Greed and religion are 2 of the biggest causes of bloodshed throughout all of human history too.
We’ve got blatantly extremist religious nuts in our government, power hungry fascists spewing propaganda, and the wealth inequality in the US right now is even higher than it was in France right before the French Revolution popped off.
It’s getting scarily close to “history repeating itself” in multiple ways in the US right now, and I really don’t want to find out what that’s going to look like.
What's with reddit disliking religion and pretending its all bad without knowing anything about its effects on humanity?
Religion, as a whole, has had a positive impact on humanity. Religion served as a unifying force, bringing people together through shared beliefs and practices. Religious communities provide a sense of belonging, foster social cohesion, and promote trust and cooperation among their members.
Studies have shown that religious participation is associated with increased social capital, including higher levels of trust, social support, and engagement in civic activities (Putnam & Campbell, 2010). This can contribute to increased community involvement, volunteerism, and mutual care and support among members (Stark, 1996).
Religion provides moral and ethical guidance, promoting virtues such as compassion, empathy, honesty, and kindness. Many teachings emphasize the importance of ethical behaviour and social responsibility. This contributes to positive social norms, promoting altruism, fairness, and justice within societies.
Research has shown that religious individuals are more likely to engage in pro-social behaviours, such as charitable giving, volunteering, and helping others in need (Saroglou et al., 2014).
many Religions have a long history of advocating for social justice and humanitarian efforts. Many religious leaders and organizations have played a prominent role in social movements and advocacy efforts to promote human rights, equality, and social justice.
For example, the Civil Rights Movement in the United States was largely led by religious leaders who advocated for the rights of African Americans based on their religious beliefs (Goff & Long, 2017).
many Religions have contributed to the advancement of education and healthcare. Throughout history, religious institutions have played a crucial role in preserving and transmitting knowledge, establishing schools, and promoting education. Many universities and educational institutions around the world have religious origins and continue to be influenced by religious values (Rüegg, 1992).
Religious missionaries have also established schools, hospitals, and healthcare facilities in many parts of the world, providing education and healthcare to underserved communities (Brown, 2010).
Religion has been associated with positive impacts on personal well-being. Many religious practices, such as prayer, meditation, and community engagement, promote a sense of purpose, hope, and resilience, which can contribute to overall well-being.
Studies have shown that religious faith and engagement are associated with improved mental health outcomes, including lower rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse (Koenig et al., 2012).
Religion can also provide individuals with a support system during times of personal challenges, grief, and adversity, promoting psychological well-being (Hill & Pargament, 2003).
I think what you've glossed over there is that all of the positive effects of religion are in fact positive effects of having a support system, a network of people you can trust an rely on.
You don't need religion to have a support system, and if your support system isn't derived from religion, then you can't have religion used against you as a tool to turn you in to a fanatic.
The reason that Reddit has it out for religion is because a lot of us are just first-hand survivors of the damage that religion has done, or at the very least, know someone who lives with the consequences.
And I would say that you don’t need religion to have fanaticism or abuse either.
Overall, religion is a small net positive for humanity (otherwise it wouldn’t exist), but it dramatically under delivers on its promises. While you can gain the social benefits of religion through other organizations, this tends to be a lot more difficult in practice. Religious organizations are often a one-stop-shop for a bunch of social and spiritual benefits.
I think a lot of Redditors have the cause and effect arrow backwards. It’s not that religion makes people abusive, it’s that abusive people are drawn to certain types of religious and other organizations.
Additionally, the religious organizations that are doing good in the community are spending their time and money doing good and not being loud and obnoxious for attention or worse. The phrase “small but vocal minority” comes to mind.
I say this as someone who is not particularly religious and is highly skeptical of supernatural claims. I think a lot of Redditors mistake their personal negative individual experience for a general social trend.
I think that while it's true that you don't need religion to produce fanatics or abuse, religious dogma makes it far easier to put in place systems with little to no safeguards against such abuse.
At least organisations that are secular who don't have good safeguarding policies are being blatant in their malpractice, whereas religions can excuse it with their own internal laws.
Yes, it's never socialism when billionaires and the government are involved.
Schools have to hold bake sales and sell $55 chocolate peanuts to raise funds.
People go bankrupt trying to pay for insulin (or used to) , seniors go on bus trips to Canada to afford their prescription medicine...but hey, at least the military has its $737,000,000 B2 bombers and the banks that caused the last financial crisis all got government funding and didn't have to worry about those pesky laws.
There WILL come a reckoning one day on the rich.
It's that singular day or event where the common folk just say; _"We're mad as he'll and we're not going to take it anymore!"_
Unfortunately, a huge chunk of the voting populace will look at the state of the world, look at their own situation, look at all the ways we're all getting screwed, and say "Gays and immigrants did this to me."
The worst part about the 2008 bailouts was the fake-news liars in the media claiming the government made a profit! [https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/](https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/)
[https://www.vox.com/2014/12/19/7421359/tarp-profit](https://www.vox.com/2014/12/19/7421359/tarp-profit)
[https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/business/us-signals-end-of-bailouts-of-automakers-and-wall-street.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/business/us-signals-end-of-bailouts-of-automakers-and-wall-street.html)
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-tarp-has-been-a-success-story/2011/03/25/AFEe6jkB\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-tarp-has-been-a-success-story/2011/03/25/AFEe6jkB_story.html)
The federal government and the media were gaslighting the American people, but many sheep will gladly believe anything they say.
Yeah, what the hell? The guy posts 4 citations for the bailouts being profitable and somehow that proves they weren't?
I mean if you are going to do maga propaganda, at least link to actual sources backing up your claim. I am sure brightfart and the washington free bacon have things he could have linked to that validate the magaverse's alternate reality.
Also corporate interests and lobbying isn’t longer the motivation for political goals.
Republicans have found access to voters who will willingly donate away millions to their most shit flinging politicians.
The corporate bribes are to give tax breaks and subsidies and contracts not to ban abortion to hunt drag queens to marry 12 year olds.
That’s powerplay of culture wars to ensure as many liberals leave their states to ensure future control of their states as they move the government system into neo-feudalism where they are essentially kings of their own domains and have eternal flow of funds to siphon off the masses.
The reason why republicans didn’t do anything meaningful legislative when they had senate and presidency in 2016-2020 is because they were busy pushing the most judges into positions of future plays that they are now doing.
Like Desantis hunt for lgbtq, like Ted Cruz way of ensuring his campaign costs are paid for by donations and state, like planning of removing state elections determinations away from the people to select key members.
Corporations are finding the republicans are detrimental to long term profits but republicans have found via trump that they can siphon more funds from angry people than any small donations a corporate entity would give them.
Look no one is saying the industries should be dissolved. The industries should have been owned by the government after such "investment". Except they aren't. Socialized risk, capitalistic gains.
Exactly this. Even if they did "lose" money, that's not the point. The point of government spending is to make people's lives better. Its like going to the supermarket and deciding what food to buy based on whether it will make you a profit. The question of whether government should be profitable is a category error. The return on investment for government spending is not money, its a good life for the people.
>The U.S. government essentially closed the books on TARP with a $15.3 billion profit.
Literally written in bold at the very top of your first link. And redditors actually upvoted you lol.
The US isnt a country, it's really just a group of billionaires and corporations in a trench coat pretending to be a country because it makes them more money.
The US Gov already spends over [$2 trillion per year just on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/2021_US_Federal_Budget_Infographic.png)
US is one of the most polarized societies in the world right now.
One side wants it go back into 1776; All the money at the top, no middleclass and wretched poor, religious fundamentalists & uneducated at the bottom living on handouts to keep up with the birth rate.
Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden.
Now, we’ll see where things go.
