rando895 @ rando895 @lemmygrad.ml

Posts

1

Comments

145

Joined

1 yr. ago

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-024-00662-3

I think sinophobia may have gotten the best of you. The study is published in Nature, definitely not a Chinese journal (if this is important to you). Which means the scientists, and institutions are readily accessible, and you can read the paper describing how it works.

What sounds sus about it?

No it's bunch berry because it's cuter

Yes, we should let the unbiased and just judicial system remove any potential check on it's power through the exclusion of a jury. Surely then things will be better. In fact I can't think of a single situation where allowing a judge and some lawyers to interpret the nuances of law led to anything terrible.

Nope, it's the stupid idiots who don't know anything about.... What ever I want to make up right now

Germany's political economic system is capitalist. In order for that type of system to exist there must be a surplus that can be extracted in the form of profit. If the cost of energy is negative (or even low) there is no surplus profit and thus the system falls apart.

Tell me they're going to meet me at like 5pm, and never show.

It's definitely a marker of healthy discourse lol

I can't believe anyone would support a rich guy who doesn't give a shit about you or your interests. He's a rich asshole who cares about maintaining the power structure and let me tell you, you are nowhere near the top of that. So long as you defend these removed you will remain at the bottom.

Anyone not voting for Biden must be a Republican obviously. There are no other options.

It's not like someone opposed to the entirety of the capitalist system actually exists. That's just a meme.

No, because in a proper democracy any representative could be removed from office at anytime solely by their constituents voting to remove them. No I don't mean during a predetermined election cycle. I mean at any time.

That way each community can decide if someone should be out of office, and it transfers power back into the hands of the people rather than their representatives.

One of the main reasons we as a society care about renewables is that we need to reduce CO2 emissions (and I'd like to think we care about others too). This article doesn't mention anything about how much less CO2 is now being released. If we take EPA numbers from 2022, assume that they represent 100% non-renewable energy, take the 25% of those numbers that represent electricity generation and reduce the total.of that proportion we have a reduction of approximately 8% CO2 emissions. Great!

So why do our emissions keep increasing year over year?

A political economic system which requires infinite growth to sustain itself, requires growth in consumption, and production. If emissions go down, some industry will suffer (namely oil and gas), so their products must be used elsewhere. A collapse of the oil and gas industry would be an economic nightmare the way we currently organize our economy.

And that is why we need to move beyond capitalism.

I already have idle animations like video games. See Karlach

I've been thinking... According to modern monetary theory money is just an accounting tool for states with currency sovereignty. Since it posits that taxes give the currency legitimacy, and maybe appropriate personal taxes can adjust wealth based clout, aren't any talk of taxes basically a red herring?

Power and wealth come from capital and productive capacity, so by by-passing the talk of capital and productive capacity, the conversation is drawn to something that can never actually provide the changes anyone remotely left desires (tax the wealthy for example).

It makes it easy to ignore that the wealthy are wealthy because they own so much property (Elon Musk has shares which are property), and that the solution is to alleviate them of that burden directly, not through taxation of the property value.

How sneaky of them trying to exist. They should make their ambitions more clear like 'Merica does with their desire to dominate the world as the de facto international police force.

This thread is lit. I'm going to list 4 arrangements of the economy. If you are interested in participating, name what you think each one is:

1: A small group of people own the lands that are worked by another group of people. The leader of these owners is chosen via divine right. The people who work the land keep what they make, however for protection they must work other lands and do not keep what is made from them

2. A small group of people hold dominion of a large group of people. The large group must work for food, lodging, etc. and are forced to do so by the threat of death and physical punishment. They do not get to keep what they make, the economic situation is determined by the generosity of those who hole dominion over them
3. A small group of people own the majority of wealth in the form of businesses, factories, goods, etc. They purchase the time of a much larger group of people who sell their labour to make ends meet. The small group decides what to do with the excess goods, services, and money.
4. A large group of people own the businesses, factories, goods, etc. These people work to make ends meet and decide collectively (democratically or through other means) what to do with the excess goods services, money, etc.

I hope these are both clear and vague enough. Good luck!

It's true. Arguing with someone whose mind is made up is to show those whose mind isn't that there is a better, alternative way.

If you believe one is wealthier because they deserve it, through success, hardwork, etc , then shouldn't these apparent shining examples of success also be held to a higher standard?

Or should we somehow decide the economic cost of someone doing something illegal, then charge everyone that? For example: the risk of speeding increases quadratically (E =1/2mV^2), the higher the speed. I.e the risk of death. Do we then set a speed limit, anything above which is considered illegal. Above this level, a fine or charge is incurred based on the likelihood of a crash killing someone upto and including the cost of one's life.

But then it's legal to kill someone if you are wealthy enough, and the poor are inherently the most moral group.

Or we could flat fine it; which disproportionately punishes the poor. Which is like saying "ohh you are poor and that's your fault, just like speeding. Get fucked lol".

I'm sure that there are other options but it's a good idea to consider the potential ramifications of fees, fines, and other punishment structures, and how they influence the society we live in.

There's a pro strongman that has started shitting on shitty people from the comments section of fitness videos. For example: woman lifts heavy weight, butt hurt "men" comment various idiotic hateful things, strongman looks at their profile and calls them a removed based on something relevant.

Obviously it doesn't do anything systematically, but it is a bit of solidarity and the original poster often tanks him. So I guess that's okay.

But yeah they are the worst.

You're right of course. I suppose it's frustrating knowing there are dozens of us and we don't have a place to share successes and failures of praxis. Maybe I have internalized the sentiment that social media is a distraction from action.

I'm gonna be real. I'm getting tired of seeing news articles about things that are obviously going to be happening under capitalism.

Yes they are privatizing everything. Yes they are killing everything and everyone.etc etc etc.

Is there a community, or an interest at all, where we can post something and talk about praxis?

So instead of "they are ruining healthcare!". Could maybe have at least one community where it's:

They are ruining healthcare (article) and my town and I have started organizing against it.

Or : there are so many homeless! (Article) we started this mutual aid group. Any advice?

I just think it can become a distraction from real action constantly reinforcing what we know, without an effort or recognition of each other's praxis.