We could always introduce a purge. Maybe every 5-10 years (random) the 10 wealthiest individuals must fight to the death. Win or lose they lose all their money and have to start over. Its like the Olympics. And they can use their money to equip themselves, with tech and weapons.

Its like the Olympics

But yeah capitalism is no bueno

I mean isn’t this more "circle jerking " about dismantling state propaganda? Interacting with those you were told are your enemy?

Besides, people should always celebrate the positives, and look towards them as something that is possible in their country too.

And as an fyi: when we were here before, the workers revolution in Russia was new. The achievements were so profound that workers in North America began demanding similar concessions from our governments. There was a real threat of overthrowing the existing power structures. And what happened? Weekends, literacy, healthcare, just generally improved living conditions. To dismiss cultural exchange as circle jerking is to ignore history and the power that comes with knowing things are better elsewhere, and that you can have that too.

Especially when your own government is doing a fine job destabilizing society already.

That would be interesting. I don’t believe the data exists. Just need a definition of bully, a list of kids who are bullies (which would be difficult given they are children and that has ethical issues), and a follow up to see if they went to cop school, became cops, career length, etc.

The stats would be easy to do.

I imagine asking a cop would be a bad idea (might go to jail for example), but maybe their former teachers or classmates could work? I’m just yapping at this point lol

Lol I have so many conversations like this. Someone was saying a bunch of people got laid off at their job during covid and they almost lost their house. I said something like “it’s a shame that they didn’t just temporarily decrease everyone’s hours so you all still had work. I mean, the work was going to come back eventually”.

And they of course agreed

I mean, private ownership by those who don’t do the work or consume the product, yet get to make the decisions is to blame, yes. And that is capitalism by definition so… Capitalism is to blame…

This thread is lit. I’m going to list 4 arrangements of the economy. If you are interested in participating, name what you think each one is:

1: A small group of people own the lands that are worked by another group of people. The leader of these owners is chosen via divine right. The people who work the land keep what they make, however for protection they must work other lands and do not keep what is made from them

2. A small group of people hold dominion of a large group of people. The large group must work for food, lodging, etc. and are forced to do so by the threat of death and physical punishment. They do not get to keep what they make, the economic situation is determined by the generosity of those who hole dominion over them

3. A small group of people own the majority of wealth in the form of businesses, factories, goods, etc. They purchase the time of a much larger group of people who sell their labour to make ends meet. The small group decides what to do with the excess goods, services, and money.

4. A large group of people own the businesses, factories, goods, etc. These people work to make ends meet and decide collectively (democratically or through other means) what to do with the excess goods services, money, etc.

I hope these are both clear and vague enough. Good luck!

If you believe one is wealthier because they deserve it, through success, hardwork, etc , then shouldn’t these apparent shining examples of success also be held to a higher standard?

Or should we somehow decide the economic cost of someone doing something illegal, then charge everyone that? For example: the risk of speeding increases quadratically (E =1/2mV^2), the higher the speed. I.e the risk of death. Do we then set a speed limit, anything above which is considered illegal. Above this level, a fine or charge is incurred based on the likelihood of a crash killing someone upto and including the cost of one’s life.

But then it’s legal to kill someone if you are wealthy enough, and the poor are inherently the most moral group.

Or we could flat fine it; which disproportionately punishes the poor. Which is like saying “ohh you are poor and that’s your fault, just like speeding. Get fucked lol”.

I’m sure that there are other options but it’s a good idea to consider the potential ramifications of fees, fines, and other punishment structures, and how they influence the society we live in.

But what about their factories/apartment buildings/office buildings? You can’t just take those away and give.it to the people who work/live there right?

Right?

I don’t know why this is surprising. Capitalism is an economic system where the goal is profit. So, why would capital do anything other than seek profit? Nearly all technological advances have occurred through government or institutional investments, then capital flocks to it when someone finds a way to profit from it.

Thinking block chain is a solution to anything is naive. It does nothing to change the underlying system, or the incentives that drive our economy. Like any system, the interconnections between the things that make up the system, and the goal of the system must change otherwise everything will just settle back to the status quo.

For example: media streaming is becoming cable tv again. Nothing fundamentally changed about the system of delivering media, or the goal of the system which is to drive profit. Thus, we are moving quickly back to the same model of paying for media (renting it really) and watching ads to increase the revenue of the provider