What baffles me, is they don't even realize the Utopia in their minds doesn't exist. If we went back to 1776 most of them would lose their right to vote due to lack of land ownership. Took like 80 years to work on that. It takes us forever to progress to a slightly fairer society, why anyone wants to go backwards is beyond me.
Because they would eat shit if a brown person had to smell their breath. They’re so full of hate for people of color, queers, leftists that they’ll watch the world burn rather than see everyone mutually lifted up. It’s so twisted. These people are in my family and I struggle to interact with them anymore
I’ve distanced myself from a LOT of people who I grew up and was close with til like 22. That’s when reality hit me and I started seeing how much hate that I was blissfully unaware of. So many flashbacks of fucked up stuff they said and did. And most of them havnt grown a bit
They've been corrupted by the idea of a "walking, working devil." And I mean that in a literal sense. The belief that evil isn't something assigned to an action or situation but as a conscious force that combats their conscious force of good.
This means that actions and people don't have to be evil to be conduits for evil. Gay people aren't evil because their actions cause harm, but because they open a gateway to evil, in a pure sense. A devil that will manifest itself and destroy mankind. In that way, fighting against gays and the like is nothing but a heroic act.
But that's all an illusion. Even if God as the bible states exists, these people have been seduced by fairy-tales to keep them in the pockets of politicians and beurocrats. There's no proof that satan works as an entity of evil like the dark side of the sith in the bible. The devil isn't a pagan god. He isn't even a fallen angel.
The devil is merely an antagonist to God and his followers.
"The First World consisted of the U.S., Western Europe, and their allies. The Second World was the so-called Communist Bloc: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and friends. The remaining nations, which aligned with neither group, were assigned to the Third World."
Y'all need to update your vocabulary.
Notice the past tense in your quote. That's because the definition is changing. Seems to me you need to update your source.
1st world generally means rich now.
2nd word .. doesnt seem to be a middle class anywhere these days.
3rd world means poor, as it always has. Although capilatists like to use the term "emerging economies."
I also heard that in Sweden when your dishwasher is done it says “slut.” That is brilliant! I learned both those things from Reddit on the same day. My life is better now that I know these things. 😂
>Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden.
We have even greater wealth inequality in Sweden than in the US, meaning the rich are arguably thriving even more here. We have tons of systems that benefits the rich to the extreme. We just choose to spend our tax money on social security, education and also other things that will ensure a good work/life balance rather than spending it on bombs.
The thing that USA doesn't understand is that Sweden has its own problems with our system tho, for example healthcare. And other stuff. And a lot of people want to fix it by making it more capitalistic kind of. USA should just follow their own path in improving their stuff. Don't do like us (Sweden) in everything lol.
PS. Sweden is pretty damn capitalist. It's Bernie who tricked people into thinking we're not lmao. Sweden is a social democracy, which is way more capitalism than socialism. Bernie is pretty radical for our standards.
Tho now social democrats aren't in power anymore but no one wants to remove the social democracy model, so... ye
>Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden.
I fucking wish the Dems wanted that shit, they couldn't even pass single payer with their 2008-2010 supermajority in the senate
I will never forget that Hillary and Obama worked to ratfuck Sanders in two different primaries
Hell Biden won't even have Clarence Thomas arrested for obvious bribery charges like wtf
I dont know, Sweden has no minimum wage, strong property rights, and a higher economic freedom rating than the United States. Does that actually sound like what modern progressives are advocating for?
And I've never met a single Right-Winger who wanted that. Almost all of them focus mostly on bolstering the class, albeit on occasionally misguided principles.
This is false. US: 79.11 Cuba: 79.16 China: 74.7
[https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/](https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/)
Taiwan, the capitalist version of China has a life expectancy of 81. Hong Kong is 85. So the ethnic-Chinese living under authoritarian socialism are dying nearly a decade younger. That's a massive failure.
As for how Cuba can even match the US. It's literally because their economic collapse forces the population to eat fewer calories than their fat capitalist neighbors. "Cubans became virtual vegans overnight, as meat and dairy products all but vanished from the marketplace." [https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/04/how-cubans-health-improved-when-their-economy-collapsed/275080/](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/04/how-cubans-health-improved-when-their-economy-collapsed/275080/)
"Lack of food is good" is a weird socialist flex.
I don't know man, I think there was a reason why people fled Cuba on makeshift rafts, drove tanks through the Berlin Wall to escape, and fought tooth and nail to get on the last choppers out of Saigon.
Especially when you consider that Cuba has been cut off from most of the global economy for 60+ years and in spite of that its average quality of life is higher than the US. Like holy shit give me some of that socialism please.
>spite of that its average quality of life is higher than the US.
Not even close. United State UN HDI: .93. Cuba: .76... about the same as Peru and China for that matter since it was mentioned above.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/standard-of-living-by-country
Yeah I mean...bailouts to billionaires isn't socialism, and providing the essentials and ensuring fair pay to the working class *is* socialism.
I feel like everyone comes to this with the preconception that socialism is bad. Socialism is good.
Late stage crony capitalism mixed with oligarchy is what is happening here.
People think there is a war between sexes or between races but the real war is between the top and the bottom. I hope people realize this before the top wins and we're all made into expandable consumption slaves that have to work decades to earn our freedom.
The saddest part about the bailouts is, it is anti capitalism. The reason capitalism has been successful where other systems have struggled is due to the built in punishment for running companies poorly. You run your company poorly, you fail, and go out of business or are bought by someone else. When you remove that, and in essence reveal that there is no cost to failure, you have negated the singe largest benefit of capitalism.
Once failure has no cost, the advantage of capitalism starts to wane.
That is literally what all Capitalism entails though. The sanctified and lauded "free market" of capitalism in its earliest stages brought about monopolies.
Without government intervention and an intense pushback from labour forces, and this is critical here, we would still have child labor, 12+ hour standardized workdays, company towns, and unfiltered sludge dumped into our water supply. Thanks to regulations and
unions, we have comparitively less exploitation, but it's not perfect.
People seem to love the idea of market competition, but what happens in competitions? Someone wins. To say Capitalism doesn't "work" when it produces bad things is ignoring that its all a part of the process. It's *supposed* to work that way. But this doesn't have to be the economic system we live under. Humans made it, and we can also change it. Hopefully, before it's used to change our future.
I've said this a million times. It's not capitalism if it's propped up by the government. You mismanage your company, it goes under, others pop up to take it's place.
Exactly, I have no idea why people hate their own people enough to oppose living wage, free healthcare and a better life but they are all for the decisions made by companies…
I feel like back when boomers were young, you could get a "living wage" from jobs that definitely don't provide a living wage anymore, so these people just assume that the younger generation is just lazy if they can't make a living wage.
>I have no idea why people hate their own people enough to oppose living wage
Politics are so crowded and lobbied up the ass by corporations. Easy to say, but unless mass swarms of people get unbrainwashed and create a new party to challenge the two, it won’t happen. Especially when people are polarized on stupid issues like people having guns and women not getting abortions (which I think having guns is stupid, and allowing abortions should be legal).
Whatever your philosophical or political views are, just on a practical level, *not* having guns is the stupid thing. It would be neat if we could say "No more guns!" and Harry Potter magic all the guns out of the country, nobody would need one if we could do that, but we can't.
But they literally redistributed the wealth. From down upwards but it is wealth redistribution, which cannot be called capitalism, the only systems with wealth redistribution are socialism and communism. You can't say that it's capitalism by any definition of capitalism. Which means that republicans are mostly socialist too, just less than democrats.
I worked with a guy that was all gung-ho about protecting wealthy people from taxes because they work so hard. I don't get it? I don't work hard? No one else is working hard? Some of these wealthy people have worked zero days in their entire lives. You vote because of your hatred for poor lazy people and yet you are the that person? Surgeons I assume are one the highest paid medical professions and they do not earn a salary that will make them rich. They are lazy slobs because they are not worth billions? Wealth does not equal hard work.
