• steersman2484@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    You are comparing basic addition with extremely complex social economics. You can’t just do A and guarantee B will happen. But if B actually happens it can be good for one group of people and bad for another one. Often the best solution is some kind of compromise. That said there surely can be some obviously bad ideas.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can’t just do A and guarantee B will happen.

      Which is why you can be correct. “Trickle Down Economics” was never even sound in theory, and proved itself wrong in practice even more, for example.

    • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The Right are denying scientific consensus on anything that doesn’t make them money or own the libs.

      Forget the “social economics” which is also bunk, because the majority of Americans want lower healthcare costs, gun control, freedom of choice, better economic equality, and better education.

      These are all things the right (and written down in Project 2025 btw).

      If Mr. Beast knew anything, he’d claim to work with the popular majority, but he’s been trained by social media that controversy equals popularity. Basically it’s an algorithmic version of “no such thing as bad press”. So he won’t do the best thing for the world, he’ll do whatever he thinks will be a net gain in popularity. Which is why he said what he said, so he doesn’t lose and right wing viewers of his clickbate.