• poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    8 months ago

    I get what you are trying to say, but you sound like someone in an abusive relationship that still believes they can fix the abuser somehow.

    • Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I think these are reasonable suggestions to make society more equitable. Do you disagree with any of them? Or just don’t like them because they modify the existing system instead of tearing it all down?

      • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        They are reasonable suggestions if you refuse to think outside the box of capitalism.

        And no, thinking outside of capitalism doesn’t require to tear it all down. That is exactly what the capitalist want us to think with their TINA.

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          What would you change it for? We’ve tried many systems globally and historically. Capitalism seems to be the best at reducing poverty.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s a completely ahistorical take. Capitalism is best at creating poverty when you look at it globally. Yes it is good at concentrating riches in a few places, and from a rich western perspective it may look like it “reduced” poverty, but even that is starting to become questionable these days.

            • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              No, its really not. Capitalism increases productivity and wealth. How that wealth is distributed varies by country. Russia for instance has oligopolies that mean most goes to individuals. Europe has social programs that mean its more evenly spread. Its up to the countries and law makers to plan that well. Its not the fault of the concept if its misused. Its a tool, like any other.

              • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Sorry but I hate to pop your privileged bubble, but that is evidently false and pure propaganda by capitalists. And capitalism isn’t even a tool, it is a political ideology with a clear goal (concentrate wealth in a few hands).

    • franglais@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      40 years of néolibéralisme cannot be undone overnight, it will take small steps to reverse the damage done, and to normalise societal expectations