Capitalism really does look like that... if you're of the ownership class.

Jul 6, 2024 10:52 PM

Decitron

Views

20513

Likes

847

Dislikes

19

Of course, said ownership class are the ones who often own and are responsible for the maintenance of buildings on the left that the poor and working class live in.

Sauce: https://x.com/JoshuaPHilll/status/1809648424515694886

FP Edit: don't worry though. Someday a trustfund baby will buy up the broken down properties that poor folk live in, raise rents, fix up the buildings causing a rise in property taxes, and evict everyone so rich people can rent out the newer places on AirBnB. The fact that this mostly effects poor BIPOC neighborhoods should not go unnoticed.

capitalism

latestagecapitalism

politics

But socialism in the form of corporate subsidies and tax breaks is OK with the capitalists.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The building is abandoned and clearly not shit is being done but cops will be called to remove anyone trying to survive the elements inside.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I prefer to think of it as taking my ball and going home.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

v

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Reaganomics is oligarchy- preference for the rich

2 years ago | Likes 94 Dislikes 1

They did spend years talking about the 1%…

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Any day now it's all going to trickle down, I'm sure. /s

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Oh, I wish socialism had come to America. Really want to repeat the history of building communism. And so that the 21st century would become as painful for America as the 20th century was painful for Russians.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 8

Cool fantasy brah

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yes, socialism is not a wet dream

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You're the only one saying it was or not

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This is so true. Blue coller, commercial roofer here, well probably doesn’t matter, but yea some one has to keep those fancy buildings in good shape. But if we were to stroll up to the front door after a long day at work..oh hell no…you stink, you are dirty, youndon’t belong

2 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

Socialism: when taxes go back down to help society, and make life easier on everyone. Capitalism: the rich own everything, steal your tax money, you mean less than nothing, you get nothing, and you work your entire life until you die.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 367 Dislikes 1

Also funny how everyone made jokes about russian politicians be so old because socialism/dictatorship (cold war). *looks at the US&A*

2 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

The US is turning into what Soviet propaganda claimed it was.

2 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Can't help feeling that response on the end is Shop'd in. Folks who spend their time reposting horseshit political memes under usernames that contain their affiliation, not exactly known for being receptive to new info.

2 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

We'll never know, because the moderators of /r/libertarianmeme deleted the comments 🤣. https://www.reddit.com/r/libertarianmeme/comments/i2uj6n/the_usa_isnt_by_any_means_perfect_but/

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Unrelated, it's good to know that my browser flags "reposting" as a typo but "horseshit" is not lol.

2 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

When you ask a socialist what's wrong with capitalism and a capitalist what's wrong with socialism, they'll both describe capitalism.

2 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

The answer to both is greedy people. As they will break any system regardless of how it works, so that they end up with more than everyone else.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yes but the capitalist will think it's all the hand outs to the poor that are the problem when it's really the hand outs for the rich that are the problem and exacerbate the problem like compounding interest.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In five years, I see my neighborhood becoming a graveyard of car washes

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Kill big cities. Living in tiny apartments is unhealthy and shitty besides.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

And soon the people in the top floors of the right one will buy the entire neighborhood on the left, turn it into high end condos. And then run the remaining local businesses out for known luxury chains.

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

And then the local government will talk about how raising rent and taxes to price out the poor people living there as a positive. Then they wonder where all the homeless folk and crime came from and why all the actual local culture and food turned into mass produced coffee shops and fast food franchises. But don't worry, it's now legal to throw homeless folk in prison to do free labor for corporations.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Sorry but I see both pictures IRL now. They really are bad at making a point.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

A lot of Americans have some weird ideas about what socialism is and how it works. And most of them are wrong.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

well of course it's messed up we're in a socialist society that favors the rich and greedy

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They're also so lazy they couldn't even just Google search two types of buildings and used AI dog shit images instead.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

That image of Cuba is not AI. It's a real place and that's how it looks at night. That image of Detroit is real too.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I don't see anything that looks AI-ish, but it can be hard to tell sometimes.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Look at the objects on the street level, the white car in particular. Lots of artifacts to be found.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The buildings are 100% AI generated. I hate that I can't properly articulate how I know, but I've seen so much AI art that it's immediately recognizable for its particular "style". They tend to have very similar color pallets and the way shading is applied and often smeary on detailed surfaces like the windows. Also the scale is all over the place and makes no sense on some things, like the doors on the glass building are colossal compared to the absolutely tiny cars.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I doubt it's AI because the trees on the left side of the "capitalism" building are mirrored on the right. A real artist might do that to save time, but it's not something AI does.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'd assume the reason for the color palate and the style is because AI steals from art made by people using those colors and that style for illustrations like those in the image. The scale issues just seem like they're the kind of idiosyncrasies that comes with art made by people. Lord knows I draw unimportant details out of proportion.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 222 Dislikes 1

Yep, neither system works well. So we shouldn't go for an all or nothing approach, but instead a hybrid system. As there are good and bad parts in both systems, so why not adopt the good bits from both and trash the bad bits. If there are any gaps left over we come up with a new solution to plug them.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 15

