• 5 Posts
  • 48 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle


  • See? That’s where I get confused and I end up with the “that can’t happen” attitude in my head.

    If you abolish private property, then who has that property? Someone will always have some of that, at least. Let’s imagine that it’s seized, by whom? How? And why wouldn’t that be thievery in the eyes of those who don’t want it? Because if I want it to happen, then it would be relinquishing, but if I don’t it would be coercive, because I cannot pay anything to that person, otherwise it would become a “haver” against all of those “havenotters” that gave their property for nothing but good will.

    And then there’s the redistribution fact, of how to do that? Equitable? By some principle? Depending on who you are and are not, you get X o Y amount of “property”? And then it’s the issue of how do you measure that “property”? Because two cups of sugar can be of similar value, but not two houses. It’s not the same to live in downtown Manhattan than in the middle of Saskatchewan.

    Finally, who does that? We? And who is “we”? Who organises “we”? How is “we” not anarchist? And if it’s anarchist, how do we ensure it’s just?







  • No, that’s an effect of collusion and cartelization of the economy. It’s because you have very few actors supplying the product and the barriers of creating a similar product are too high, so new competitors cannot access the market. Then the current suppliers can sit on the product and wait for it to be at the right price, as long as it doesn’t go to waste.

    As you can see, all of this screens about real estate:

    • Cartelization/collusion: The aren’t that many companies that have properties on sale
    • High cost to enter: Building is pricey, and it depends on the location of the property more than anything. So a building in one neighborhood is not a direct replacement of a building in another neighborhood.
    • Real estate does not go to waste. Unless bad luck or poor choices, your building should work fine for a couple of generations. And worst case scenario, the land already has a price.

    This is the time when governments should intervene and come up with a proposal to solve the cartelization.



  • What about the respect given to an individual because of its status in society? There are certain people that have a base level of respect because of their seniority, job or role during a period of time.

    Those people may or may not show the same amount of respect towards others as is shown to them in general. And I dare say, there will be people willing to defend them even if they are not up to expectations, just because they have that seniority/job/role.

    Take for instance:

    • Some politicians
    • Some celebrities
    • Some senior members of an organisation, like CEOs, CTOs, senior managers, etc.

  • It doesn’t make sense because it’s some conspiracy theory level bullshit. It would imply that big CEOs or board members either:

    • Possess a big percentage of the current real estate properties (and I mean, huge, like 50%)
    • Big part of their assets are in real estate (again, more than 30%)

    And, that of course, they are all colluding. Meaning, there is a kind of Illuminati kind of society of all the CEOs that get together with pie charts and excels to see how to maximize their profits.

    It’s a delusion that people with a low grasp of reality are using to cope with the fact that:

    • Economy is shit
    • There are people that, because of connection and money, are unscathed by the economic shitinnes we live in
    • Because the economy is shit, companies are grasping to get out of red numbers
    • Because we have had mediocre to sheerly bad managers in almost every industry for most of the last three decades thanks to some economic bonanzas, the only way they see they can improve the margins is by doing stupid things like back to office

    I like Hanlon’s razor for these cases: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. I this, I feel, is indeed that.


  • camelCaseGuy@lemmy.worldtoMemes@lemmy.mlTotally make sense
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Exactly! I would add that you can still use “no binario” or “no binaria” in a (somewhat) respectful manner. For instance, you can say “persona no binaria” (non binary person), “comunidad no binaria” (non binary community), because both nouns are feminine, you can use the feminine alteration of “no binario”. For masculine I would go with “su género es no binario” (its gender in non binary), since gender is masculine and “su” doesn’t imply any gender at all.

    Again, not an expert just another fellow native Spanish speaker with a bit of a geekiness about languages.








  • camelCaseGuy@lemmy.worldtoMemesThe Sanctimonious Centrists
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    10 months ago

    Oof! Somebody took Karl’s kool-aid.

    So, first off, it’s not the capitalist system that is at fault for the miners not having a back-up plan after the coal mine dries or coal is not marketable anymore. It’s due to corrupt politicians and lack of foresight from the constituents, that’s at fault there. But that’s to be expected. Most people are unable to plan their life with more than 5 years ahead, imagine a whole town working for commodities company where they don’t have enough education to understand the complexities of the market. It’s simply nearly impossible. The only place that I know that did something like this is Norway, where they have a trust fund coming from all the oil money, so when their oil dries up, they can still live out of that money for a while.

    And as you can see from my previous paragraph, that’s not something that communism or socialism can change. That’s human nature. Cuba is not a shit hole because the US embargo, it is because Castro wanted its own SimCity. The same goes for Russia during the Soviet era, or China even now. Corruption is endemic of the politicians. And that’s a fact. No system survives corruption.

    Finally, addressing the whole “history is a class struggle”. That’s to say a lot. You could say that human history has inherent class struggle, and that’s fine. But in reality, history is not defined by class struggle, more than could be defined by change of ethos, power dynamics or even whimsical change of heart. It’s too simplistic to say that everything has been a class struggle, because it simplifies human emotions and desires to materialistic possessions.