this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
1049 points (81.1% liked)
Memes
45724 readers
804 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The existence of the middle class with many wealthy means you have to have a lot of people in poverty. If not liking that makes me left wing then so be it
What a horrible take. The world is not a zero sum game. The US in the 50s-80s is a good example of a thriving middle class and way lower poverty than now.
Edit: This is wrong. Poverty levels have been fairly stable since 1970. Middle class has shrunk but this does not appear to have had an impact on poverty rates.
The severity of destitution at the bottom of the social order skyrocketed from the late 70s onward thanks to austerity policies.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/20/how-the-american-middle-class-has-changed-in-the-past-five-decades/ You'll need to provide some sources for that. This data suggests that poverty levels haven't varied much in the last 50 years. Middle class has shrunk but this did not appear to impact poverty rates.
You can start with unemployment rates
Unemployment rates are not poverty rates. And those have been pretty stable since 1950. Less than 4% in 2018 and 2019 for example.
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/unemployment-rate-by-year-3305506
1950-1970ish had a higher poverty rate than any time in the 50 years since.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States
Poverty dropped from 1950-1970 (due to economic growth but the middle class also expanded during this time period) and has been fairly stable since.
You know what you're saying aligns with what they're saying right?
Nuanced difference. My point was that the significant drop in poverty from 1950-1970 existed with the increase and proliferation of the middle class. Their post implies that 20 year period (1950-1970) had high poverty rate the whole time, which is absolutely false.
It also coincided with the US propagating violent dictatorships and committing unparalleled war crimes abroad. The Korean War, Vietnam War, Indonesian Mass Killings, rise of the House of Saud, Shah in Iran, and incredible meddling and history of coups/death squads in Latin America.
That middle class wasn't made by just engaging in good business, unless you consider the violence of imperialism good business... In which case absolutely go fuck yourself... But only if you stand by all that foreign aggression and murder and downstream oppression.
Looks at instance…
Go fuck yourself hexbear Russian apologist. US fuckery internationally did nothing to build the middle class at home any more than Putin’s war crimes are helping the Russian economy.
Yeah I’m sure it didn’t, they were just meddling in other countries’ politics just for fun
They were meddling for corporate profit. And if you think corporate profit helps the middle class then I’ve got a bag full of pigshit called “trickle down economics” to sell you.
How, in your mind, was the middle class in the first world created?
How did the great depression end?
Did Keynesianism not rest upon massive military spending as laid out in NSC-68?
Lol. You're conflating the MIC and multi-national corporate profits with the growth of the middle class domestically? You'll need some sauce for your crazy ass theory. Let me know how the United Fruit Company contributed to the growth of the middle class. Did the UFC share their profits with the middle class?
TIL trickle down economics is when you do massive military spending and use it to open up new markets in the third world to private interests and then meddle in those countries' politics constantly to keep them underdeveloped neocolonies
There’s plenty of literature about the growth of the middle class in America and elsewhere and none of it talks about the United Fruit company.
what literature please
Stupid tankies asking for sources. That's basically thought police - aren't you bozos supposed to hate the police? Hahahaha gottem.
oh shit I'm about to go Tankie Mode (asking for sources)
Oh, nice whattaboutism. Didn't say shit about Russia dumbass. What the fuck does that have to do with a conversation about the US engaging in direct imperialism during the 20th century? You sick fucks are obsessed with Russia, it's kind of cute. Like you've got a crush or something.
My guy I'm just talking about well recorded history here. Go Google operation Condor, or if you're really feeling adventurous, literally any history book about Latin America. US violence and meddling is a core part of what gave the country a deeply unfair advantage. There was only dramatic reduction in poverty and a "growing middle class" because we were actively preventing that from developing abroad. Pretending foreign policy and domestic issues are separate realms is completely juvenile. Look at OPEC for the easiest example in the world.
Are you actually arguing a right wing talking point? Do you think the profits of a giant corporation help the middle class? That’s called trickle down economics and it’s total bullshit.
What no theory does to a mf.
No, this isn't trickle down economics. It's called superprofit/super exploitation, a marxist concept. The West™ in general, but a few powers specifically (subject of our discussion here, the USA in particular) have enforced extremely brutal oppression in the global South. This has kept the global South from developing competitive or even self-sufficient industry and reliant on imports. This gives American firms a massively unfair advantage, one which is used to placate the American working class so they don't develop solidarity with the global South. Throw in some bog standard racism and you've got a stable empire of misery. It's classic divide and conquer tactics, same used to pit managers/white collar workers and more blue collar or service workers against each other. Let some people feel superior to others, and they'll be so busy looking down they won't mind the boot on their back standing above them.
There's a rich body of theory here (which you are plainly ignorant of) but I would recommend reading about the phenomenon of unequal exchange by Jason Hickel
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802200005X
It's a good starting place for understanding how wealth is extracted from the south for the north.
Unfortunately for all of us, Capitalism has a long-term rate of profit problem. Even with super exploitation profit falls in the long run. To maintain their power and the rate of profit the capitalists begin ripping out and further oppressing the once (relatively) privileged working class of the north too. That's why social safety nets are being torn to shreds and constantly under attack, and gains in quality of life/life expectancy have either stalled or regressed in so called "rich" countries.
We say "workers of the world unite" for a reason. It's a global struggle.
America got all those bombs from a genie lamp, definitely no large scale industry that helped factory workers secure a middle class existence. The treats they consumed had nothing to do with the destitution their government caused in the third world either. The US did not overthrow a government at the behest of a banana company.
Please show us all where the profits of a giant corporation (United Fruit Company) from deposing President Arbenz in 1954 helped the middle class in America.
It only helped the profits of a giant corporation. Wait, are you using a right wing talking point that giant corporate profits help the middle class? That’s called trickle down economics and it’s been debunked for years.
The US in the 50s-80s was a thriving example of an apartheid state, suppresing minorities and incarcerating them and exploiting them for slave labor.
It still is, but it also was back then