Originally posted by Impediment
I’m 100% pro-capitalism.Make your money and stack your paper.
Jeff Bezos capitalized on the laziness of the world and now he has three commas in his checking account.
I’m not even mad at him.
Haters are gonna hate.
Maybe if he had free competition. But he didn't. All the alternatives were run out of business, all the cheap products were bought by the same corporations and resold at much higher prices. I sell my Chrono Trigger cart at 5 dollars, someone buys it and sells it on Amazon for 200. Before you know it, no one can afford Chrono Trigger except other speculators.
And that's all Amazon is. A playground for speculators pricing out the average consumer and constantly trading inventory with other speculators.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Are any of them good people?What do you think about them? Open ended!
I admire anyone that has the drive and the will to succeed in their chosen field. To take a look at a mountain and go "ima climb that ****er".
The problem is when you take advantage of people to do it. Maybe a person can make the argument that Amazon wouldn't be as big as it was if Bezos wasn't willing to exploit vulnerable workers and have really shady business practices when it comes to selling "quality" products, but all that means to me is that if Amazon couldn't climb to the mountaintop without doing that shit, then it shouldn't be on the mountaintop in the first place.
Originally posted by -Pr-
Maybe a person can make the argument that Amazon wouldn't be as big as it was if Bezos wasn't willing to exploit vulnerable workers and have really shady business practices when it comes to selling "quality" products, but all that means to me is that if Amazon couldn't climb to the mountaintop without doing that shit, then it shouldn't be on the mountaintop in the first place.
Originally posted by NewGuy01
You have it backwards; worthy or no, if Amazon hadn't been willing to cut corners, then it would've been out-competed by a company that was. That's just the nature of the mountaintop itself. Jeff Bezos isn't really the problem.
I'm not expecting them to never cut corners. That's the cost of doing business a lot of the time.
The problem I have is that I believe Amazon could still be the biggest player in town while treating its workers fairly. I don't believe for one second that they're mutually exclusive.
Originally posted by -Pr-Oh, that's the thing. They are mutually exclusive. Exploitation is the core trait of capitalism, it is how it functions as an economic system.
The problem I have is that I believe Amazon could still be the biggest player in town while treating its workers fairly. I don't believe for one second that they're mutually exclusive.
Nikito Rogozin published author HSB, WSJ, Forbes, 10+ years proThe US presently has the conditions which are fairly ripe for a revolution. More of a “color” variety than any other kind most likely. And in that - much of the general public and the 1% are going to be on the same side. The recipe for a revolution has been much the same since times immemorial: limited social/economic mobility among the higher classes AND the inability or unwillingness of the regime to meaningfully deal with the problems/concerns that worry the general public. If it is just one of the two - not that big a deal… but if it is both - the clock is ticking.
The time where the systemic issues in the US could have been resolved with moderate reforms has long passed. Probably last chance to effect moderate reform And have it do something was in the 1990s, but the system is too far out of equilibrium now. The problems ‘can’ has been kicked down the road for far too long and as such the legitimacy of the rulers/systems of power as they are is no longer recoverable. And the opposition includes both the higher classes and the general public. I mean, does anyone in America legit believe that the current corrupt rulers and institutions could really make things good and the people whole?
Importantly, it is not the top 1%, but the top 0.01% that run things. All in all it is only a couple thousand people who factually own and control everything of note in the US and exercise actual major systemic power. While the top 1% are major beneficiaries of that regime, they themselves don’t have that much of an input and practical power over the systems in question - not different from the general public when it comes to the exercise of power in the US regime. The 1% is known in social sciences as the ‘elites’ while the 0.01% as the ‘rulers’ - the ones who are actually in charge.
The general public and the 1% don’t want different things unlike the 0.01%. The people want a safe, orderly and prosperous country with good social/economic mobility. While the 0.01% want a national and global regime which would permit them to stay in power and on top of everything in perpetuity. Which in fact creates an oligarchy the main goal of which is self-perpetuation. Money is indeed important to ensure that the rulers could retain the compliance and support of the elites as that’s essential for regime maintenance. And what is very important to understand is that self-perpetuation is the main goal and not necessarily money.
Money itself doesn’t do all that much in a practical sense if you got, say, over $20 million. The “incremental benefit”/“marginal utility” of anything decreases with each additional unit. E.g. having a second pair of shoes is far more practically useful than a 22nd. Same with money: after a certain point around $10 million - there is really quite nothing that money can buy which would meaningfully improve your life quality. And e.g. $20m is entirely sufficient for one to live out their life in luxury.
As such, the more wealthy someone gets - the less they are interested in more money per se, but more in the maintenance of a system which would permit them to live that life of luxury. Preferably in an intergenerational manner. I mean, it doesn’t matter if you got 20 million or 20 billion in the bank should the pitchfork mob drag you out of your cozy bed or the government decides to nationalize your assets or expel you. And this concern dictates all the actions of the 0.01%. Now, of course, money is an important tool to this effect - that’s how you procure enablers. But, obviously, money isn’t all that’s needed. Other tools of the subjugation of the populace are more important. And it is the control over these tools that’s most critical.
What is important is that the conditions in the US are ripe for a revolution against the rulers. The main reason being the overproduction of elites: e.g. there are far fewer positions of importance and funds to be distributed than there are graduates of important colleges. This creates a situation where the potential elites are dissatisfied with the status quo and might side with the general population against the rulers. And that’s how revolutions happen - you need to have elites take part in them for them to succeed. The rulers are presently working hard to prevent the sort of thing via division of the elites and outright oppression. But the situation is out of the equilibrium…
Wealth/economic inequality isn’t particularly important.While it could be a rallying cry for the masses to demand social justice… we well know that it is insufficient for things to go boom. You can have a society with lots of literal slaves on one side and people literally owning whole provinces or sectors of economy on the other… and have such a system be stable over centuries. For things to get interesting you need what I discussed above. The rest is just contributing factors.