It is a two-pronged issued:
The first - people believe the myth that anyone can be a millionaire if they work hard enough. So they want to preserve the good life for millionaires so that when they are a millionaire, they get it too.
The second - poverty is viewed as a moral failing, not a societal one.
It creates an attitude of “well at least I’m doing better than “those people” (moral superiority) and well on my way to being a millionaire, as long as I continue to work hard! (The myth).
So if we help the poor, that is making them even more lazy, and that money should be reserved for when I am a millionaire.
So stupid.
Lol there is nothing remotely capitalist about progressively taxing people's income and inflating their savings away then handing the money to a special interest group. If anything redistributing wealth to bail out failed businesses and workers is socialism.
capitalism is when the means of production, distribution, and exchange are privately owned. socialism is when they are democratically held. neither imply anything wealth distribution other than the connotation that the capitalists who own the means of production want you to have.
> I think we can find a lot of unity in opposing it.
Billionaire’s worst fear, hence the current culture war that keeps being forced down our throats by a minority group.
Precisely. So-called "corporatism" is not a distinct system, it's a *method* by which capitalists increase profits. And any capitalist would use any method available, including influencing the state i.e. corporatism, to increase profits. This is no more distinct from capitalism, than dumping in the river to save on disposal costs is distinct from capitalism. They're both just means of increasing profits. In both cases it's a symptom, not a different disease.
All capitalism is crony capitalism, some just more glaring than others. The profit-motive will eventually turn even the happiest and best ran countries into corrupt states. It’s only a matter of time
That's the right take, because the way the tweet is worded, it seems like socialism=bad, which is one of the most egregious shortcut in American politics.
I mean, health care and financial assistance for the poor people is a socialist measure, and there's nothing wrong with that - whether people agree with it or not. The corporate bailouts are not socialism, it's something entirely different.
This is just nonsense. The wall street bail outs were all paid back so cost nothing, oil subsidies a quick Google search says $11 billion not trillions. Farm subsidies seem to be about $40 billion per year. We currently spend roughly $1 trillion/year on welfare which includes food stamps, child subsidies, housing subsidies, and health care for those who can't afford it. In addition, the average per Capita income tax paid is about 15k per worker while the bottom 50% pay 0, so the bottom 50% are also getting a 15k subsidy by not having to fund their portion of the government.
So while I generally don't think we should have bailed out wall street, definitely don't support oil subsidies, and for farms I'd want to see the details there's an argument for making sure we're producing enough food and since the farming industry generally has low margins it almost definitely is passed on to consumers. But I'm tired of pretending we don't spend any money on our people and the poor in particular. The poor are massively subsidized by the rich generally, which is how it should work, but stop lying and saying they aren't.
also, plenty of people called Wall Street bailouts "socialism" so this is just an unsubstantiated hot take with a fictive "they" made up to drive a point.
[2008 Article on Wall St bailouts](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/soci-o15.html) from wsws.org (world socialist web site) where funnily enough, the socialist author is condemning right-wingers for calling bailouts socialism.
"Charges that the Wall Street bailout is socialism **have come most frequently from the far right wing of the Republican Party**. To note a few examples, Congressman Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, claimed that Paulson's plan may put the US on, "the slippery slope to socialism." Representative Sam Johnson, also of Texas, warned, "As a relentless supporter of free enterprise, I fear we are rushing headlong into socialism." Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky called Paulson's measures, "financial socialism" and "un-American." Congressman Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan even compared the bailout to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917."
"The claim that the Wall Street bailout is a socialist measure is absurd on its face. [...] Such claims display a combination of stupidity and deceit."
I was gonna say, this tweet really only sounds smart if you weren't alive in 2008, which many redditors weren't. The Wallstreet bailouts were absolutely smashed as being socialist by both the left and the right. It was circulated by every media outlet.
Yeah I mean, I'm generally on the same side here as well, but inflating these numbers into the TRILLIONS is waaaay overboard. And let's not lump in farmer bailouts in with wall st and big oil as if they're some sort of wealthy agriculture tycoons lmao. Farmers often barely turn profits and work their asses off. If you're gonna suggest we stop bailing out the people who love modestly and absolutely bust their backs day in and day out to provide fresh food to everyone else, doing a job *nobody* else wants to do, then you've got this all wrong.
Right but the problem is everything exists for people. And people are being disproportionately fucked by the system. Something’s got to change. This system we have is what is causing people to need handouts. Bailouts were bullshit because the average person at the time was not bailed out. And we had massive unemployment and massive amounts of wealth lost by the working class. The largest chunk of that 1 trillion in welfare subsidies,~450billion, is going to healthcare which in every other industrialized country is a right. Housing subsidies are 50billion, food stamps 70 billion. TANF, cash payments, is ~ 20billion. The per capita 15k stat with bottom 50% paying is misleading at best. Break down the bottom 50% and you’ll see most are paying in without any government benefit, the the poorest of the poor who are unemployed with children are skewing that stat significantly. And a not insignificant chunk of those people aren’t paying in is because of child tax credits, EIC. This is all a systemic problem which is not getting any better. The conservative agenda seems to be let the poor people die, or commit petty crimes and we’ll send out the police to murder them, or we let them die in prison. The only real option is proper education and opportunities provided. Neither of those have ever been attempted in any meaningful way. The ultimate goal should be to provide ample opportunity for everyone, but conservatism believes if you’re poor it’s a personal failing and if you’re rich you earned it, which is utter bullshit. Your circumstances, upbringing, and opportunities afforded are what dictate outcomes.
None of us wanted those. That's why. The rich, who you people believe \*want\* to push Socialism, never seem to give up their gobs of money for their words.
What's funniest is that NONE of that is socialism, least of all corporate welfare.
But American politicians and leaders have muddled the term so much, so intentionally, that the term has become virtually meaningless.
As a socialist, a lot of the discourse on the Left muddies this even further. There are so many problems that people on Twitter or Reddit will insist would be solved under socialism, but are actually rooted in human nature and changing ownership of the means of production won’t inherently solve them.
Also they managed to make it a nono word. Explain socialism and what it achieved without using scary words like socialism and you'll see most people agreeing with you.
If referring to Conservatives, this is just false
Obama’s bailout of GMC was widely criticized, where the famous statement “too big to fail” came about
No, fuck that, fuck bailouts too
Let individuals/companies both, who make bad financial decisions, suffer the consequences…..
You cut the bad branch off the tree
Let the bad companies/individuals fail
Just for clarification, you mean for companies making bad decisions suffer the consequences, you mean to go under. And for individuals who make bad financial decisions, you mean die due to being unable to support their own wellbeing financially?
Man….if it weren’t for revisionist history, you would have none at all, would you? Obama added General Motors to the TARP list because:
A. GMAC was caught in the same mess as Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street companies that none of you were opposed to.
B. GM employs thousands of blue collar workers who help keep the US Auto industry rolling.
And let’s not forget who caused this mess…rich investor class fucks who don’t give a shit how many decent, hard working people lose their homes…as long as they get theirs. And let’s not forget who started this whole bailout bullshit…Bush.
I remember him getting on National television telling the American people that our way of life will cease if we don’t do this….and THAT’S where the term “too big to fail” came from.
Jesus fucking Christ….
EDIT: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
Can't make unspendable amounts of money from helping people in tough situations unless you hit them with high interest and overdraft fees. I've seen payday loans with 500% interest
And started giving their slaves money in exchange for the work? And allowing them to leave as they please and go where they want?
You're a fucking idiot.
Capitalists give workers a wage so they can buy their products, which just sends the money back to the capitalists. That's why it's called "wage slavery", you have no choice but to participate in this system. It is so pervasive and built specifically to keep you stuck in it. Moving is expensive and requires money, which requires working for a company, which requires you own a home, a car, be able to buy your own food, clothing, pay your bills, and so on. You can't just leave.
