3 ms·

There are plenty of examples of the later and none of them are pretty compared to status quo in the US. It seems unpopular to state but blindingly obvious that

by kev009 8y ago

There are plenty of examples of the later and none of them are pretty compared to status quo in the US. It seems unpopular to state but blindingly obvious that we live in the best time in the history of the world for humans, and if you live in a first world country you have it easier than anyone at any point in history to simply live or climb an economic ladder. Second system syndrome is en vogue right now in politics. Maybe there is some tectonic shift that will happen this century due to technological progress, but I'd counter moderate and incremental change would be much less risky (if you botch a software project maybe people lose jobs, if you botch a political sea change millions of people die) and there is plenty of small but meaningful improvements to be had for every class of person.

Frost1x 8y ago
The problem is that the economic system as it stands today does not allow for moderate incremental change. In a country where we blindly worship capitalism from birth to our graves, any attacks against capitalism are framed as being un-American. Small iterative changes are fought tooth-and-nail by those emboldened through exploits encouraged by capitalism who, ironically, hold most the power to make such changes (not much unlike historical implementations of fuedelism). The system itself is very self-preserving in that nature. Those who have the most to lose in the system have the most power and resources to resist change because that's how the underlying system is structured. With socioeconomic mobility at an all time low due to earlier successes closing doors behind them (the "american dream"), it's no wonder people are growing more frustrated and seeking radical change over incremental changes. They've tried incremental change (and watched their parents and grandparents try it). It didn't work, so now they're pulling out the stops and who could blame them. Look at the 2016 and upcoming 2020 presidential elections, largely fueled products of this issue in various forms. People are growing very tired of being lied to and exploited. The very wealthy groups, as the article suggests, need to consider that maximizing long term profits may require them to reduce their short term profit margins a bit and keep working classes from turning this entire country upside down.
- kev009 8y ago
  I think everything you said could be true and you completely missed the point of my comment. If I lived in a third world country, I'd be more astounded that there are places I could never work a day in my life and be fed, sheltered, have access to incredible healthcare (yes even in the US) and probably lead an intellectually satisfying (with free access to books, entertainment, computers, Internet and FOSS etc) life. The fact that there are thousands of billionaires that have possessions and power beyond my comprehension as even a very well off American doesn't mean much. No more than the fact that there is a Pope or Presidents or professional athletes or any other demigod I will never be. It's just another modern form of feudalism that humans seem to be hardwired for.

by kev009 8y ago

Frost1x 8y ago

The problem is that the economic system as it stands today does not allow for moderate incremental change. In a country where we blindly worship capitalism from birth to our graves, any attacks against capitalism are framed as being un-American. Small iterative changes are fought tooth-and-nail by those emboldened through exploits encouraged by capitalism who, ironically, hold most the power to make such changes (not much unlike historical implementations of fuedelism). The system itself is very self-preserving in that nature. Those who have the most to lose in the system have the most power and resources to resist change because that's how the underlying system is structured. With socioeconomic mobility at an all time low due to earlier successes closing doors behind them (the "american dream"), it's no wonder people are growing more frustrated and seeking radical change over incremental changes. They've tried incremental change (and watched their parents and grandparents try it). It didn't work, so now they're pulling out the stops and who could blame them. Look at the 2016 and upcoming 2020 presidential elections, largely fueled products of this issue in various forms. People are growing very tired of being lied to and exploited. The very wealthy groups, as the article suggests, need to consider that maximizing long term profits may require them to reduce their short term profit margins a bit and keep working classes from turning this entire country upside down.

kev009 8y ago
I think everything you said could be true and you completely missed the point of my comment. If I lived in a third world country, I'd be more astounded that there are places I could never work a day in my life and be fed, sheltered, have access to incredible healthcare (yes even in the US) and probably lead an intellectually satisfying (with free access to books, entertainment, computers, Internet and FOSS etc) life. The fact that there are thousands of billionaires that have possessions and power beyond my comprehension as even a very well off American doesn't mean much. No more than the fact that there is a Pope or Presidents or professional athletes or any other demigod I will never be. It's just another modern form of feudalism that humans seem to be hardwired for.