to the society - they see it as a harm to the child. Comparing it to murder was spot on, because that’s exactly how those people see it.
That’s his whole point though. To a lot of Christians, abortion literally is comparable to murder. It doesn’t make sense, but that’s just how they see it. That’s why the arguments up thread don’t work on them.
That sounds great and all, but the vast majority of anti-abortion Christians are pro murder. They hard core believe in the death penalty, and don’t care that innocent people have been murdered by the state. They would rather let children die of starvation rather than let even one person “take advantage” of the system. They have created programs to sterilize the poor and minorities, which is just abortion before the sex. They are hypocrites who only care about power and controlling others.
Growing up without the Catholic dogma and worldview thrust upon you from birth (and consequently playing a part of every action you ever make {unless you lose your faith}, and many thoughts you think) and trying to use the argument that abortion does NOT equal murder is like arguing with an alien. Because from a personal worldview lense, they absolutely do believe abortion = murder with every fiber of their being. It’s not enough to just say “no it’s not” or make really any argument that leads to that debate. It even affects the views of many ex-catholics who have religious trauma and have been through extensive therapy for it.
No, to you and I, abortion is not murder. But trying to argue that is equal to them arguing to people like us (I assume) that gay people are not just, existing and normal, and not making a conscious decision to be gay. They think it’s due to trauma and all gay people are mentally ill and can be cured. However there’s no curing necessary. But they’ll argue until they’re blue in the face that it is. It’s the same level of worldview solidification.
Some people must have crippling abortion addictions. The kind of people that are like “I love being pregnant” and then soon after “Stairs my beloved ❤️” repeated indefinitely.
"The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is “engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion.”"
Oh fuck right off. What’s that? You don’t like it when someone has an ideology forced on them?
cbsnews.com
Oldest