The General US Politics Thread

note that "amoral"≠"immoral". capitalism isn't axiomatically evil and corrupt. but if you want corporations to be ethical, you have to make it more profitable to be ethical than to be unethical, and that has literally never been the case.

e: interesting how Fighteer and i make the exact same point and then draw different conclusions from it.

Edited by ChloeJessica on Oct 23rd 2021 at 12:42:29 PM

An absence of intrinsic morality that will always evolve a system that thrives best when it can starve and overwork its components is de facto immoral, regardless of what motivates it.

Cooperative enterprises respond to the same market pressures as everything else. While capitalism is not perfect, it cannot simply be torn down without massive and potentially catastrophic disruption.

We have seen how regulation and properly orchestrated pressures can cause corporations to behave ethically. I work for a medical device manufacturer and ethics are driven home to us by constant training. This arose because we got caught doing some unethical things, so you can draw several conclusions. One of those is that the regulatory environment did its job.

We are also paid well and have excellent benefits because the social standing of a healthcare company suffers if it doesn't keep its own employees healthy.

The problem with unethical behavior in the medical industry isn't just a top-down thing. The temptation to cheat the system is everywhere, especially on the sales end, where it is oh so easy to slip a healthcare provider a little benefit to guarantee business, or for the HCP to solicit such a gratuity.

My point is that this isn't an ideological battle against evil corporations, like we're some kind of medieval knight jousting at villains. It's a fight against human nature at every level of society.

of course co-ops respond to market pressures; that wasn't the point. the point is that they're inherently fairer and more ethical than corporations, particularly in preventing wealth from being consolidated among relatively few people.

i agree with this and you know that from the last time we got on this subject, and at no point have i advocated for the summary elimination of capitalism. you agree that regulation is necessary to curb its worst impulses, but a lot of the time, when people suggest ways to regulate it, you react as if we're hanging Adam Smith in effigy.

Fighteer, I am not a communist because I just like communism. I am a communist because, in my best judgment, communism is the fairest system and the easiest way to raise the standard of living of every human being. Communism is a means t an end, and not the only means. If something can be done, here and now, within capitalism, to further that same end, then I wholeheartedly support it, even if it does nothing to promote communism whatsoever.

You're right; it's not a crusade against evil corporations. It's a strong desire to make life better for as many people as possible. We have ideological differences, but I know you want the same end result that I do.

So long as the metric for success is measured by growth margins, capitalism is inherently unsalvageable. The way our economy is set up demands that every company must continue cutting costs, raising prices, increasing their markets, etc. indefinitely. By the very nature of growth, a capitalism can never be satisfied.

In our economy, there is no such thing as "Enough". There can't be. "Enough" drives away shareholders. There can only be "More". The poor MUST get poorer, the products MUST become more expensive, the revenues MUST increase. Indefinitely. Forever. And any company that cannot continue not just stepping on their laborers but accelerating the rate at which laborers get stepped on fails, crashes, and is bought by a company that can.

If a company made 100% of all money in the world this year, they would be expected to make 104% of all money in the world next year. And 108% of all money next year. If they cannot do this, they would collapse and go bankrupt even though they're making literally all of the money that exists. In what way is that sustainable?

Rich people hoarding all of their money in Scrooge McDuck money bins is commonly seen as the main problem with our economy, but it's not all of it. The other problem is that our economy is a train designed to shovel coal faster and faster into the engines, more coal, even more, year after year yet more coal; to accelerate faster and faster, consume more and more, and never, ever slow down.

And when there's nothing else for it to consume, it can only consume us.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Oct 23rd 2021 at 11:33:57 AM

If one company earned all the money in the world, it would also spend all the money in the world, and it would form a closed system. Internal competition for resources would then fragment off sub-companies that would form their own operational units and it would break up into smaller pieces. Your hypothetical is irrational.

If we are referring to capitalism specifically in the sense of "laissez-faire, caveat emptor, no taxes or regulations", then yeah, it's unsustainable, but that's no more a reality than is my strawman of a Communist society in which everyone lives in obshchestvos and survives by subsistence farming. If we want to play that game, I'm out. I've got better things to do.

Edited by Fighteer on Oct 23rd 2021 at 2:38:03 PM

Quick reminder that we have a Thread on Capitalism

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16221439480A59569000&page=1

nvm took my post to the Capitalism thread

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 23rd 2021 at 11:36:49 AM

This is the guy who characterized the delay on the infrastructure bill as a "liberal revolt" that was a "humiliating blow" for Biden the day before Biden brought the centrist and progressive leaders to the White House and made it openly clear the progressives had his full backing.

