Not all models or definitions of Capitalism even follow that, go read Henry George. You can represent collective ownership of land through taxing the shit out of those that own it, and since it's the one resource you can't make more of its the best way to eliminate the landlord parasite problem because no one will own land they don't intend to use to fulfill a use case. Supply for housing, for example, would even out as landlords start seeing holding unimproved land as a huge red check on their balance sheets. They would be incentivized to sell or build something that people need on said land.
Trickle down economics was a joke because the more wealthy people become, the more they want with that wealth, and the more they're desires influence what the market creates. So we spend resources making diamond studded hand bags and mega yachts when the market wouldn't even create those things if the richest among us (always land owners in the end) actually got taxed on the one thing they can't tax dodge, land holdings.
Right cause policing belief ever worked and/or is ethical at all.
I'm an atheist but fuck that shit, waste of resources while simultaneously accomplishing nothing AND you get to invalidate your claims of goodwill by forcing people into your system of thought.
How is a corporation going to signal boost someone in a website they don't even know exists for a platform of a few thousand reliable everyday users when they have no presence with which to "boost" it?
now exists in the world and is impossible for you to do anything about.
Is the corporate astro turfer with us in the room right now, demesisx?
There's a snowball's chance in hell that corporations are spending their time and money trying to convince the few dozen active posters and few thousand commenters of anything. Most corporations with a PR department probably don't even know Lemmy exists let alone has a significant enough number of users to matter to their interests.
Even if all of that weren't true, you've still done nothing but created a community which I'm sure takes all of the time that setting up a new voice channel on discord does. Congratulations, you've created a place where random people who don't agree with you will be framed as corporate imps for having an independent thought or knowledge of how the world works that you just can't wrap your head around.
"Impossible for you to do anything about"
Lol it's like watching Jerry from R&M leaving the day care and being told that he was always allowed, we really couldn't care less but you'll take this criticism as "those darn corpos trying to ruin Lemmy!" Instead of people calling you out for providing nothing and then pretending you are some activist striking out against the man.
Im almost positive this is either the same exact story being posted a year later, either way I distinctly remember the same argument of "it's behind glass, dumbasses" being mentioned last time.
Except it does correlate meaningfully, don't believe me? Break your index finger, does it hurt? No shit.
That's not to say the nervous system can't create pain that has no source, the entire condition of fibromyalgia is evidence of that possibility, but to say they aren't meaningfully correlated is insane.
Most people who have pain unrelated to medical diagnosis in their 30's and 40's are fat as hell, eat like crap, and get no exercise, and are constantly dehydrated. That's why they hurt so damn much.
You might just live in crime central, that's not happening everywhere. Probably on an individual cost of cashier versus lost stock basis with each location.
The issue is that one specialist can oversee how many AI job holders? How many jobs are we getting rid of that will supposedly be bolstered by the new jobs created in the fields of manufacturing and AI hosting/training?
Now how many of those jobs have or will actually materialize?
That's my issue, it'll just get placed on IT's shoulders without any additional support.
The primary issue with Aquinas is that he's essentially pairing a "god of the gaps" fallacy with philosophical ideas that predate the scientific method we would need in order to functionally claim most of what he's talking about.
For example, he declares with confidence in his fourth way that because somethings are hotter, colder, etc. that there must also be an ultimate good just like there is ultimate heat. He begins the claim with scientific observation and then immediately rolls it into the field of philosophy and ethics. Now someone from the year 500AD might not consider that an issue since the scientific method didn't even exist at the time and all natural philosophy was on the same playing field, but modern people wouldn't consider those two fields to just be overlapping and logically interchangeable in that manner.
In the fifth way he claims that because certain beings have agency (or sapience, like us) and certain objects do not, that all non sapient objects must operate according to a being with said agency. This is patently untrue with modern scientific understanding as well, water flows because of friction and gravity, not because it was caused to do so by a god of some variety. Rocks fall, seasons change, etc. all due to natural processes. Not because there NEEDS to be a being with knowledge that guides it.
It's interesting because this claim is foundless as he hasn't proven that all objects operate based on a "plan" of some variety, he merely makes the claim that a plan from a sapient being is required for anything to happen and then begins to assess conclusions based on said claim. Moreso than that, it occurs in contradiction with his attempted understanding at potential and kinetic energy from the first way. He seems to have an idea about potential energy but then throws it out to just claim that objects or animals without knowledge operate on something else's will.
Thus beginning a long standing religious tradition of using scientific rhetoric where its helpful and attempting to shoehorn philosophy in where it contradicts or fails to uphold.
Right, but they're doing it because they believe they can make up the lost manpower through automation that won't be integrated enough to do so for another couple years. So they're going to overload their current employees even further than they likely already are and the product/s will continue to suffer and fall off.
This isn't happening in a vacuum, it's happening currently because they believe AI is far enough along to pick up the slack.
It's more due to AI and/or the expectation of automation being able to reduce the workforce before that actually gets set up functionally. Also that tech companies are doing it to try and kick back against people demanding their wages increase with cost of living, so game devs are piling onboard with layoffs for the same reason.
Not all models or definitions of Capitalism even follow that, go read Henry George. You can represent collective ownership of land through taxing the shit out of those that own it, and since it's the one resource you can't make more of its the best way to eliminate the landlord parasite problem because no one will own land they don't intend to use to fulfill a use case. Supply for housing, for example, would even out as landlords start seeing holding unimproved land as a huge red check on their balance sheets. They would be incentivized to sell or build something that people need on said land.
Trickle down economics was a joke because the more wealthy people become, the more they want with that wealth, and the more they're desires influence what the market creates. So we spend resources making diamond studded hand bags and mega yachts when the market wouldn't even create those things if the richest among us (always land owners in the end) actually got taxed on the one thing they can't tax dodge, land holdings.