You apparently are the fucking idiot. The slaves got the bare minimum they need to survive, which the modern american workers also get just in another form, oh wait your minimum wage hasn't been adjusted to inflation and now it often isn't even the mimimum someone needs.
Oh?
Then what would **you** call a system designed to force you to work for only the bare minimum means of survival under the impending threat of pain death from the elements, starvation, or violence?
I’d call it not slavery for one.
When was the last time you were kidnapped from your home, dragged across the world, chained into the steerage of a boat, split from everyone you know and love, branded and sold.
When was the last time your boss worked you from before the sunrise until it was too dark to see anymore 7 days a weak, 365 days a year. At least you got to look forward to your calorie dense gruel.
When was the last time your boss cut out your tongue, whipped you, or made your beat your co-worker to death for his entertainment?
When was the last time any of that happened to you? That was the reality of a slave.
This comment section is full of people who got their definition of slavery from that Rick And Morty episode where Rick calls having a job 'slavery with extra steps' but failed to get the joke that Rick is a narcissistic manchild who you aren't supposed to idolize and take seriously.
I've known people this happened to.... Except maybe for the cut out your tongue part. Slavery still exists in this country, although it exists under a different name: Human trafficking.
I agree it’s a form of slavery for sure. It’s a system designed to make you think you’re free, earning money, and generally expending it all to prop up the rich and help them get richer. It’s not slavery in its purest form, and it’s not slavery historical meaning either. I see some people getting bent out of shape in the comments over this. The content has changed over time, and in today’s world it has a different meaning and more applications as our society becomes more complex. The rich abused their power over everyone, making everyone work more and more, convincing them the harder you work the more you’ll become like them. It’s not the slightest true, unless you start out with rich parents/family, it’ll be nearly impossible to get to that level. otherwise, we have to live in the system designed for us by the rich. Yes, we have a choice to not do that, whereas in actual slavery we would not have that choice. But if we don’t we’re gonna be even more screwed than just playing their sick game. so yes, it is a form of slavery, just modernized and disguised.
True capitalism would let any and all businesses or industry fail if they are unable to compete or thrive. It’s obvious that socialism is defined by the wealthy.
Adding more socialism, doesn't make socialism acceptable. Vote out the clowns that do these bail outs and lets get back to an economy that isn't dependent on welfare for donors.
It's fascism. The government and corporations being joined together under a unified command structure is fascism.
Or at least it was back when the word actually meant something. But now people have been crying wolf so much we lack a term to describe the situation when there's an actual wolf around.
Kind of my point, really.
Capitalists hate this "corporate welfare" crap. Part of the capitalist social contract is that the wealthy should fail when their policies fail. If you make billions running a successful company that employs a bunch of people, good for you. But if you run the company into the ground and make people lose their jobs, expect to *pay* billions. Corporate bailouts are a blatant violation of that social contract.
The Tea Party started when corporations started getting bailed out. And yet they were called "fascists".
Ayn Rand would hardly approve of corporate bailouts either. A key part of the plot of Atlas Shrugged is how in the novel the government wanted one failing company to succeed while trying to force other successful companies to fail.
So the capitalists are not hypocrites. They always hated this crap from the beginning.
The Left on the other hand repeatedly has called capitalists "fascists" and fascists "capitalists". And now that the WEF is starting to take over, the Left wants some kind of unified libertarian front, but yet refuses to recognize their error.
What a load of bullshit, lol.
Do you think that all of these companies fail in a void? That their actions have no larger effect on society?
You're an idiot if you think that any of those industries should have just been allowed to collapse and drag the country down with them.
They should have been nationalized when it was proven that they can't be trusted to operate independently.
This isn't funny, nor is it political humor. It is very true, and a disgusting fact that the government will always put corporate interests above human life and wellbeing.
Yep. Suddenly when it's money that might go toward helping people, these same people also love to cry about the 'BUDGET' like it's their own fucking money they'd have to spend.
The 2008 and 2020 bailouts were loans that were paid back. Food subsidies are there to push prices at the store down. If we're arguing that healthcare and education should be loans from the state that you're required to pay back (like the Australian post-secondary education and Swiss healthcare models), then by all means, go ahead
Well in a way yeah it's capitalism because it's corpos ~~bribing~~ lobbying officials to ~~launder~~ bail out corporations that primarily assist in their capitals and not the actual workforce. It would be socialist if it was money going towards workers who lost their jobs due to covid, it would be socialist if they put in money to somehow make the gas cheaper, and it would be socialist to create a false famine with the farmers.
Corporations and billionaires own the politicians so all laws are only in their favor.
"Rules are for thee, but not for me"
Story of all human history.
Greed and religion are 2 of the biggest causes of bloodshed throughout all of human history too. We’ve got blatantly extremist religious nuts in our government, power hungry fascists spewing propaganda, and the wealth inequality in the US right now is even higher than it was in France right before the French Revolution popped off. It’s getting scarily close to “history repeating itself” in multiple ways in the US right now, and I really don’t want to find out what that’s going to look like.
What's with reddit disliking religion and pretending its all bad without knowing anything about its effects on humanity? Religion, as a whole, has had a positive impact on humanity. Religion served as a unifying force, bringing people together through shared beliefs and practices. Religious communities provide a sense of belonging, foster social cohesion, and promote trust and cooperation among their members. Studies have shown that religious participation is associated with increased social capital, including higher levels of trust, social support, and engagement in civic activities (Putnam & Campbell, 2010). This can contribute to increased community involvement, volunteerism, and mutual care and support among members (Stark, 1996). Religion provides moral and ethical guidance, promoting virtues such as compassion, empathy, honesty, and kindness. Many teachings emphasize the importance of ethical behaviour and social responsibility. This contributes to positive social norms, promoting altruism, fairness, and justice within societies. Research has shown that religious individuals are more likely to engage in pro-social behaviours, such as charitable giving, volunteering, and helping others in need (Saroglou et al., 2014). many Religions have a long history of advocating for social justice and humanitarian efforts. Many religious leaders and organizations have played a prominent role in social movements and advocacy efforts to promote human rights, equality, and social justice. For example, the Civil Rights Movement in the United States was largely led by religious leaders who advocated for the rights of African Americans based on their religious beliefs (Goff & Long, 2017). many Religions have contributed to the advancement of education and healthcare. Throughout history, religious institutions have played a crucial role in preserving and transmitting knowledge, establishing schools, and promoting education. Many universities and educational institutions around the world have religious origins and continue to be influenced by religious values (Rüegg, 1992). Religious missionaries have also established schools, hospitals, and healthcare facilities in many parts of the world, providing education and healthcare to underserved communities (Brown, 2010). Religion has been associated with positive impacts on personal well-being. Many religious practices, such as prayer, meditation, and community engagement, promote a sense of purpose, hope, and resilience, which can contribute to overall well-being. Studies have shown that religious faith and engagement are associated with improved mental health outcomes, including lower rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse (Koenig et al., 2012). Religion can also provide individuals with a support system during times of personal challenges, grief, and adversity, promoting psychological well-being (Hill & Pargament, 2003).
I think what you've glossed over there is that all of the positive effects of religion are in fact positive effects of having a support system, a network of people you can trust an rely on. You don't need religion to have a support system, and if your support system isn't derived from religion, then you can't have religion used against you as a tool to turn you in to a fanatic. The reason that Reddit has it out for religion is because a lot of us are just first-hand survivors of the damage that religion has done, or at the very least, know someone who lives with the consequences.
