MinekPo1 [it/she] @ MinekPo1 @lemmygrad.ml

nya !!! :3333 gay uwu

---

Read more

Posts

1

Comments

215

Joined

2 yr. ago

This is not me pulling shit out of my ass - its an opinion US military officials held at the time.

the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing.

Eisenhower

The vast destruction wreaked by the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the loss of 135,000 people made little impact on the Japanese military. However, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria ... changed their minds.

the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, D.C.

If at any time the USSR should enter the war, all Japanese will realize that absolute defeat is inevitable.

the Joint Chiefs of Staff's Joint Intelligence Staff

Cry about it

Elon Musk exists

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshuabecker/2023/08/18/61-of-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck-heres-the-simple-solution-were-overlooking/

I'm sorry but did you miss "for no reason other than making yourself richer"? I'm mostly focusing on cases where a company is not struggling to stay afloat, but are in good shape.

Also, I don't feel like this is a good faith argument, not from your fault, mind you, so I don't think it is productive to continue this shouting match. I hope you understand my point, even if you disagree with it, but I, hopefully, have a decent grasp of where you are coming from.

Even if consumption does not increase, chasing after infinite growth, on a finite planet, is not sustainable, which is my point.

I stated as such. Being laid off can, but not always is, a source of insecurity and stress. Over half of Americans, cannot afford to loose their job, as it means loosing the roof over their heads. And again, as I stated, my original statement was hyperbole and I stand by the point I wanted to make:

Making 10 000k potentially loose their home, savings, life, is not outweighed by keeping 20 000k just above poverty.

No they are not.

But I do not think removing the source of livelihood for hundreds of people for no reason other than making yourself richer is no different to preventing employees from negotiating fair wages.

• the largest genocide was not the Holocaust, but the genocide of Indian tribes
• American companies assisted in the III Reich war effort and profited of German Concentration/Death camps
• the USA does not follow the rules of the WTO, an organization it itself started, promoted and forced onto the world
• the USA is behind countless coups and military overthrows of governments, yet they are the one to preach democracy

just a few more of the top of my head 🙃

apples and oranges.

solely to increase earnings and not because the company is hurting

“Coca-Cola killed trade unionists in Latin America. General Motors built vehicles known to catch fire. Tobacco companies suppressed cancer research. And Boeing knew that its planes were dangerous. Corporations don’t care if they kill people — as long as it’s profitable.”

I don't think the "good" of letting 20k people not starve eventually, is outweighed by making 10k starve. This is of course hyperbole, but I hope I get my point across. Besides this strikes me as very similar to effective altruism and long-termism, which are slippery slopes by themselves, but that is besides the point.

Also:

make it impossible to prove said person laid people off for their own benefit.

No. CEOs most often receive bonuses for making the company more profit, so the CEO is most likely not doing this to get good to more people, but for their own pocket.

Not to blow out your flame, but I doubt you will be able to succeed through a "democratic" system, especially in the US, as politicians need corporate backers to get a seat. Besides, even if you get one independent representative, their voice, so your voice as well, will be snuffed out by several politicians using the hot topic of the day to rally support from masses, while passing bills which benefit their corporate backers.

Look at it from the other direction: Those 10000 did nothing wrong. And yet some of them lost their livelihoods, some lost lives. The CEO, assuming he is the guy who started the company, and not someone else who came in, could not create the company without them, yet the CEO is the only one who gets rich.

Again, the company does not need to fire them, they can be routed to other divisions to other workflows, they can take some responsibility from other workers, but they were not, they were fired, simply to enrich someone who already got richer from their work, while giving them a small sliver of the reward.

Highly educated adults – particularly those who have attended graduate school – are far more likely than those with less education to take predominantly liberal positions across a range of political values.

Pew Research Center

The human population is not doubling in size every three years. For profits to increase at this rate, at some point human consumption needs to increase, which is then inherently unsustainable, no matter what you are using to produce packages.

Besides, you are hired explicitly because you produce more value than you are paid, via wages and benefits. Though I admit, an argument can be made that this is not an inherently bad thing.

Copy pasting my own comment:

FYI this argument (often referred to as the human nature argument) only holds water when you look at European history. Most other societies had an element of communal property. Also in more developed life (including but not limited to humans), especially in situations of crisis, alturism is more expressed than self interest.

In other words: socialism is not against human nature. Capitalism is.

FYI this argument (often referred to as the human nature argument) only holds water when you look at European history. Most other societies had an element of communal property. Also in more developed life (including but not limited to humans), especially in situations of crisis, alturism is more expressed than self interest.

In other words: socialism is not against human nature. Capitalism is.

Fuck fascism. Also reminder that it was the declaration of war by the USSR, not the atomic bombs which made the Japanese surrender.

I actually saw a sticker recently placed on a bus stop saying "save Poland, use cash" and I was very perplexed by it. I suspected it was some far-right/alt-right bs, but wasn't sure.

What in the name of Santa is that font