this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
1880 points (99.5% liked)

Political Memes

5347 readers
2400 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

We need to rethink economy

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

In what world or country are professors not making enough to afford somewhere to live? In my country professors make good money despite the fact that tenure doesn't really exist here. It's one of the highest ranks you can have in academia above lecturer, senior lecturer, and reader.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago

Sorry we've got a vocabulist here hold on let me talk him down

Nobody is talking about whatever ivory tower caste system you are talking about, to normals "professor" is common parlance for "college teacher" and many campuses around the country still call adjunct """"""""instructors""""""""" adjunct professors

i hope this fulfills the terms of your devil riddle

[–] [email protected] 37 points 12 hours ago

Private equity, shareholders. No publicly traded business is in the business of providing service and goods of value.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

In 1776, Americans engaged in open warfare, with guns and killing and infections and amputations and no anesthetic, with England, because they were tired of paying taxes and getting nothing from them.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Our current population has emotional breakdowns when told they have to wear a mask to keep old people from dying. I am not at all confident that we will ever reach the same level of energy that led to organized, cohesive revolution and war unless some outside power starts taking away people's internet and pizza rolls.

[–] thatKamGuy 4 points 5 hours ago

Not when more than a third are too apathetic and disengaged to care, and another third are beholden to the robber baron cause through blind consumption of propaganda disguised as ‘fair and balanced’ news.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

To be fair, who the fuck goes up against the American army‽

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Canada. There are other wars the U.S. has lost, but I don't know how involved the U.S. Army was in them.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Capitalism combined with markets with inelastic demand is a lot of fun. But communism bad because tankies or whatever.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Bad because the centralized planning committee is little better than ONE BOARDROOM TO RULE THEM ALL and if you disagree with them they send their secret police to yank a black bag over your head and disappear you in the night. Then you, everyone you associated with, and everyone within three generations related to you spend the rest of your short, brutal, agonizing existences starving and/or freezing to death at a slavery camp in the wilderness.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 minutes ago

Was this written by a child?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

That sounds more like Authoritarianism...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 31 minutes ago

I think that's because communism has only really been implemented/taken over by authoritarians, and wasn't really communism.

Any possibly good people that gain power and pursue communism are couped or destroyed

[–] [email protected] 18 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Unchecked greed is bad for society, capitalist or communist.

People are the problem. If we could only get rid of the people. /sarcasm

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago

I'm surprised to see such a well rounded, logical view here. Kinda feels rare on this platform these days.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago

Bureaucracy is a huge problem.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 17 hours ago

but the shareholders!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

It has been unchecked corporate greed. If you just look around or follow twitter pages like more perfect union. Story after story of corporate greed and people coming together to try to make life fair and liveable.

They recently had one of some big corpos buying up all the land in a state to build their own crypto city. Even that land is for farming is ultra important. Now that group of corpos are suing the people for coming together and not selling.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

And why is corporate greed allowed to exist? Capitalism. You were so close.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I get what it is. Not much we can do about it other than form unions and keep fighting.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

there's more we can do. united, we can do anything. every great achievement of mankind was because people bound together to accomplish a goal. anybody can organize. governments and corporations don't have a patent on organization.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

So capitalism in anutshells.

[–] [email protected] 98 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't worry because you are free to exploit people as well! Oh, you're not exploiting, fucking over, and scamming literally every human being you meet? What's wrong with you. Maybe you're just not smart enough to screw people over. /$

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 day ago

Wow, that "/$" is art. Congratulations.

/Fully sincere.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 22 hours ago

Oh my, reminds me of a saying we used to have back under soviet occupation. Translated it would be "If you aren't stealing, you're stealing from your family.". Americans are at the point where that's the world they live in, but they haven't yet developed the depressing worldview of the average soviet citizen. Oof...

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Stock Markets getting those record highs tho. If only people could get paid in shares of the companies that own their labor, but if that happened they'd actually have to answer to the workers and we simply can't have that in muh free markets

[–] [email protected] 8 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Honestly, i don't want to get paid in share of the company, i'd prefer cash directly bank into my account so it's available immediately for me to use on the needs and wants. With share, i need to liquidate it, that took time in negotiation. And if no one want to buy it in a bad year, i'm stuck with shrinking money that i can't use.

