Tumgik
#capitlism
i-am-dulaman · 2 years
Text
Okay I'm riled up about this rn so time for a history of economics lesson (rant) from me, a stranger on the internet
I'm a communist, I hate capitlism, so lemme just put that out there. But capitlism had its moments. Even marx had some praise for parts of capitlism.
And by far the most successful form of capitlism was Keynesian economics, as evident by the enormous increase in living standards in those countries which adopted it between the 1930s and 1970s.
What's Keynesian economics? The idea that capitlism can't survive on its own, and must be supported by government spending at the poorest ends of society and taxes at the richest ends of society (essentially the opposite of trickle down economics) as well as strong regulations on certain industries like banking.
It basically started in 1936 with President Roosevelt who was a personal friend of John Keynes (who the theory is named after).
Roosevelt implemented Keynesian economics to great effect; he raised the top tax rate to 94% (he actually wanted a 100% tax rate on the highest incomes, essentially creating a maximum wage, but the senate negotiated down to 94%) and similarly high corporate tax rates, he created the first ever minimum wage, created the first ever unemployment benefit, created social security in America, pension funds, and increased public spending on things like public utilities and infrastructure, national parks, etc. Which created about 15 million public sector jobs.
This ended the great depression and eventually lead to America winning world War 2, after which many countries followed suit in implementing similar policies, including UK, Australia, and NZ (apologies for the anglosphere-centric list here but they're the countries I'm personally most familiar with so bare with me)
Over the next 40 years these countries had unprecedented growth in living standards and incomes, and either decreasing or stable wealth inequality, and housing prices increasing in line with inflation. Virtually every household bought a car and a TV, rates of higher education increased dramatically, america put a man on the moon, and so on.
Then it all abruptly ended in the 80s and the answer is plain and obvious. 1979 thatcher became UK prime minister. 1981 reagan became US president. 1983 the wage accords were signed in aus. 1984 was the start of rogernomics in NZ (Someone link that Twitter thread of the guy who posts graphs of economic trends and points out where reagan became president)
(Also worth noting those last two in NZ and Aus were both implemented by 'left' leaning governments, but they are both heavily associated with right wing policies.)
This marked the beginning of trickle down economics: tax cuts, privatization of publicly owned assets, reduction in public spending, and deregulation of the finance sector. The top tax rates are down to the low 30s in most of these countries, down from the 80s/90s it was prior. Now THATS a tax cut.
And what happened next?
Wages stagnated. Housing prices skyrocketed. Bankers got away with gambling on the economy. Public infrastruce and utilies degraded. And wealth inequality now exceeds France in 1791.
I don't know how anyone can deny the evidence if they see it, but there's so much propaganda and false information that a lot of people just don't see the evidence.
Literally all the evidence supports going back to Keynesian economics but now that the rich have accumulated so much wealth it's virtually impossible to democratically dethrone them when they have most of the politicians on both the right and the left in their pocket.
Unfortunately it was the great depression and ww2 that gave politicians the political power to implement these policies the first time around. Some thought the 2008 crash would spur movement back towards Keynesianism (which it actually did in Iceland, congrats to them), I hoped covid would force governments to now, but nope.
All these recent crises' seem to have just pushed politics further and further right, with more austerity and tax cuts.
I don't really have a message or statement to end on other than shits fucked yo.
5K notes · View notes
env0writes · 11 months
Text
Tumblr media
Before the Fall 6.13.23 “Single Bedroom”
These beige walls bounce my whispered words Only the ones, to myself, I say I say… If I squeeze My eyes shut Just hard and long enough To finally see For once, some color
@env0writesC.Buck Ko-Fi & Venmo: @Zenv0 Support Your Local Artist! Photo by @env0
14 notes · View notes
carlosthehedgehog · 7 months
Text
I’m so sad to be working another customer service job when I did all I could to never get one again.
I got my current job because I originally applied for a quality assurance position but they could not pass me up for customer service.
Yay being an extrovert. Now my personality can be exploited for capitalism.
2 notes · View notes
myheartisoutatsea · 10 months
Text
Dad Talks. EP. 1 | Ethical Economics AKA Humanity vs. Capitalism
The Context - Discussion with friend over text
Friend : We still put money before people. 
Me : But as humanity grows we’re more knowledgeable now, and we’ll catch people and hold them accountable for it. 
Friend : Literally the opposite has happened. 
Me : I refuse to give up on the good of humanity. 