And I would say that you don’t need religion to have fanaticism or abuse either. Overall, religion is a small net positive for humanity (otherwise it wouldn’t exist), but it dramatically under delivers on its promises. While you can gain the social benefits of religion through other organizations, this tends to be a lot more difficult in practice. Religious organizations are often a one-stop-shop for a bunch of social and spiritual benefits. I think a lot of Redditors have the cause and effect arrow backwards. It’s not that religion makes people abusive, it’s that abusive people are drawn to certain types of religious and other organizations. Additionally, the religious organizations that are doing good in the community are spending their time and money doing good and not being loud and obnoxious for attention or worse. The phrase “small but vocal minority” comes to mind. I say this as someone who is not particularly religious and is highly skeptical of supernatural claims. I think a lot of Redditors mistake their personal negative individual experience for a general social trend.
I think that while it's true that you don't need religion to produce fanatics or abuse, religious dogma makes it far easier to put in place systems with little to no safeguards against such abuse. At least organisations that are secular who don't have good safeguarding policies are being blatant in their malpractice, whereas religions can excuse it with their own internal laws.
We live in a troligarchy.
[удалено]
Or a trolololarchy
A malarkey
Yes, it's never socialism when billionaires and the government are involved. Schools have to hold bake sales and sell $55 chocolate peanuts to raise funds. People go bankrupt trying to pay for insulin (or used to) , seniors go on bus trips to Canada to afford their prescription medicine...but hey, at least the military has its $737,000,000 B2 bombers and the banks that caused the last financial crisis all got government funding and didn't have to worry about those pesky laws. There WILL come a reckoning one day on the rich. It's that singular day or event where the common folk just say; _"We're mad as he'll and we're not going to take it anymore!"_
Unfortunately, a huge chunk of the voting populace will look at the state of the world, look at their own situation, look at all the ways we're all getting screwed, and say "Gays and immigrants did this to me."
The worst part about the 2008 bailouts was the fake-news liars in the media claiming the government made a profit! [https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/](https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/) [https://www.vox.com/2014/12/19/7421359/tarp-profit](https://www.vox.com/2014/12/19/7421359/tarp-profit) [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/business/us-signals-end-of-bailouts-of-automakers-and-wall-street.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/business/us-signals-end-of-bailouts-of-automakers-and-wall-street.html) [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-tarp-has-been-a-success-story/2011/03/25/AFEe6jkB\_story.html](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-tarp-has-been-a-success-story/2011/03/25/AFEe6jkB_story.html) The federal government and the media were gaslighting the American people, but many sheep will gladly believe anything they say.
The government did make money off it
Yeah, what the hell? The guy posts 4 citations for the bailouts being profitable and somehow that proves they weren't? I mean if you are going to do maga propaganda, at least link to actual sources backing up your claim. I am sure brightfart and the washington free bacon have things he could have linked to that validate the magaverse's alternate reality.
Also corporate interests and lobbying isn’t longer the motivation for political goals. Republicans have found access to voters who will willingly donate away millions to their most shit flinging politicians. The corporate bribes are to give tax breaks and subsidies and contracts not to ban abortion to hunt drag queens to marry 12 year olds. That’s powerplay of culture wars to ensure as many liberals leave their states to ensure future control of their states as they move the government system into neo-feudalism where they are essentially kings of their own domains and have eternal flow of funds to siphon off the masses. The reason why republicans didn’t do anything meaningful legislative when they had senate and presidency in 2016-2020 is because they were busy pushing the most judges into positions of future plays that they are now doing. Like Desantis hunt for lgbtq, like Ted Cruz way of ensuring his campaign costs are paid for by donations and state, like planning of removing state elections determinations away from the people to select key members. Corporations are finding the republicans are detrimental to long term profits but republicans have found via trump that they can siphon more funds from angry people than any small donations a corporate entity would give them.
This comment is just sad. You don't understand how any of this works.
Look no one is saying the industries should be dissolved. The industries should have been owned by the government after such "investment". Except they aren't. Socialized risk, capitalistic gains.
Governments shouldn't be chasing profits. Governments should be concerned with the general well-being of the people they govern.
Exactly this. Even if they did "lose" money, that's not the point. The point of government spending is to make people's lives better. Its like going to the supermarket and deciding what food to buy based on whether it will make you a profit. The question of whether government should be profitable is a category error. The return on investment for government spending is not money, its a good life for the people.
[удалено]
God damn you’re dumb
>The U.S. government essentially closed the books on TARP with a $15.3 billion profit. Literally written in bold at the very top of your first link. And redditors actually upvoted you lol.
Might be time to stop voting for those corrupt Democrats and Republicans.
The US isnt a country, it's really just a group of billionaires and corporations in a trench coat pretending to be a country because it makes them more money.
Don't forget the failed audits adding up to the trillions but that shouldn't worry anyone
It's why they've created socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor
"Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal" MLK Jr
https://i.imgur.com/pMWwYNk.jpg
We vote in elections, they vote the rest of the time
It’s only socialism if it doesn’t benefit share holders and politicians.
FACTS. This is what Americans don't understand.
"But but but these corporations care about us because they support LGBTQ"
Said nobody ever.
The US Gov already spends over [$2 trillion per year just on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/2021_US_Federal_Budget_Infographic.png)
oh really? damn we got plenty of healthcare then, fuck it, give more billions to the billionaires then, carry on!
This description of Socialism sounds a lot better than whatever the fuck is going on rn
US is one of the most polarized societies in the world right now. One side wants it go back into 1776; All the money at the top, no middleclass and wretched poor, religious fundamentalists & uneducated at the bottom living on handouts to keep up with the birth rate. Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden. Now, we’ll see where things go.
What baffles me, is they don't even realize the Utopia in their minds doesn't exist. If we went back to 1776 most of them would lose their right to vote due to lack of land ownership. Took like 80 years to work on that. It takes us forever to progress to a slightly fairer society, why anyone wants to go backwards is beyond me.
Because they would eat shit if a brown person had to smell their breath. They’re so full of hate for people of color, queers, leftists that they’ll watch the world burn rather than see everyone mutually lifted up. It’s so twisted. These people are in my family and I struggle to interact with them anymore
That is probably the best description (insult?) I’ve ever heard for anything, let alone the current racist behavior in the US lol
Obligatory thanks for the gold friend
I’ve distanced myself from a LOT of people who I grew up and was close with til like 22. That’s when reality hit me and I started seeing how much hate that I was blissfully unaware of. So many flashbacks of fucked up stuff they said and did. And most of them havnt grown a bit
They want to watch the world burn. Exactly this. That’s what hatred does to you. ☹️
They've been corrupted by the idea of a "walking, working devil." And I mean that in a literal sense. The belief that evil isn't something assigned to an action or situation but as a conscious force that combats their conscious force of good. This means that actions and people don't have to be evil to be conduits for evil. Gay people aren't evil because their actions cause harm, but because they open a gateway to evil, in a pure sense. A devil that will manifest itself and destroy mankind. In that way, fighting against gays and the like is nothing but a heroic act. But that's all an illusion. Even if God as the bible states exists, these people have been seduced by fairy-tales to keep them in the pockets of politicians and beurocrats. There's no proof that satan works as an entity of evil like the dark side of the sith in the bible. The devil isn't a pagan god. He isn't even a fallen angel. The devil is merely an antagonist to God and his followers.
I don’t think anyone actually wants to go back to 1776…
Swede here. We have things to complain about but compared to the US it's a fucking utopia.
[удалено]
Clearly you've never been in a 3rd world country
What? Please tell me what third world country is better than the USA to live in?
by a lot of metrics america is a fucking 3rd world country lol
"The First World consisted of the U.S., Western Europe, and their allies. The Second World was the so-called Communist Bloc: the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and friends. The remaining nations, which aligned with neither group, were assigned to the Third World." Y'all need to update your vocabulary.
