4 ms·

> So much simping for neofeudalism Nothing could be less true of my philsophies and my hoped outcomes for the work I've utterly exhausted myself doing for over

> So much simping for neofeudalism Nothing could be less true of my philsophies and my hoped outcomes for the work I've utterly exhausted myself doing for over a decade. > the rich are showered with cash This is the giveaway of your own ideological animus. What does this even mean in any real context? Even if anybody's true priority was for the rich to be as enriched as possible, any half-sentient politician, economist or rich person knows that the rich can only become richer if ordinary people have enough money to buy stuff from them, so, nobody benefits from impoverishment of the masses. Without that recognition, there's no hope of a sensible discussion about the topic of what economic approach will actually deliver outcomes that are the most efficient and fair.

r00fus 2y ago
> This is the giveaway of your own ideological animus. What does this even mean in any real context? Read up on commercial paper - https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070313/introduction-commercial-paper.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070313/intro... > the rich can only become richer if ordinary people have enough money to buy stuff from them Also the rich/corporate simply move countries. They don't need the poor from the US, they'll globalize and get whatever good deals they can wherever they can because of free trade.
- tomhoward 2y ago
  > Read up on commercial paper Ok, yep, it’s a common trick in these kinds of discussions to link to a vaguely-related article with a directive to “read up” on the topic but without any commentary on how it specifically supports any claims being made. Really it’s just a giveaway that there’s no substantive point being put forward.
  - BenFranklin100 2y ago
    I read the linked article. It has little relevance to the present discussion. Let’s just say the OP’s username is ripe for an apt rhyme.
    - tomhoward 2y ago
      Yep, I read the paper too, then spent quite some time Googling various combinations of “commercial paper”, “fed”, “reaganomics”, “trickle down”, and other more tenuous terms, yielding nothing at all of any substance. More fool me I guess.

r00fus 2y ago

> This is the giveaway of your own ideological animus. What does this even mean in any real context? Read up on commercial paper - https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070313/introduction-commercial-paper.asp https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/070313/intro... > the rich can only become richer if ordinary people have enough money to buy stuff from them Also the rich/corporate simply move countries. They don't need the poor from the US, they'll globalize and get whatever good deals they can wherever they can because of free trade.

tomhoward 2y ago
> Read up on commercial paper Ok, yep, it’s a common trick in these kinds of discussions to link to a vaguely-related article with a directive to “read up” on the topic but without any commentary on how it specifically supports any claims being made. Really it’s just a giveaway that there’s no substantive point being put forward.
- BenFranklin100 2y ago
  I read the linked article. It has little relevance to the present discussion. Let’s just say the OP’s username is ripe for an apt rhyme.
  - tomhoward 2y ago
    Yep, I read the paper too, then spent quite some time Googling various combinations of “commercial paper”, “fed”, “reaganomics”, “trickle down”, and other more tenuous terms, yielding nothing at all of any substance. More fool me I guess.