Ha, called it.

Neoliberal hack all the way.

More is coming out on how Facebook ignored or actively encouraged extremism and went out of its way to prevent anyone in the company from stopping it.

This news is very amusing in light of our recent discussion :V

It's Weissmann.

The guy's no relation to Jordan Weisman (Creator of Battle Tech) or Greg Weisman (Writer for most of the best cartoons for the past 30 years).

They're actually intelligent people.

Speaking on "Removing the Economic System," It should be noted, combined with the Black Death, that's what caused the Dark Ages. All because King Phillip of Spain didn't want to pay back a loan to the Knights Templar (who, at the time, controlled the vast majority of commerce and banks in Europe).

So there is historical precedent for "Removing an economic system suddenly = Disastrous" regardless of how bad/corrupt it is.

Edited by Pendrake on Oct 23rd 2021 at 2:35:18 AM

Facebook's own researchers created a test profile for a conservative woman from the South who followed Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting. How long did it take before Facebook started pumping Qanon conspiracies about Democrats being pedophiles at her?

Three days.

I will note that no one has actually called for this, nor do I think the example is particularly relevant.

But given that this is off-topic if you're interested in continuing this discussion it should happen in the capitalism thread

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 23rd 2021 at 3:10:57 AM

Dark Ages were not a real thing.

That is, if by "Dark Ages", you mean "a time of intellectual darkness, violence, and backwardness". Which, considering the context in which you used the term, you apparently do.

Edited by djoki996 on Oct 23rd 2021 at 3:10:54 AM

It was more a response to the whole "Capitalism is bad and should be replaced immediately" bit from earlier. Shifting an economic system has to be done slowly, carefully, and naturally.

In any event, it is offtopic. Speaking of On-topic, one of the Jan 6th Rioters is an even bigger idiot: https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/23/politics/january-6-defendant-proud-boys-court-order/index.html

Guy literally did a speech at a Proud Boys event. After being told he was not to associate with the group. Guy also did the "Gina Carano" and compared Republicans to Jews, and the Left to Nazis.

Edited by Pendrake on Oct 23rd 2021 at 3:57:18 AM

How very DARVO.

Man, I wish I was the FBI agent in charge of catching these guys. Must be the easiest job in the world right now.

This was never in any doubt if you payed even the slightest attention to what they say amongst themselfs rather then scream to the public.....

Internally a lot of companies were praising the pandemic, since it gave them an excuse to "lay off" workers with no intent to ever bring them back, generally speaking most of them wanted to slash there employment by 20% in order to pay less people for the same amount of work.

Then externally they scream "LABOR SHORTAGE" because "We just wanted to fire people to reduce costs" makes you look like the bad guy.

I do think there's also an element of a lot of employers being so used to there being at least a mild excess of labor that they don't really know how to function in a truly competitive labor environment.

The overall laborforce participation rate is still down somewhat compared to prepandemic, but we are talking about 1.5 points. That shouldn't be enough for most employers to feel a serious squeeze, and a lot of them aren't. My own employer doesn't seem to have any trouble hiring new people, and since it's the holiday season we are constantly getting new people in.

I'd also speculate that the rise of gig economy, for whatever faults it may have, has resulted in a situation where it's very easy to acquire certain kinds of work. So if an employer can't beat working for an app, either in pay or working environment, they are going to have a lot of trouble finding anyone to work for them. Why deal with an a-hole boss all the time when you can make almost as much if not more while only dealing with the occasional a-hole customer?

Edited by Falrinn on Oct 23rd 2021 at 5:29:12 AM

Speaking of labour, Wisconsin's Senate has approved a law allowing 14 and 15 year olds to work until 11PM, claiming that this is going to address the labour shortage. :|

Edited by RainehDaze on Oct 23rd 2021 at 5:09:14 PM

Is Wisconsin a heavily right-wing state? I'd expect something like this from Texas, Florida or Tennessee.

Texas House of Representatives declares that the state is not bound by the 14th Amendment and thus the state should be able to declare same-gender marriages invalid within its borders.

Oh, and apparently (if one of the comments is accurate), segregated schools are still on the books in Alabama, so denying the equal protection clause like that would naturally have all the problems.