Different story if you work in those big tech of course.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lucidlethargy 9 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Isn't it 'Hear, hear" like hear this, not this place?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

Yes. It's short for "hear him", and also i guess gets rid of the pointless gendering of that phrase.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago
[–] [email protected] 149 points 1 day ago (12 children)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] merc 64 points 1 day ago (6 children)

This is generating the typical anti-capitalist hate, but we should also consider that this is also a reflection on the kinds of unpaid work that women have been doing for generations. The problem isn't necessarily profits or middle-men, it's just that some things are always going to be expensive if people are actually paid for the work they do.

Take daycare. In the US the government says that one adult should care for no more than 3 infants, no more than 4 toddlers and no more than 7 preschoolers.

Take someone working at the US poverty line at about $15,000 per year. That's $1250 per month. For 3 infants that's $415 per month each, for 4 toddlers that's $312 each, for 7 preschoolers that's $180 each. That's the absolute cheapest you could possibly go, where a worker is at the poverty line, and there are no costs for rent, supplies, and also zero profit.

But, as a parent, you probably don't want the absolute lowest "bidder" to take care of your kids. You probably want someone who's good with kids, kind, gentle, patient, etc. So, let's not even go all the way up to the lowest possible teacher's salary of $34,041 in Montana. Let's say the daycare worker is great with kids, but doesn't have the teaching background to get even the least well paying teaching job available in the country. Let's say you'd be willing to have someone who makes $24,000 per year for easy math. That's a wage where the caregiver is going to struggle to make ends meet in most of the country, but maybe it's worth it for them because they like working with kids. That's $2000 per month. For infants it's $667 per month each or $8000 per year, toddlers it's $500 per month each or $6000 per year. preschoolers it's $285 per month each or about $3500 per year.

Again, this is before you consider any profits. That's money straight from the parents to the caregiver's salary. That's before you consider rent, before supplies, before snacks, etc. That's no reading nook, no library, no arts and crafts, that's presumably just using someone's living room.

Now, if the daycare worker is going to be able to take sick days or vacations, you'll need to pay part of another person's salary who will cover. So instead of 1 person watching 7 preschoolers, you have 10 people watching 70 preschoolers plus 1 who rotates in to cover when the main workers are unavailable, so make that another 10%. We're up to almost $9k per year for an infant, and we still don't have cribs, baby food or a cent in profit, and we have a worker who is barely scraping by.

The point is, any job that involves a lot of human supervision is going to be very expensive. Caring for babies and old or sick people involves a lot of human supervision. Much of this work used to be done by women who didn't work outside the home. Now that women are working outside the home, even when they have young children, we're realizing how expensive it is. None of what I've talked about involves capitalism or profits, it's just purely paying someone to do child-care work while the woman does other work.

But, this is where the capitalism / socialism aspect comes in. If we want women to be able to work outside the home, and we also want kids to be something that isn't financially ruinous, society needs to help pay for those things. In a purely capitalist, no socialism, winner-take-all world, having kids is a major liability. Having an option to not have kids is great, but in the long term society is doomed if nobody is willing to have kids anymore.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 21 hours ago

Revenue - Costs = ????

(???? is corporate profit, so they maximise fees and minimise salaries)

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 day ago (7 children)

If you went 100 years back in time and told people that school teachers would be dead broke despite making the best financial decisions possible and be nearly homeless despite working long hours they would be fucking shocked.

Being a school teacher, even one for elementary school kids, in the late 19th century was not only a respectable profession, but also decently paid. I think Horrible Histories said that the average school teacher in the 1880s and 1890s in the UK made around 60 pounds sterling a year, which was a fairly decent wage at the time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 17 hours ago

The problem is there's not a good historical context for the high cost of daycare and nursing homes. Just 60 years ago it was considered normal and good parenting for kids to be left unattended for most of the time. We're taking 3 year olds wandering around town unattended. This is where some of the outdated expectations of children come from is teaching kids to survive in a world where they're expected to be on their own for such a huge amount of their childhood

And on the flip side of the spectrum people are living far longer than they ever have so end of life care has become a decades long investment. Social security was first implemented because people who didn't expect to live long enough to need to think about retirement suddenly found themselves too old to work but needing to make ends meet

The only window of historic context we have for the sheer cost of daycare and nursing care would be from about 1970 and later, since that would be after civil rights protections had been passed (meaning you couldn't just pay a minority person a pittance to do the work) at a time when women really started entering the workforce in earnest, and expectations had largely become that children were not left unmonitored

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›