look man you said you wanted people to be less full of shit, don't complain now that your getting your wish.
United States Trump v Kamala Harris 2024
- Thread starter Causeimboredrightnow
- Start date
look man you said you wanted people to be less full of shit, don't complain now that your getting your wish.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
I was right on my gut instinct. Some comedian.
Login • Instagram
Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.
www.instagram.com
Yoy mean someone who would've been in favor of slavery back in the day when it was legal.
Maybe you should look into understanding ethics instead of economics. And maybe then you'll understand the idea of paying people a liveable wage instead of indulging in the modern day equivalent of slavery.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
Bruh, Adam Smith had already dismissed it as economy inefficient and morally repugnant. In a book that had been published four score and eighty years before a certain iconic speech.
The capitalists were the ones FIGHTING the slavers. And winning.
I won't pretend to be an expert, but as far as I see it, there is no practical difference. The end goal of economics is to maximize material prosperity, which in this materialistic world of ours means true happiness.
If you want a world where you can have whatever is possible for you to gain, you want a world that is maximally economically efficient.
If it was ineffecient then it would've died out a long time ago, it's one of the longest lasting institutions in human history for a reason.,
When you pay your workers a pittance and have to build a net around your factory to prevent suicides, that's morally repugnant too.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
What....what is this logic? Humans have always used economically inefficient models and always will, right to the day we die off as a species. That doesn't mean they're efficient, it just means humans aren't biologically geared for optimal economic efficiency.
But then again, nobody who knows people will ever doubt that. We just can't handle resource allocation properly. Our monkey brains aren't made for it.
No, I'm pretty sure you don't think companies shouldn't be preventing suicides at the workplace. So this is probably an attempt to get me to defend China or something.
Or did I misjudge you?
That's what it should be. In reality, it's a typical min-max engine running out of control with no real goal besides "bigger number better", which is why it doesn't actually meaningfully benefit most people.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
Says the man that has lived his entire life in all that free market economics can produce.
Look, I'm sorry we're not a religious group. We can't and won't promise you paradise, because we're honest enough to admit it doesn't exist. All we can give you is the most comfortable life possible in your circumstances. You are free to ditch it in favour of some wonderful dream that will turn into a nightmare, but never try to convince anyone- especially yourself- that that isn't what you're doing.
I mean, Donald Trump literally got elected because the economy isn't working for a shitton of the US population, myself included, so this isn't the big "gotcha!" you think it is.
There's so much damn distortion of the economy due to regulations, bureaucracy, perverse incentives, and general lack of a definitive goal for it all that you're in a situation where materially, life is worse for a majority of the population of what should be one of the richest countries on the planet.
I don't believe that there can be some utopian paradise barring some absolutely batshit things happening. But I don't believe it's unreasonable to say "Maybe we should do something about the fact that our economy does not seem designed to ensure and encourage people to live."
Skitzyfrenic
Well-known member
He's not that cool.
Not to mention 'institutional capture' issues don't ever seem to factor into Soli's world, nor any of the other ways the 'free market' is often just a farce of which mega-corp/mega-corp group has more government power at the moment and will manipulate the market to benefit their specific mega-corp/group or mega-corps.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Slavery is measurably inefficient at actually producing greater wealth for a society. It may benefit a specific elite class of slave-owners, but even there, the fact that the slaves at all times have massive incentives to get by on as little work as they can, to destroy the system, to escape the system, etc, incurs huge costs.
Slavery is primarily about people getting off on lording themselves over other people. Anything else is secondary.
The modern 'wage slave' concept is also a result of government screwing with the economy. Regulatory bloat creating high barriers to entry in markets, institutional capture, 'public-private partnerships' establishing de-facto state monopolies, etc.
Health care costs alone would almost certainly be between a third and a thirtieth of what they currently are, if it weren't for all the screwing with the medical industry the government has done over the last 100+ years. Imagine being able to go to your doctor for a dislocated wrist, only waiting ten minutes to see him, the appointment takes fifteen minutes, he reseats it and wraps it professionally for you, tells you what specifically to do and not do, and it costs you all of thirty bucks.
That's the kind of world we could be living in without the government sticking its nose in everything and making it all worse.
Actual free markets incentivize good wages and working conditions, because valuable employees are crucial to a business running well. They also incentivize both treating customers, and customers treating companies, well, because either party has all kinds of other options if someone is determined to treat the other party like shit.
How is your boss going to get away with being horrible to you, if you know you can drive half a mile down the road, and get a new job with someone who won't? How will he get away with underpaying you?
Government interference, on the other hand, chokes growth, picks winners and losers in who gets paid well, which eventually turns into all but the elite being paid poorly, and generally makes everything worse. Especially policies that are supposed to 'improve conditions for the working class,' like minimum wage and nationalized health care.
The logic is quite simple, it's a matter of natural selection, if it's inefficient then it can't survive for any prolonged period of time.
I think that if companies have to actively prevent suicide, then they're immoral and at best one small step removed from slavery.
And that we should stop doing business with companies engaged in such monstrous practices.
Last edited:
IndyFront
Well-known member
If there aren't parallel actions taken by the government to balance things. After all, if the government can't do its job properly it should be abolished.
Kamala Harris leads by huge margin in first Echelon poll for 2028 Democratic nomination
Well, this is great news for the GOP. In an Echelon presidential poll for 2028, it looks like Democratic voters want to stick with Kamala Harris as their candidate.
notthebee.com
She may have lost this election, but this poll confirms what i have been saying for months: the media's flip on her worked better than yiu could expect, and the democrat base fucking loves her now.
IndyFront
Well-known member
They really are immune to learning anything aren't theyKamala Harris leads by huge margin in first Echelon poll for 2028 Democratic nomination
Well, this is great news for the GOP. In an Echelon presidential poll for 2028, it looks like Democratic voters want to stick with Kamala Harris as their candidate.
She may have lost this election, but this poll confirms what i have been saying for months: the media's flip on her worked better than yiu could expect, and the democrat base fucking loves her now.
Please, please bring Kamala back for '28.Kamala Harris leads by huge margin in first Echelon poll for 2028 Democratic nomination
Well, this is great news for the GOP. In an Echelon presidential poll for 2028, it looks like Democratic voters want to stick with Kamala Harris as their candidate.
She may have lost this election, but this poll confirms what i have been saying for months: the media's flip on her worked better than yiu could expect, and the democrat base fucking loves her now.