In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there are important, interesting or just plain weird things happening out there and a group of people can find these better than one.
I thought I would test with a thread for linking general news articles about "other news" and discussion. Perhaps it goes into the abyss that is page 2 and beyond, but it is worth a try.
Some guidelines:
- Try to find the "clean link", so that links to the news site directly and not a social media site. Avoid "amp-links" (google).
- Write some cliff notes on what it is about, especially if it is a video.
- It's not an excuse to make outlandish claims via proxy or link extremist content.
- If it's an editorial or opinion piece, it is polite to mark it as such.
- Note the language if it is not in English.
- There is no demand that such things be posted here, if you think a piece merits its own thread, then make one.
Well, generally the "non-wealthy" are all convinced the other side is trying to take wealth from them and transfer it to someone else. And they would rather wealthy people on "their side" gets the wealth (which they perceive right or wrong will eventual trickle down) then having it permanently transferred to the other side.
You underestimate how much all the focus on racial and gender equity plays into the hands of wannabe oligarchs.
There is also the more high content economical argument that fr
Your first paragraph makes a ton of sense to me.
Not really buying the second.
I firmly believe we could achieve a mix of socialism and capitalism that would work quite well. I mean, we already have it but instead of improving we just argue that any change brings certain doom. Meanwhile the wealth of our nation continues to be concentrated more and more to less and less people.
The idea of capitalism is rewarding those who make money.
But that does not guarantee those who make billions of $ actually contribute to quality of life in society. Either (a) in the process of making billions of $, or (b) the power afforded to those who possess billions of $.
Some billionaires actually produce things that many believe improve society. Other billionaires have produced essentially nothing in value, and have actually been very destructive in their path to wealth, in addition to being destructive with the unfettered power they possess thru basically unlimited wealth.
The money isn't made by them. They raise the capital and the profits are made by the people doing the work.
In some cases billionaires make almost all of the wealth on their own, with no other beneficiaries participating in generation or benefits of that wealth. In other cases they put up risk capital that enables them to make wealth from innovation and other people's efforts, with those people gaining wealth as well. (albeit not as much individually as those staking risk capital)
Biden out at the white house... side entrance of course.
Now that need to tent that home and fumigate it.
The idea of capitalism is rewarding those who make money.
But that does not guarantee those who make billions of $ actually contribute to quality of life in society. Either (a) in the process of making billions of $, or (b) the power afforded to those who possess billions of $.
Some billionaires actually produce things that many believe improve society. Other billionaires have produced essentially nothing in value, and have actually been very destructive in their path to wealth, in addition to bei
I dont know where to even begin addressing this ignorant post... oh yeah, it is ignorant.
I'm all ears.
I dont know where to even begin addressing this ignorant post... oh yeah, it is ignorant.
So these are my 3 assertions:
1. Capitalism exists to reward those who make money;
2. At least one billionaire exists who has improved quality of life in society;
3. At least one billionaire exists who has reduced quality of life in society.
Which do you disagree with hence make my post ignorant?
So these are my 3 assertions:
1. Capitalism exists to reward those who make money;
2. At least one billionaire exists who has improved quality of life in society;
3. At least one billionaire exists who has reduced quality of life in society.
Which do you disagree with hence make my post ignorant?
Answer me one question, why would you pick those specific bullet points from your post?
The job of a CEO is much harder now than it was in 1978 because they have more regulations to deal with, so they deserve to earn more. Workers have more of a social safety net than they used to. It's only fair for the pay gap to widen.
Bs …
Fwiw real wages for the bottom 60% has not grown from about 1980 .
And that is because the profits margin from the economy has been increasing towards corporations only ….
But hey let’s take your pov ….
Are we to expect radical lowering wages from ceo with trump in office aiming at reducing massively regulations ?
Gtfo ….
Ps: they probably got lawyers that get paid for that too ….
Here is what employees get today from the economy,
it’s a real joke compare pre 1980 …
When people will stop believe nonsense about trickle down economy or stupid **** like that ….over 40 years of data’s and still people can’t admit how wrong it is …
No wonder U.S. government are so indebted.
Well, generally the "non-wealthy" are all convinced the other side is trying to take wealth from them and transfer it to someone else. And they would rather wealthy people on "their side" gets the wealth (which they perceive right or wrong will eventual trickle down) then having it permanently transferred to the other side.
You underestimate how much all the focus on racial and gender equity plays into the hands of wannabe oligarchs.
There is also the more high content economical argument that fr
Well didn’t seem corporate socialism prevent enriching massively U.S. companies in the last 2 decades ….
What happened there ?
A better text I suppose even tho it’s from a decade ago , the trend was clear even back then …
Employee compensation, meanwhile, continued to shrink as a share of the economy, falling to 43.5 percent of GDP, from a high of 54.6 percent in 1970. Much of that decline was replaced by corporate profits, which doubled as a percentage of GDP over the same period and accounted for nearly 10 cents out of every dollar of economic output last quarter.
Has long the right don’t get that , it will get worst and worst politically .
They force a narrative that is totally debunked for over 40 years of data’s ….
The poor don’t get richer by enriching the rich .
Not with the American fiscal regime the way it is design today .
I don't recall calling you a fascist (I might have done that if we discussed COVID policy but I don't recall conversations with you specifically about that).
I don't recall calling jalfrezi a fascist either, even if I disagree a lot with him on policy.
Or rococo, which is one of the smartest people I ever interacted with online in 20+ years. Or ecriture, which is very smart as well but has huge biases (at least in writing) to admit stuff.
Idk exactly about the word fascist but you called literally everyone in this forum appart from 3 or 4 posters (playbig rickroll lozen ) leftist, obscene, demented etc... and by extension ennemy of the state and humanity, scums of the earth who should get shot, true and absolute evil etc...( and also called leftist the true fascist which by extension is calling fascist everyone here).
I guess you have as much memory as intelligence.
On X David Asher raises the possibility that Biden was China's Manchurian candidate for the 2020 POTUS election.
He reasons that Bohai, a Chinese company valued in the billions, may be owned up to 27% by Biden family members, who were pardoned yesterday for any "non violent offenses".
He also reasons that when Hunter declared his divestment of Bohai, there is no accounting evidence showing he received any proceeds.
David Asher worked at the US Defense and State Departments, and specializes in discovery of illicit financing.
read through it, while there's no smoking gun, it's a pretty interesting read
pardoning your entire family for crimes they may or may not have committed is pretty wild
Agreed. Hopefully after what Biden has done and what Trump is doing/will do (in terms of pardons), there will be enough interest in conquering the mountain that is constitutional reform to bring this pardon silliness under control.
no idea if this is a joke or not but it's funny nontheless.
This section shall be known and may be cited7as the "Contraception Begins at Erection Act.
"8(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to discharge genetic9material without the intent to fertilize an embryo