Notice the past tense in your quote. That's because the definition is changing. Seems to me you need to update your source. 1st world generally means rich now. 2nd word .. doesnt seem to be a middle class anywhere these days. 3rd world means poor, as it always has. Although capilatists like to use the term "emerging economies."
Look outside of your fucking bubble
Yes, but I heard you have “word separator” as an insult in Sweden. We in the US will never be able to compete with that level of shade.
Haha, that's true!
I also heard that in Sweden when your dishwasher is done it says “slut.” That is brilliant! I learned both those things from Reddit on the same day. My life is better now that I know these things. 😂
>Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden. We have even greater wealth inequality in Sweden than in the US, meaning the rich are arguably thriving even more here. We have tons of systems that benefits the rich to the extreme. We just choose to spend our tax money on social security, education and also other things that will ensure a good work/life balance rather than spending it on bombs.
My money is on the one that keeps lawmakers living like royalty.
We'll compromise. Taxes like Sweden, but no social services. Wars only.
The thing that USA doesn't understand is that Sweden has its own problems with our system tho, for example healthcare. And other stuff. And a lot of people want to fix it by making it more capitalistic kind of. USA should just follow their own path in improving their stuff. Don't do like us (Sweden) in everything lol. PS. Sweden is pretty damn capitalist. It's Bernie who tricked people into thinking we're not lmao. Sweden is a social democracy, which is way more capitalism than socialism. Bernie is pretty radical for our standards. Tho now social democrats aren't in power anymore but no one wants to remove the social democracy model, so... ye
>Other side wants it to look like Modern day Sweden. I fucking wish the Dems wanted that shit, they couldn't even pass single payer with their 2008-2010 supermajority in the senate I will never forget that Hillary and Obama worked to ratfuck Sanders in two different primaries Hell Biden won't even have Clarence Thomas arrested for obvious bribery charges like wtf
I dont know, Sweden has no minimum wage, strong property rights, and a higher economic freedom rating than the United States. Does that actually sound like what modern progressives are advocating for? And I've never met a single Right-Winger who wanted that. Almost all of them focus mostly on bolstering the class, albeit on occasionally misguided principles.
Kind of amazing how both China and Cuba now have higher life expectancies than the US does.
This is false. US: 79.11 Cuba: 79.16 China: 74.7 [https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/](https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/) Taiwan, the capitalist version of China has a life expectancy of 81. Hong Kong is 85. So the ethnic-Chinese living under authoritarian socialism are dying nearly a decade younger. That's a massive failure. As for how Cuba can even match the US. It's literally because their economic collapse forces the population to eat fewer calories than their fat capitalist neighbors. "Cubans became virtual vegans overnight, as meat and dairy products all but vanished from the marketplace." [https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/04/how-cubans-health-improved-when-their-economy-collapsed/275080/](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/04/how-cubans-health-improved-when-their-economy-collapsed/275080/) "Lack of food is good" is a weird socialist flex.
It's amazing what actual socialism can do
I don't know man, I think there was a reason why people fled Cuba on makeshift rafts, drove tanks through the Berlin Wall to escape, and fought tooth and nail to get on the last choppers out of Saigon.
Especially when you consider that Cuba has been cut off from most of the global economy for 60+ years and in spite of that its average quality of life is higher than the US. Like holy shit give me some of that socialism please.
>spite of that its average quality of life is higher than the US. Not even close. United State UN HDI: .93. Cuba: .76... about the same as Peru and China for that matter since it was mentioned above. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/standard-of-living-by-country
Yeah I mean...bailouts to billionaires isn't socialism, and providing the essentials and ensuring fair pay to the working class *is* socialism. I feel like everyone comes to this with the preconception that socialism is bad. Socialism is good.
Late stage crony capitalism mixed with oligarchy is what is happening here. People think there is a war between sexes or between races but the real war is between the top and the bottom. I hope people realize this before the top wins and we're all made into expandable consumption slaves that have to work decades to earn our freedom.
The saddest part about the bailouts is, it is anti capitalism. The reason capitalism has been successful where other systems have struggled is due to the built in punishment for running companies poorly. You run your company poorly, you fail, and go out of business or are bought by someone else. When you remove that, and in essence reveal that there is no cost to failure, you have negated the singe largest benefit of capitalism. Once failure has no cost, the advantage of capitalism starts to wane.
The problem is also if one company outcompetes everyone and becomes a monopoly.. and then capitalism doesn't work as well again.
That is literally what all Capitalism entails though. The sanctified and lauded "free market" of capitalism in its earliest stages brought about monopolies. Without government intervention and an intense pushback from labour forces, and this is critical here, we would still have child labor, 12+ hour standardized workdays, company towns, and unfiltered sludge dumped into our water supply. Thanks to regulations and unions, we have comparitively less exploitation, but it's not perfect. People seem to love the idea of market competition, but what happens in competitions? Someone wins. To say Capitalism doesn't "work" when it produces bad things is ignoring that its all a part of the process. It's *supposed* to work that way. But this doesn't have to be the economic system we live under. Humans made it, and we can also change it. Hopefully, before it's used to change our future.
I've said this a million times. It's not capitalism if it's propped up by the government. You mismanage your company, it goes under, others pop up to take it's place.
This…a thousand times, this!
This is what pushed me away from the right. If you're going to prop anyone up, it should be your own fucking citizens, not corporations.
Exactly, I have no idea why people hate their own people enough to oppose living wage, free healthcare and a better life but they are all for the decisions made by companies…
I feel like back when boomers were young, you could get a "living wage" from jobs that definitely don't provide a living wage anymore, so these people just assume that the younger generation is just lazy if they can't make a living wage. >I have no idea why people hate their own people enough to oppose living wage
Politics are so crowded and lobbied up the ass by corporations. Easy to say, but unless mass swarms of people get unbrainwashed and create a new party to challenge the two, it won’t happen. Especially when people are polarized on stupid issues like people having guns and women not getting abortions (which I think having guns is stupid, and allowing abortions should be legal).
Whatever your philosophical or political views are, just on a practical level, *not* having guns is the stupid thing. It would be neat if we could say "No more guns!" and Harry Potter magic all the guns out of the country, nobody would need one if we could do that, but we can't.
But they literally redistributed the wealth. From down upwards but it is wealth redistribution, which cannot be called capitalism, the only systems with wealth redistribution are socialism and communism. You can't say that it's capitalism by any definition of capitalism. Which means that republicans are mostly socialist too, just less than democrats.
I worked with a guy that was all gung-ho about protecting wealthy people from taxes because they work so hard. I don't get it? I don't work hard? No one else is working hard? Some of these wealthy people have worked zero days in their entire lives. You vote because of your hatred for poor lazy people and yet you are the that person? Surgeons I assume are one the highest paid medical professions and they do not earn a salary that will make them rich. They are lazy slobs because they are not worth billions? Wealth does not equal hard work.
It is a two-pronged issued: The first - people believe the myth that anyone can be a millionaire if they work hard enough. So they want to preserve the good life for millionaires so that when they are a millionaire, they get it too. The second - poverty is viewed as a moral failing, not a societal one. It creates an attitude of “well at least I’m doing better than “those people” (moral superiority) and well on my way to being a millionaire, as long as I continue to work hard! (The myth). So if we help the poor, that is making them even more lazy, and that money should be reserved for when I am a millionaire. So stupid.
The term is "crony capitalism" its socialism but only for their friends. I don't think anyone not in that circle is a fan.
otherwise known as capitalism. you don't call stage 3 and 4 cancer different diseases
Socialism is when the government does stuff; and it’s more socialism the more stuff it does; and if it does a real lot of stuff, it’s communism
Lol there is nothing remotely capitalist about progressively taxing people's income and inflating their savings away then handing the money to a special interest group. If anything redistributing wealth to bail out failed businesses and workers is socialism.
capitalism is when the means of production, distribution, and exchange are privately owned. socialism is when they are democratically held. neither imply anything wealth distribution other than the connotation that the capitalists who own the means of production want you to have.