Friend : Oh, Humanity is good. Capitalism is evil. 
The Discussion with Dad - Also over text, and prompted by me presenting the above discussion and my thoughts on it. 
Me : Greed is evil, economy is a neutral entity that is wielded. It is one man’s greed that sours it. 
Well this poses an interesting question.
Can a concept, which due to the nature of human history, is created by man be neutral? If it is created by humans, who are intrinsically biased and lean forwards either positive or negative questions, then can it truly be neutral? 
Can I claim that something man made is neutral when I proclaim man is good but inherently fallible?
Dad : Sounds like you are doing fine. You pose the more interesting question. Capitalism, and even the idea of economics, are man-made creations. But not necessarily in the way a building or an invention is, or.a book or painting.
Economics comes from the idea that humans require, or desire, certain things to survive, and take action to acquire those things. As the types and numbers of things fluctuate, as well as how many humans and there are and how those things are produced, certain patterns of behavior emerge that seem to be driven by the numerous variable. Hence we study economics as a sort of science - it seems to operate under certain principles that can be deduced by observation and testing. It’s sort of like anthropology or sociology, we are trying to understand how humans have developed or how they will respond.
Me : So in considering it’s study being a science, can we presume we should be neutral in judging its patterns and more so directing moral judgements on those who use the properties of economics to act?
Dad : Capitalism is at, its heart, a theory of economics. One might even say it is the most basic and fundamental theory of how economics works. But it makes assumptions about how people respond to their economic stimuli and their motives. The primary assumption is that people will act to maximize their things. (Keep in mind that I am not an economist and that there is a great deal of literature on this topic - it has been studied a lot.)
There are other theories that predict that people and societies react differently. Capitalism tends to be more individualistic. Socialism and communism more focused on the wellness of the group.
Me : So does capitalism assume greed or does capitalism encourage greed?
Dad : I think you can approach any of those theories with a certain neutrality; the theories themselves are neither good nor evil. How people apply those theories can be approached from an ethical standpoint.
Me : Fair.
Dad : Does capitalism assume greed or encourage greed? Interesting question. Probably both, but even greed might not be the right word.
Then the question is what is the word that capitalism works off of.
Well, the question overall is interesting because in economics it is difficult to separate economic theory from an economic system. That is precisely because humans are involved. It is a bit like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle or Schrodinger’s Cat - you can’t know the outcome or state of the system unless you act to measure it, but your act of measuring it determines the state of the system.
In economics, how one believes the system works depends partly on how one believes humans act or should act, and humans can work in different ways.
Me : Damn.
This leaves me and my friend very much at odds because I believe we think inherently differently on the way humans work. I think we both find humans to be naturally good, but I more easily overlook the times human do bad to embrace the times human do good while they are the reverse.
I will lean towards capitalism because I like the individualistic approach while still having great faith that more times than not humans will do good.
Dad : You will find there are several different version of capitalism as an economic and political ideology.
Me : But my friend leans towards socialism because they have seen too many times that humanity can be bad and the system abused, so an economic plan for the welfare of all appeals more to them because they believe the opportunity for bad is inherently tempting.
It worries me that I may only find capitalism appealing because I think I myself will work well in it, or perhaps that is my privilege that leads me to favor capitalism. 
Dad : Humans are involved in all of these systems. There are no robots or divine forces that will be kind to everyone if only we let them.
Socialism relies on good governance to work. It can be as poorly applied as capitalism.
Me : True.
Dad : Capitalism often maximizes freedom of the individual, which allows individuals to flourish more than other systems, but also allows individuals fail more than other systems. It can also lead to unhealthy balances of power or wealth that can twist the system into actually being intrinsically unfair. This is likely because capitalism is a near perfect theory in an ‘unbounded’ system (resources and people and space are limitless), but when applied more practically to the bounded systems we actually live in it needs some regulation and constraint. (My own personal theory - might be complete B.S.)
Me : Don’t sell yourself too short, it’s the observation of peers that make a theory sound.
--- 
Quote of the Day : From the Classic Doctor Who Series, in the final episode of the Castrovalva. 
The Master, to the people he has created - “You do not have the will to do it.” 
The People he made, responds with - “You may have made us, Man of Evil, but we are free.” 
