• 1 Post
  • 33 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle






  • I understand your frustration, and I think he is guilty of the things he is accused of also. I still think the justice department made the correct democratic decision of setting the precedent that the executive branch does not prosecute political figures when the electorate has a chance to make that decision.

    I hate that the electorate decided that none of those offenses were damning enough to flush that turd, but that’s democracy. He won the popular vote and it’s up to those of us unhappy with the result to convince others that we need better leadership.


  • The justice dept went easy on Trump because it sets a very dangerous precedent for the current administration to use the power of the justice dept on political rivals. He was removed from office and his actions were investigated and displayed to the public. Under normal circumstances, those actions should make it so he cannot run again. The electorate are designed to be the check on political power, but it failed.

    I fear elections no longer have that check. I do however believe the justice department made the right decision. I don’t think it should criminally prosecute political rivals, because then we end up with situations like Nivalny dieing in prison. The justice department played it’s role by exposing all of the criminal behavior, the electorate did not by allowing someone that dangerous back into power.


  • Yondoza@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlRent is Robbery
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Again, love the lofty goal you’re setting, but you pretty blatantly don’t mention an alternative system. Easy to point out a problem, much harder to build a real solution.

    The funny thing is, capitalism happened organically. It wasn’t a designed system. So dismantling capitalism without a solid replacement will likely just lead right back to capitalism.


  • Yondoza@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlRent is Robbery
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Love your optimism, but “making things affordable” is not a valid plan for managing resources. It provides a goal without a solution.

    Are you suggesting price fixing? That has a lot of associated outcomes that typically cause worse situations than doing nothing.

    You can introduce a guaranteed buyer at fixed price points which alleviate some of the negative consequences, but add others.

    These are not simple problems. The reason these problems exist isn’t solely because “rich and powerful people are evil” as nice as that would be. These problems still exist because they’re complicated and ‘one size fits all’ solutions haven’t been found for them.


  • Yondoza@sh.itjust.workstoMemes@lemmy.mlRent is Robbery
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Disclaimer: not advocating for current system.

    What alternative would you propose for providing loans?

    My controversial (for Lemmy) take is that loans are good for society. They provide an incentive to not hoard resources, but provide them to those who want to put them into action today for future benefit.

    A good loan benefits both parties, ie. An auto loan that allows someone to buy a car to get to a job to earn an income that is above the cost of the loan. Without the loan that person couldn’t get to work and whatever service they were providing to society is lost.

    All that said - that doesn’t mean the way loans work today is the best solution, but the same functionality of trading current and future resources needs to exist. You don’t have to call it a loan, and it doesn’t have to be performed by private for profit institutions, but if you want a thriving economy I believe you need this function carried out somehow.

    The equivalent function in Communism is (or historically has been) a centrally planned resource allocation which very clearly is a horrible idea because of the incentives towards corruption. If you take a literal interpretation of communism (instead of historical) where “the workers own the means of production” trade unions could fulfill this current to future resource allocation function. I do not know if this would create the same corruption as single central authority, but my gut feels is that it would (based on the US labor union and organized crime affiliation of the past.

    In short, the current function for trading current and future resources (ie. loans) is far from ideal, but I have not found an alternate that provides more benefits than deficits. I would love to learn about more alternatives, but just saying ‘loans R bad’ makes it sound like you’re advocating getting rid of them with nothing to handle their underlying function, which is a terrible idea.