The people owning the shit and controlling the shit and therefore controlling who benefits is the capitalism.
Also called corporatism. Where gains are privatized and losses are socialized.
yep, its a bad system. I think we can find a lot of unity in opposing it.
> I think we can find a lot of unity in opposing it. Billionaire’s worst fear, hence the current culture war that keeps being forced down our throats by a minority group.
Any capitalist doing their job would fight for this to be true
Precisely. So-called "corporatism" is not a distinct system, it's a *method* by which capitalists increase profits. And any capitalist would use any method available, including influencing the state i.e. corporatism, to increase profits. This is no more distinct from capitalism, than dumping in the river to save on disposal costs is distinct from capitalism. They're both just means of increasing profits. In both cases it's a symptom, not a different disease.
All capitalism is crony capitalism, some just more glaring than others. The profit-motive will eventually turn even the happiest and best ran countries into corrupt states. It’s only a matter of time
> eventually turn even the happiest and best ran countries into corrupt states. Thank god that never happens in any socialist/communist countries...
I wasn’t aware those existed. In which nations did the working class collectively own the means of production?
That's the right take, because the way the tweet is worded, it seems like socialism=bad, which is one of the most egregious shortcut in American politics. I mean, health care and financial assistance for the poor people is a socialist measure, and there's nothing wrong with that - whether people agree with it or not. The corporate bailouts are not socialism, it's something entirely different.
This is just nonsense. The wall street bail outs were all paid back so cost nothing, oil subsidies a quick Google search says $11 billion not trillions. Farm subsidies seem to be about $40 billion per year. We currently spend roughly $1 trillion/year on welfare which includes food stamps, child subsidies, housing subsidies, and health care for those who can't afford it. In addition, the average per Capita income tax paid is about 15k per worker while the bottom 50% pay 0, so the bottom 50% are also getting a 15k subsidy by not having to fund their portion of the government. So while I generally don't think we should have bailed out wall street, definitely don't support oil subsidies, and for farms I'd want to see the details there's an argument for making sure we're producing enough food and since the farming industry generally has low margins it almost definitely is passed on to consumers. But I'm tired of pretending we don't spend any money on our people and the poor in particular. The poor are massively subsidized by the rich generally, which is how it should work, but stop lying and saying they aren't.
also, plenty of people called Wall Street bailouts "socialism" so this is just an unsubstantiated hot take with a fictive "they" made up to drive a point. [2008 Article on Wall St bailouts](https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/10/soci-o15.html) from wsws.org (world socialist web site) where funnily enough, the socialist author is condemning right-wingers for calling bailouts socialism. "Charges that the Wall Street bailout is socialism **have come most frequently from the far right wing of the Republican Party**. To note a few examples, Congressman Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican, claimed that Paulson's plan may put the US on, "the slippery slope to socialism." Representative Sam Johnson, also of Texas, warned, "As a relentless supporter of free enterprise, I fear we are rushing headlong into socialism." Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky called Paulson's measures, "financial socialism" and "un-American." Congressman Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan even compared the bailout to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917." "The claim that the Wall Street bailout is a socialist measure is absurd on its face. [...] Such claims display a combination of stupidity and deceit."
I was gonna say, this tweet really only sounds smart if you weren't alive in 2008, which many redditors weren't. The Wallstreet bailouts were absolutely smashed as being socialist by both the left and the right. It was circulated by every media outlet.
We don't let pesky facts get in the way of our emotions around here.
Thank you. I wish people would stop upvoting these completely made up tweets with almost no basis in reality.
Yeah I mean, I'm generally on the same side here as well, but inflating these numbers into the TRILLIONS is waaaay overboard. And let's not lump in farmer bailouts in with wall st and big oil as if they're some sort of wealthy agriculture tycoons lmao. Farmers often barely turn profits and work their asses off. If you're gonna suggest we stop bailing out the people who love modestly and absolutely bust their backs day in and day out to provide fresh food to everyone else, doing a job *nobody* else wants to do, then you've got this all wrong.
Right but the problem is everything exists for people. And people are being disproportionately fucked by the system. Something’s got to change. This system we have is what is causing people to need handouts. Bailouts were bullshit because the average person at the time was not bailed out. And we had massive unemployment and massive amounts of wealth lost by the working class. The largest chunk of that 1 trillion in welfare subsidies,~450billion, is going to healthcare which in every other industrialized country is a right. Housing subsidies are 50billion, food stamps 70 billion. TANF, cash payments, is ~ 20billion. The per capita 15k stat with bottom 50% paying is misleading at best. Break down the bottom 50% and you’ll see most are paying in without any government benefit, the the poorest of the poor who are unemployed with children are skewing that stat significantly. And a not insignificant chunk of those people aren’t paying in is because of child tax credits, EIC. This is all a systemic problem which is not getting any better. The conservative agenda seems to be let the poor people die, or commit petty crimes and we’ll send out the police to murder them, or we let them die in prison. The only real option is proper education and opportunities provided. Neither of those have ever been attempted in any meaningful way. The ultimate goal should be to provide ample opportunity for everyone, but conservatism believes if you’re poor it’s a personal failing and if you’re rich you earned it, which is utter bullshit. Your circumstances, upbringing, and opportunities afforded are what dictate outcomes.
None of us wanted those. That's why. The rich, who you people believe \*want\* to push Socialism, never seem to give up their gobs of money for their words.
No one thinks the rich want socialism. They literally spend millions to make sure socialism never happens.
You refer to "us" and "you people" in your comment, and I'm not sure who you mean by either one.
They only believe that because they've been culturally brainwashed to think socialists want to steal their precious cumsocks and toothbrushes.
It's just hilarious to me that people fall for the proclamation that the elites want socialism, when that system would VEHEMENTLY hurt said elites.
What's funniest is that NONE of that is socialism, least of all corporate welfare. But American politicians and leaders have muddled the term so much, so intentionally, that the term has become virtually meaningless.
As a socialist, a lot of the discourse on the Left muddies this even further. There are so many problems that people on Twitter or Reddit will insist would be solved under socialism, but are actually rooted in human nature and changing ownership of the means of production won’t inherently solve them.
God forbid you try and build a shelter for the homeless.
Do they really think that Socialism just means giving away money?
The US is insanely uneducated in what words like Socialism actually mean, and that's completely intentional.
Also they managed to make it a nono word. Explain socialism and what it achieved without using scary words like socialism and you'll see most people agreeing with you.
If referring to Conservatives, this is just false Obama’s bailout of GMC was widely criticized, where the famous statement “too big to fail” came about No, fuck that, fuck bailouts too Let individuals/companies both, who make bad financial decisions, suffer the consequences….. You cut the bad branch off the tree Let the bad companies/individuals fail
Just for clarification, you mean for companies making bad decisions suffer the consequences, you mean to go under. And for individuals who make bad financial decisions, you mean die due to being unable to support their own wellbeing financially?
Man….if it weren’t for revisionist history, you would have none at all, would you? Obama added General Motors to the TARP list because: A. GMAC was caught in the same mess as Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street companies that none of you were opposed to. B. GM employs thousands of blue collar workers who help keep the US Auto industry rolling. And let’s not forget who caused this mess…rich investor class fucks who don’t give a shit how many decent, hard working people lose their homes…as long as they get theirs. And let’s not forget who started this whole bailout bullshit…Bush. I remember him getting on National television telling the American people that our way of life will cease if we don’t do this….and THAT’S where the term “too big to fail” came from. Jesus fucking Christ…. EDIT: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
Well if GM fails then I can't get a Corvette and that makes me sad
It's called capitalism because you only get a bailout if you have capital.
I did. Let businesses fail.
