909
UBI Cash Payments Reduced Homelessness, Increased Employment in Denver
(www.businessinsider.com)
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
909 points (97.0% liked)
World News
32288 readers
960 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
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
I recently heard it phrased like this:
Capitalism is built on hierarchy, which means someone fundamentally NEEDS to be at the bottom. There is no way around it, someone needs to suffer.
But if we raised the bottom up enough, it wouldn't really matter if they were on the bottom. Many people would be happy if they had a stable place to live, food, healthcare, and freedom, and many don't really need or even want "more" all the time. The problem is the vast differences in wealth and ownership.
That’s a fair point. But in a world that values money above all else, that’s not just a divide in wealth and ownership but a divide in power.
The problem is you can't exploit comfortable people, so the uber rich would only be super rich, and that's not good enough for them...
I don't think that this is really true.
If someone has "more" then yes of course someone needs to have "less", merely by definition.
The question is really whether those with less are living below the poverty line or living comfortably. I guess it's a question of semantics whether "capitalism" requires people to be living below the poverty line but I don't think it does. It's just shitty regulations which allow wealth to become as concentrated as it has.
Socialism in principle sounds great, but most times it's been implemented it's suffered from the same problem as capitalism - the people with power are greedy and use their power to manipulate and oppress the populace.
This is true, the "dictatorship of the proletariat" is self-contradictory and impossible IMHO. Because as soon as a member of the proletariat is a dictator, they are now no longer a member of the proletariat.
Now you don't need a dictator, you can enact socialist policies democratically. This is very slow and kind of difficult, because the capitalists will lobby and fight so hard against it, and you need to maintain public support.
That isnt what dictatorship of the proletariat means. It means that the former bourgeoisie are temporarily politically disenfranchised from proletarian democracy
I wish all .de instances a very get off my federation
Amazing.
German politics and energy consumption aside, I think they have the best base of knowledge for what your proposed economic model has in store for them and their allies. They had that model forced upon them, and fought for change and economic freedom. There was a freaking wall dividing their country over that.
Don't shitpost on good discussion please.
East germans, especially women and lgbt people, lost a lot of practical rights during reunification
Daily reminder that Germany never underwent denazification
He's referring to post-WW2 East Germany being controlled by the USSR you absolute gonk.
I gotta start using that!
I was being charitable. That's even worse. Flat out support of nazi germany.
Lol where??
Nazis dogwhistle opposition to the USSR during WW2 Germany, the one time where the USSR was absolutely on the right side of history.
Literally every time someone goes hard on the anticommunism, they're just ass-sore that they kicked their asses back in WW2.
Well I can take your logic and easily condemn all criticism of America as being Nazi dog whistles.
You could if it wasn't for the fact that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1gcipAvplY
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=R1gcipAvplY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Are we just going to ignore the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, wherein Stalin let Hitler invade Poland as long as he got half of Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia?
You know what the US never did? Call Hilter and agree to a joint imperialist effort in carving up sovereign nations.
Edit:
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Pariahs_Partners_Predators/ZliWXGydrzAC?hl=en&gbpv=0
I know you didn't watch the video.
The video made by a social media influencer, streamer, and entertainer, not a historian? That video?
No he's a historian, all of their videos are extremely well researched and he's gone on record to clarify multiple times that he is not a socialist. There was even a video where they complained that their work could only get reach if they framed it as entertainment, making it very clear the only reason he does these videos is because they get a lot of reach and make him a lot of money.
You just don't want to watch the video because it showcases how fundamentally evil your underlying views are and you're not ready to accept that maybe you're a lot more pro-nazi than the western media and education has programmed you into thinking.
Where did he get his history degree?
You think I give a fuck? Liberals will always just dismiss anything with "source??" if they disagree with it, but accept nazi lies wholesale.
For example whenever Ukraine, Russia, China, or North Korea come up, people just believe everything they hear unquestioningly even when they're saying shit like "NK believes that unicorns are real"
Fuck Nazi's, and fuck people who cooperate with Nazi's, like the USSR.
Who was responsible for the fall of the nazis. Who killed hilter. Say it with me. Stalin. Sta-lin.
Also is someone who thinks that Stalin killed Hilter really qualified to know if a youtube entertainer is a historian.
Whatever, keep passively siding with nazis, I don't give a fuck if you want to die on that hill.