*Proceeds to swing on a chandelier and break both the Masters machine and plan.* 
--- 
Food and more reading for thought : https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/economics/ 
2 notes · View notes
honeyglot · 2 years
Text
capitalism as extremist religion
from The Theft of Time, by Aeron Bergman & Alejandra Salinas, June 2020 (emphasis mine):
“If the forced “observation” of 24/7 capitalism sounds like the forced observation of an extremist religion, it is because that is exactly what it is. Capitalism is the largest religion in the history of humanity.6 Walter Benjamin’s reflections from 1921 are even more urgent a century later:
In the first place, capitalism is a purely cultic religion, perhaps the most extreme that ever existed.”7
The market is worshiped and revered like a malevolent, anthropomorphic god. It casts a spell to labor compulsively,  devouring time. Benjamin wrote in his unpublished notes that in Capitalism there are no weekdays, or in other words, every day must be filled with the obligations of piety. “There is no day that is not a feast day, in the terrible sense that all its sacred pomp is unfolded before us; each day commands the utter fealty of each worshipper.”8 Market worship fills every day of the week, month, and year.”
5 notes · View notes
kabudora · 5 months
Text
US capitalism is bad for your mental health
The older I get, I understand the long-term consequences of a self-centered and ego-centric behavior capitalism supports. And oh Lord, it hurst.
0 notes
girlboyburger · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media
today i realized i could draw anything i want, so.
i drew myself a girlfriend
1K notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
621 notes · View notes
tiny-huts · 2 months
Text
Maybe Chris Perkins should have thought for a minute before using the word "predatory" for Jarlaxle on a highlight on Twitter. I assume he meant "opportunistic" but really bad look for like one of your most famous and ONLY queer characters (also Cute how wotc is okay making random NPCs of no importance gay or trans, which is a step ofc, but won't touch any of the famous characters from the books with a ten foot pole Jarlaxle got confirmed queer via word of God on Twitter and they have done nothing to actually... Confirm it officially and have it in any of the adventure guides and it continues to really only be a joke with Elminster)
16 notes · View notes
2-b-frank · 5 months
Note
Magic anon! you are stuck in baby jail with no magic for 10 asks! this means no flying or teleporting
Ribbon yelled "WAIT NO." But, it was already too late.
He was unable to move his ribbons nor teleport either. He spun his head around and couldn't.
He grabbed the edge of the baby jail and shook it. "GET ME OUT OF HERE"
16 notes · View notes
shokuto · 6 months
Text
That terrible Fantastic Four rap is making me picture Johnny as one of those obnoxious white rappers on the side lmaoooo
14 notes · View notes
pansyfemme · 8 months
Text
the meanest thing that happens in my tags isnt ppl saying im wrong or whatever its the people who feel the need to correct my grammar and spelling. like ohhhh theres a mispelling in a jude pansyfemme post?? that's a new one
7 notes · View notes
art-student-rants · 4 months
Text
last year i tried to be all aesthetic and this year i’m trying to be honest but i’m not much good at either. i’d try to be both, but i don’t know if that’s possible because nothing honest is aesthetic at all (unless you’re into the gory-sad type, no judgement)
3 notes · View notes
maroooonsun · 1 year
Text
Just realized in the second part of the clean break sasha publicly announces she doesn't want people to go without radiation shielding and yettt in the second episode of the blank slate she gets so.. concerned? Shaken? When the aurinko crew completely tank how much treatment costs
27 notes · View notes
wereah · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media
So now I have a Team 7 photo for all of my Team 7 Photo needs!
_(┐「ε:)_❤ Weren't they so cute and sweet back then? I really like how Naruto came out. I think If I were to redo this piece, I'd do something different with Sakura. She looks a little bland next to the boys.
This illustration has several . . . medium-level technical mistakes throughout ( Sasuke's eye--!) , but I've spent too long on it already. I need to finish the Worthwhile comic and get it out the door. So to speak.
35 notes · View notes
scribespirare · 1 year
Text
IM NOT DONE RODEO BY GARTH BROOKS IS SO FUCKING GOOD IT GIVES ME THIS HUGE SWELL OF EMOTION AND GOD IM SO ANGRY IM CUT OFF FROM THAT PIECE OF MY HERITAGE, THAT SO MUCH OF THE CULTURE HAS CHANGED SO MUCH AS TO BE NEAR UNRECOGNIZABLE.
Shoulda Been A Cowboy and The Cowboy in Me give me the same fucking emotion like why and how has modern country/rodeo culture shifted so fucking much. It's all right wing and bedazzled and peanut rollers and I can't fucking stand half of it. Commercialized. Pre-packaged for ease of buying.
2 notes · View notes