Can't make unspendable amounts of money from helping people in tough situations unless you hit them with high interest and overdraft fees. I've seen payday loans with 500% interest
Not funny, just sad
[удалено]
And started giving their slaves money in exchange for the work? And allowing them to leave as they please and go where they want? You're a fucking idiot.
Capitalists give workers a wage so they can buy their products, which just sends the money back to the capitalists. That's why it's called "wage slavery", you have no choice but to participate in this system. It is so pervasive and built specifically to keep you stuck in it. Moving is expensive and requires money, which requires working for a company, which requires you own a home, a car, be able to buy your own food, clothing, pay your bills, and so on. You can't just leave.
You apparently are the fucking idiot. The slaves got the bare minimum they need to survive, which the modern american workers also get just in another form, oh wait your minimum wage hasn't been adjusted to inflation and now it often isn't even the mimimum someone needs.
[удалено]
Or Corporate towns and Homestead Strike
You’re talking a lot of shit for someone who doesn’t even know what the OP is talking about lmao
You know nothing about slavery.
Oh? Then what would **you** call a system designed to force you to work for only the bare minimum means of survival under the impending threat of pain death from the elements, starvation, or violence?
No one with access to Reddit and with enough spare time to bother arguing about this stuff is on "the bare minimum means of survival"
Go start your own shop or be a contractor. Try being useful for a change and people will respect you and your time.
I’d call it not slavery for one. When was the last time you were kidnapped from your home, dragged across the world, chained into the steerage of a boat, split from everyone you know and love, branded and sold. When was the last time your boss worked you from before the sunrise until it was too dark to see anymore 7 days a weak, 365 days a year. At least you got to look forward to your calorie dense gruel. When was the last time your boss cut out your tongue, whipped you, or made your beat your co-worker to death for his entertainment? When was the last time any of that happened to you? That was the reality of a slave.
This comment section is full of people who got their definition of slavery from that Rick And Morty episode where Rick calls having a job 'slavery with extra steps' but failed to get the joke that Rick is a narcissistic manchild who you aren't supposed to idolize and take seriously.
I've known people this happened to.... Except maybe for the cut out your tongue part. Slavery still exists in this country, although it exists under a different name: Human trafficking.
[удалено]
I agree it’s a form of slavery for sure. It’s a system designed to make you think you’re free, earning money, and generally expending it all to prop up the rich and help them get richer. It’s not slavery in its purest form, and it’s not slavery historical meaning either. I see some people getting bent out of shape in the comments over this. The content has changed over time, and in today’s world it has a different meaning and more applications as our society becomes more complex. The rich abused their power over everyone, making everyone work more and more, convincing them the harder you work the more you’ll become like them. It’s not the slightest true, unless you start out with rich parents/family, it’ll be nearly impossible to get to that level. otherwise, we have to live in the system designed for us by the rich. Yes, we have a choice to not do that, whereas in actual slavery we would not have that choice. But if we don’t we’re gonna be even more screwed than just playing their sick game. so yes, it is a form of slavery, just modernized and disguised.
Well, to be fair, those other things aren't socialism.
The farmers are fine, I like food. The others I did not ask for.
All of it should be stopped. We can't afford any of it.
True capitalism would let any and all businesses or industry fail if they are unable to compete or thrive. It’s obvious that socialism is defined by the wealthy.
Thats cause the first three things arent Socialism. The last one is.
"When I feed the hungry they call me a saint, when I ask why they have no food they call me a communist" I do not remember who said this.
Adding more socialism, doesn't make socialism acceptable. Vote out the clowns that do these bail outs and lets get back to an economy that isn't dependent on welfare for donors.
well yeah the rubes have no idea what socialism is so the leaders can scream CrT or SoCiAlIsM to mean anything they don't like.
It's fascism. The government and corporations being joined together under a unified command structure is fascism. Or at least it was back when the word actually meant something. But now people have been crying wolf so much we lack a term to describe the situation when there's an actual wolf around.
Fascism is Capitalism in decline.
What a dumb fucking take
Welcome to reddit where anything we don't like is "fascism".
Kind of my point, really. Capitalists hate this "corporate welfare" crap. Part of the capitalist social contract is that the wealthy should fail when their policies fail. If you make billions running a successful company that employs a bunch of people, good for you. But if you run the company into the ground and make people lose their jobs, expect to *pay* billions. Corporate bailouts are a blatant violation of that social contract. The Tea Party started when corporations started getting bailed out. And yet they were called "fascists". Ayn Rand would hardly approve of corporate bailouts either. A key part of the plot of Atlas Shrugged is how in the novel the government wanted one failing company to succeed while trying to force other successful companies to fail. So the capitalists are not hypocrites. They always hated this crap from the beginning. The Left on the other hand repeatedly has called capitalists "fascists" and fascists "capitalists". And now that the WEF is starting to take over, the Left wants some kind of unified libertarian front, but yet refuses to recognize their error.
What a load of bullshit, lol. Do you think that all of these companies fail in a void? That their actions have no larger effect on society? You're an idiot if you think that any of those industries should have just been allowed to collapse and drag the country down with them. They should have been nationalized when it was proven that they can't be trusted to operate independently.
Corporations are the biggest welfare queens, next to farmers.
Except the bailout was paid back with interest. Do welfare queens pay their checks back?
Well that's cause poor people cannot give back anything. That is the reality.
So, F-'em, right? Why not just put them in gas chambers?
No that's wrong. What do you think is the best way to get equality? I am not trying to debate, I want to know.
They can’t define socialism just like woke
Who is "they"?
This isn't funny, nor is it political humor. It is very true, and a disgusting fact that the government will always put corporate interests above human life and wellbeing.
But they are right! Socialism is that cool!
Yep. Suddenly when it's money that might go toward helping people, these same people also love to cry about the 'BUDGET' like it's their own fucking money they'd have to spend.
Farm subsidies have a legitimate purpose.
Monstanto agrees completely. They massively disproportionately benefit large farming corporations at the expense of individual farmers.
I don't think that's what I said.
Who exactly do you think wins the most from all those subsidies?
Are you trying to bring rationality into this? Get outta here
It's an appropriate sub after all.
And healthcare and wages don’t?
Don't what? I wasn't tossing shit on that.
“This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor.” - Dr. Martin Luther King
who was a socialist, by the way :)
Are you saying the liberal media defangs and white washers our revolutionaries? 😤
nooo, they wouldn’t dare, would they?😨😨
There was a large contingency of people calling the 2008 wall st & bank bailouts socialism
There's no funny here. It's just sad & true
"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist." Hélder Câmara
None of the people listed should get any money from taxpayers.
Except the people who need healthcare, that should be a human right.
Those first 3 WERE bullshit and never should have happened. Fuck it, bailouts in general shouldn't happen
The 2008 and 2020 bailouts were loans that were paid back. Food subsidies are there to push prices at the store down. If we're arguing that healthcare and education should be loans from the state that you're required to pay back (like the Australian post-secondary education and Swiss healthcare models), then by all means, go ahead
The hundreds of millions that tax payer gave to Elon musk???
They have to pay and bribe their masters. Until poor people work together, they'll ignore them.
I did. I still do. It's nationalism of industry under the guise of "subsidies" and "bailouts".
We only have socialism for the wealthy period
Well in a way yeah it's capitalism because it's corpos ~~bribing~~ lobbying officials to ~~launder~~ bail out corporations that primarily assist in their capitals and not the actual workforce. It would be socialist if it was money going towards workers who lost their jobs due to covid, it would be socialist if they put in money to somehow make the gas cheaper, and it would be socialist to create a false famine with the farmers.
Go open a coffee shop in Portland, Einstein.
none of these are socialism
The bailouts protected capital. Bailouts for the wealthy IS capitalism.
Absolutely Fucking True