Like I said, fuck the Nazis, and fuck the people who cooperate with Nazis ahem Stalin.
You gotta self reflect my brother in Christ, because you're the most pro-fascist person in this entire thread.
Just for curiosity, how much have you donated to antifascist causes? I'm not talking charity, I mean actual direct action.
Could you explain how this is relevant to you being the most pro-fascism person in this thread?
I just think it would be funny if you talked all this talk about being antifascist and yet haven't ever put your money where your mouth is.
Like are you genuinely antifascist, or are you just a racist liberal who hasn't come to grips with the fact that they're not the good guy, because I've dealt with a lot of guilty white people caked up on cognitive dissonance who will go around projecting accusations but the instant it's time to show up for real action, they're nowhere to be found. You don't have to answer because normal people don't get this invested on picking a side when both sides are overwhelmingly evil.
50 bucks. Food not bombs. Prove me wrong. Don't do it for me, do it for your community.
Man you really try so hard to distract from the fact that Stalin was a fascist who was friendly with Hilter, up until the moment Hitler betrayed him.
Siding with the Nazis for 2 years is 2 years too long.
Hold on... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
You can address the fascist roots of Nazi Germany originating from America while also recognizing the fascist roots of modern day Russia originating from the USSR. This is the problem with building your world view around "which side" you're on, it makes you completely blind to the underlying evil from your faction. Like bless their hearts because they're absolutely in the right place but I cringe every time a communist feels they need to side with something everyone can agree was bad because it was their side doing it, just like I cringe every time a liberal opens their mouth because they can't go three sentences without supporting some fascist regime.
You're the one supporting a fascist regime, this entire discussion started because you claimed that being anti USSR is someone being pro Nazi.
The USSR was demonstrably more friendly to Hitler than the US, because it was fascist, ruled by a dictator, and had imperialist dreams of cutting up Europe with Hitler.
The US sure is imperialist and fascist and bad, the USSR was the imperialist and fascist parts of the US, dialed up to 12.
I cringe every time a tankie opens their mouth because every sentence is a nostalgia-fetishizing ultra-nationalism for Soviet fascist dictatorship.
I give up. You refuse to do even the bare minimum to address the fascism that you carry. You're a fraud who deep down believes in the nazis and likes what they did. You're just waiting for an opportunity to betray the left, mark my words it's only a matter of time before it happens and when it does, remember that I told you so and that there won't be any going back when people see you for who you are.
No man, it's really easy to denounce fascism. Fuck fascism in Nazu Germany, in the United States, in Russia, and in the USSR.
You're the only one who feels the need to defend a fascist institution. Ironic to talk about addressing "that fascism that you carry" when you have that going on my dude.
Only because fascists inevitably eat each other. Nazi fascists and red fascists worked together until one turned on the other.
Say what you want about the US, but they could go right to the Nazi beating without having to cooperate with them first.
And Stalin literally did not kill Hitler. Hitler killed Hitler, in true fascist self-imploding fashion.
Only after France and England refused a defensive pact against the Nazis, and had already given the Nazis a bunch of territory and industry needed.
Also, would you have preferred that the nazis got all of Poland, Estonia, and Lithuania in the initial invasion? Because that would have led to a lot more deaths in those occupied territories, and might have resulted in the nazis beating the soviet union in 1942, which would have basically meant that the Nazis would have won ww2.
Conservatism is built on hierarchy. Capitalism just says markets work and investment is gambling. You can do that and still keep everyone fed / clothed / sheltered, specifically because markets work, and can make food / clothes / shelter more plentiful. Some people having more doesn't require private space station versus duplex cardboard box.
Conservatives only say market failure demands misery and successful gambling means unchecked power because that's what they always say. That's their only conclusion, applied to literally everything. That's how conservatives think things work. The entire tribal worldview boils down to "well somebody's gotta be king." Just a fractal pyramid of militaries over empire, rulers over courts, owners over workers, and patriarchs over families. If you're at the bottom you're lucky to be alive, and how dare you question your betters.
The unspoken assumption is that change is impossible. This is genuinely how they think everything works. Like the universe itself dictates a steep gradient, and the only way things could be different is by shuffling around who goes where. So if someone is suffering, they must have fucked up to deserve it, and if you want to help them, you're putting someone else in their place.