3 ms·
Even if I could hold my nose and accept extreme, hideous inequality as the price of efficiency, the fact that the deal is a one-way bet for capitalists is just
by panarky 4y ago
Even if I could hold my nose and accept extreme, hideous inequality as the price of efficiency, the fact that the deal is a one-way bet for capitalists is just too much.
After capitalists invest in "winners" and extract even more capital for themselves, they always use that power to force everyone else to subsidize their bets on "losers". They threaten "systemic failure" and "contagion" if public funds aren't used to bail out their losses. They win when they win, and they win when they lose.
And then, decades later, after they've socialized their losses and made us pay for their bad and lazy decisions, we discover that even their winners were losers.
Their winners didn't make us healthy, or intelligent, or moral. Their winners didn't house us or feed us or make us safe and secure.
We accepted outrageous inequality, we impoverished the public sector, became wage slaves for them, and all we got in return was clicks, and ads, and grift, and memes, and anxiety, and depression, and hate, and conflict and war.
- simple-thoughts 4y agoWho is your “we” and who gave you the authority to speak for us? You are assuming power here, which does feel great to do psychologically just as it was great for Louis XIV. I don’t see any proof in what you said that I should follow your authority as opposed to these evil capitalists- at least they seem to be honest in their self interest while your twisting claims of priestly morality try to undermine others for your own benefit.
- panarky 4y ago"We" are those of us who believe billionaires can take care of themselves, and shouldn't coerce us to pay for their mistakes and failures.