The root of the problem is lack of corruption resistance. Corruption is like corrosion on the structural members of a bridge. We do a lot to arrest corrosion but nothing to reverse corrosion you end up with the bridge collapsing eventually. We built them with less than the ideal amount of corrosion resistance with the intention that it would be a problem for the future so we could save time/money/resources/manpower/whatever now. It's little surprise we build our governments the same way.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

The real problem is that you can have all the anti corruption systems you want. But those will be the first places the corrupt will infect and take over. And if they can't take them over, they will take over the system that funds them and then cut their funding so they can barely function. It's why fighting corruption has to be a constant fight. But people stop after they mostly or fully eradicate it. But then after a few years it just comes back, but only no one is fighting it then.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

You've been caught in the thought trap that anti-corruption is preventative only. Just like the bridge maintenance deferrals.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Oh no, I know it needs to be constantly done. I'm just aware that people stop paying attention to prevention when it has done its job so well that it has eliminated the problem it was there to prevent. And so gets downsized because it doesn't need to be so large because they aren't finding anything. And then because it was downsized, it allows it to grow back. Because that's how governments allocate resources and funding most of the time.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

or

2 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Even in a system where everyone is happy, there can and would still be disparity between people in an unfair manner. As someone can be happy in an unfair system simply because they don't realise how unfair the system is. So if they think everyone is paid $10 they would be happy because it's all fair. But if they don't know some are paid $100 they would still be happy even though it isn't fair. It's why happiness is an easily warped metric. Because it needs awareness of the system to be a factor.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 8

if happiness needs the awareness of the system, then make then aware of the system? you've solved your own hypothetical problem with your mansplaining.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

literally just make sure everyone has food, shelter, and medicine. It's not that complicated.

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Of course, right after submitting the image I notice I mixed up left and right & can't edit it. Gonna lay down & stare at the ceiling a bit.

2 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 4

Hm, I can add text to a post later. Does this function not work for you?

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I was able to after switching to the new imgur design shortly. I thought it could only be edited once after going to FP.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hope somebody taped some salami under your breakdown desk.

2 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I knew what you meant

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

But not anymore?

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I used to know so many things.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

*Lie down.

2 years ago | Likes 37 Dislikes 3

2 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 1

Felt this short interaction in my soul ty for this whole post lmfao

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

2 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

capitalism is the best economic system we have. There are no socialist countries that are performing better than the best capitalist countries.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 41

And many of those countries the US fucked with and made worse. Do you ever have a point that isn't dog shit?

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Shouldn't those other countries be stronger since they supposedly have a stronger economy?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Its starts with the definition of "capitalism" and "socialism" - because both are a spectrum that also overlaps quite a bit. All modern countries mix both systems and take the successful aspects while trying to minimize the problems. As example are minimum wages, environmental protection, workers rights translating into "gov telling companies what to do" -> socialism. It takes potential profits away from business owners - but in these cases rightfully.

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

literally not a single thing you listed is socialism. Those are just laws. Socialism is when the people own the means of production, not private companies. Can you start a business in just any any field you want? Yes? Then its capitalism.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

Problem is: this is an extremly abstract, theoretical approach - and far from reality. Yes, those are "only" laws - but laws define if its socialism or capitalism. In socialism do laws and regulations result in people owning the means of production. But even there are various scenarios available. As example were yugoslavia workers "owning" the factory the work in - and had a say in decisions etc. We would call this cooperative. Farmers are often having cooperatives - so farmers = socialists?

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

yes, co-ops are a form of socialism.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is very common that expensive landmachines as combine harvesters are owned by a farmers cooperative - which then rents the combine harvester to farmers when they need it. There are in some countries also cooperative banks - e.g. to grant loans to farmers for new machines, seed etc. So farmers are then probably mostly socialists.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As example is access to some industries in capitalism not "open", because heavy gov regulations (nuclear industry as example) - and others completly banned (e.g. selling weapons to north korea or spying on your own government or sex trafficking). Conclusion: your description is way too abstract. It depends on the levels of regulations. All countries are a mix of socialist aspects and capitalist aspects. Even in the 1920s USSR was private ownership of small and medium companies allowed and

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

normal. Stalins increasing authorianism ended this - but you could always find private owned businesses - and in the 80s they opened up again for much more private ownership. On the other hand are "strategical" parts of the industry in most capitalistic countries gov run - or so strictly gov regulated that the results are the same. Examples are infrastructure as power plants, power grids, roads, water, gas etc. Muncipalities in many countries own the local power grid, water, gas grid. These are

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

and the little voice in my head immediately wants to remind you that the Scandinavian countries are successful, highly globally regarded as having an extremely high standard of living, and have HUGE socialist programs.

Meanwhile in America, arguably the most capitalist nation in the world, you can easily die from preventable disease or freezing to death on the street

2 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

QED /gallery/dktzklb

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

They are not socialist countries. They are capitalist countries with social programs.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 14

[deleted]

[deleted]

2 years ago (deleted Jul 7, 2024 5:19 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

I do get it.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

So what you're saying is that adding more socialist policies makes capitalism better? Gee, I wonder what conclusions we can draw from that insight. Hmm...

