Mediocre_Bard @ Mediocre_Bard @lemmy.world

Posts

6

Comments

468

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'll leave it alone if you cancel my student loan debt.

Who is Mankrik’s wife?

Or better yet, why is Mankrik’s wife?

This looks like the graph is presenting the compensation line below the productivity in both graphs. In the second graph, the mean and median are represented in such a manner as to indicate that high end outliers are inflating the data set. This is speculative, I know, but certain patterns appear in certain ways for very few reasons.

Can you share the graph's definition of 'Real Producer' and 'Real Consumer'? I am specifically wondering if the capitalist-class wage and the working-class wage are represented as a single wage.

Anal [Ambush]

So, it cannot be requested under the Freedom of Information Act? Can't that be escalated to a lawsuit?

Chuck Norris will save us.

Productivity has been increasing for decades, but real wages have not kept pace and income inequality continues to grow.

Come join me in Azeroth. There is no politics in Barrens chat. Only pain.

What does technological progression without the oppressive aspects of capitalism look like? (I don't know, and don't know if there is an answer.)

It seems to me that the current trend of population decline in the west is fine for humanity because it is not a sharp cut, but a taper, while it is a problem for capitalism because fewer people equal smaller markets over time. A stable population would also, based on this, cause problems for capitalism because the markets would not be growing and the infinitely increasing return expected by investors would fail to materialize.

I get it. TikTok is trash.

Please don't make assumptions of my lived experience based on your grandfather's toileting practices. That doesn't make sense. Regarding the progression of society, there is an interim step that you are skipping over. We didn't go from subsistence farming to our present state. We grew a civilization over time.

I am not anti-societal growth. I am anti-endless growth. Capitalism demands an endless amount of growth so that the people at the top are always making more money. It is inherent in the system that there can never be enough. I disagree with this and believe that we would be better off if we defined a standard of living that allowed people to be happy and pursue their own passions while not exploiting one another and over-consuming resources.

On an old commute I used to pass a sticker that said, "If you had enough, would you know it?" In our current system, the answer to that question will always be no because there will always be pressure to want more. This creates an infinite pursuit of more that is damaging to our psyche. We spend more time wanting than we do having. If we had a realistic goal, one that prioritized happiness and health over always getting more, then we wouldn't need an ever-growing society with an ever-growing population. We could shrink it and improve both the environment and our quality of life.

I think that where we are parting is ways is on the value of progress. If progress were an equitable share of all resources and an improvement in everyone's quality of life, then I would be on board. However, in our current system, progress means infinitely growing wealth for some and infinitely growing labor for others. I believe that we should be less focused on progress and more focused on health and happiness, and these things do not require a lot of people.

I can't believe that people have seen the video of the stiletto cock stomp through plywood that caused the man to ejaculate blood and still don't understand the appeal of this kink.

I agree. I do recall that Trump posted a message on Truth that 'it was a great time to buy' before announcing a tariff roll back the following day (maybe the day after). So, I agree with you and would also like to see actual investigative journalism around this.

It seems like you are for a stable population (let me know if that is wrong) and I am for a stable population at a lower level. I don't think that these two positions are that far apart. I understand that you want to avoid the struggle of dealing with a lopsided generational distribution while I see population reduction, not just the elimination of growth, as necessary to improve the overall quality of life for all people*.

*While I was typing this, I thought to myself, "Oh yeah, okay. This is how Thanos got going."

Well, I thought my upbringing was normal and that everybody was physically and emotionally abused. It turns out that this is incorrect.

Oh, what the fuck ever. Must be coming up on a weekend. Better shit on the economy and then walk it back like a bitch on Monday. Why do people even report on Trump's threats? They're just the latest exhibit in the "Hey! The Rich Keep Getting Richer!" Museum.

I would rate it a 0 or -1. My therapist would rate it a -9 or -10.

lol, big talk. I'll believe it when I see it.

Unrelated, my favorite TV show is the X-Files.

Am I correct that you are proposing to stop population at two children per couple?