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Well...what is capitalism and what is socialism? If it is only socialism when there is no private property, then its only capitalism when there is slavery and child labor.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

capitalism is when there is free market trade. Socialism is when people own the means of production.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

Yeah, thats the most abstract form. But this means: as soon as child labour and slavery are banned = no free market anymore. As soon as there is private ownership = no socialism anymore. Which means the USA is no capitalism - and the USSR no socialism.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I will have to correct you on some minor details. There are no absolute socialist countries just as there are no absolute capitalist countries. Many "Capitalist" countries apply socialism often to major benefits of the larger population; infustructure, social programs, public schools, libraries, the military, police, fire, and in many countries medical facilities benefit from socialism.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

infrastructure and the military isn't socialism though, its built by private or publicly traded companies. Its not government workers building the roads. The rest isn't socialism either because they aren't products. Socialism is about owning the means of production. The government nor the collective people own the tools produced for the police, libraries, etc.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I think you might need to revisit what socialism is. You seem to believe that socialism is absolute state control, that would be communism. Socialism is the pooling or public money to support programs and institutions often outside the private buisnesses. You appear to have your definitions a little mixed.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I'd love to see where you are getting that definition from lol

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Judging by the fact you're downvoting actual links that discuss the Slave Trade and Capitalism suggests to me you're not actually interested in debate or expanding your point of view. You appear to be entrenched in the position "Capitalism the best, Socialism bad" while overlooking what a majority of people are saying to you in the comments and why you're being downvoted. No here wants an absolute Socialist economic system. No one here wants an absolute Capitalist system. Either system...

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Capitalism can be a great engine for innovation and productivity, however, unfettered capitialism has also given us the slave trade, child labor, monopolies, wealth inequality, removal of safety regulations, and the military industrial complex.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Complete socialism is difficult to achieve in society where scarcity and currency moves just about every country but complete capitalism leads to some of the darkest historical points in this country and every country. To say "It's the best system" is historically inaccurate and ignores the horrors capitalism has brought upon the world for the pursuit of 'wealth'.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

My dude, slavery and child labor existed waaay before capitalism.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Indeed they did but is it your opinion that an absolute free-market does not lead toward the extremes. Review the peek of the industrial revolution before the great depression. When America was enjoying its pro-capitalistic views. You will find children in factories, suppressed wages, use of immigrant/slave labor, and so on. No one claims Capitalism created slavery and child labor but when Capitalism has no regulation or social welfare programs, Capitalism falls right back into these dark tools.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

An article exploring the topic. I can also provide you some books exploring the expansion of capitalism and how one of major drivers of the econmic idea was the slave trade. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/slavery-capitalism.html

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

The "best capitalist countries" like the US, UK, & the rest of the imperialist core are doing well BECAUSE most other countries (which are capitalist) look like the Congo; robbed of resources, forced into nearly-unpaid labor, & driven to poverty to be forced to sell resources cheap to rich people/ corporations that exploit workers here and everywhere. There aren't any socialist countries that have been allowed to exist because the capitalists ensure they fail or fall into authoritarianism.

2 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 2

Can you name the countries you believe are being robbed? GDP, life expectancy, population, etc. is all increasing in the congo.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 11

I gave one example of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, especially now with cobalt mines, but basically the entire history of Africa for the past several hundred years up to today is basically colonial exploitation by the Imperial core for resources and labor, with China and a few others starting to get their hands in the game in the past several decades.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

But l just explain that life for people in the congo is improving.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

Who cares if it's getting alittle better for them? It should never have been like this in the first place. Just look at the whole of Africa

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Meanwhile, even in the imperialist core of capitalism, our poor aren't really doing great. Our GDP means nothing to people who aren't getting paid enough to make rent or feed themselves/ their families, or get medical help. Our rich people are certainly "performing better" than "socialist countries" or even those exploited capitalist countries, to be certain, but that's doesn't mean shit to anyone living in poverty here or anywhere.

2 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

few people in america live in poverty.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

Most people in America are one medical emergency from homelessness. Hell, lots are one missed PAYCHECK from homelessness. Most people in America are never going to afford to retire as things are. Our poverty doesn't look like poverty in Ethiopia or Sudan to be sure, but that doesn't mean shit isn't fucked for most people here. Links to follow:

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

no they aren't. Nearly everyone has health insurance, and the out of pocket cap is like $8k, which doesn't have to be paid upfront. Health insurance is free to people under a certain income.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

https://content.schwab.com/web/retail/public/about-schP.pdf">https://contenwab/C">P.pdf">https://content.schwab.com/web/retail/public/about-schwab/Charles-Schwab-2019-Modern-Wealt">t.sch">wab/C">P.pdf">https://content.schwab.com/web/retail/public/about-schwab/Charles-Schwab-2019-Modern-Wealth-Survey-findings-0519-9JBP.pdf -- https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/emergency-savings-report/ -- https://www.cnbc.com/id/100840148 -- https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/about-1-in-4-us-adults-over-50-say-they-expect-to-never-retire-an-aarp-study-finds Capitalism worked for a few, globally, for a short while, and that number of people it worked for is constantly shrinking.

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1