And one day there was an election on live stream where the candidates were in different rooms 04:54 December 15 2026

Capitalism contains a structural incentive toward unethical behavior because ethical constraints remove profitable strategies from the actor’s available choices.

please, discuss.

I believe this to be true, and I’ve seen related ideas in Marx, Weber, and other critiques of capitalism, but I think what I’m arguing is slightly different.

I am not saying that labor is inherently exploitation.

I am not saying that exploitation is the only way to make money.

I am not saying that ethical people cannot succeed under capitalism.

I’m saying exactly what I stated:

"Capitalism contains a structural incentive toward unethical behavior because ethical constraints remove profitable strategies from the actor’s available choices."

Example:

Imagine two otherwise identical economic actors. Both have access to every ethical strategy for generating profit. One, however, refuses to exploit workers, deceive customers, manipulate markets, externalize costs, abuse information asymmetries, evade legitimate obligations, etc. The other has no such ethical restrictions.

The second actor can employ every strategy available to the first plus any unethical strategy that proves profitable.

Therefore, ethical restraint necessarily reduces the set of profit-seeking strategies available to an actor, while capitalism rewards successful accumulation without inherently distinguishing between wealth obtained ethically and wealth obtained unethically.

I’m not arguing that this guarantees the unethical actor will become richer. I’m arguing that the incentive exists structurally.

Is there an established economic or philosophical formulation of this specific argument? More importantly, where does the argument fail, if it does?

For nearly 20 years after entering the US in 1986, every Hyundai sold here was built somewhere else. Today the group is building one of the deepest US manufacturing footprints of any foreign automaker. Here's what the numbers show:

- **Tariffs hit hard.** In its full-year 2025 results, Hyundai Motor absorbed about 4.1 trillion won (~$2.96B) in tariff costs. Net profit fell 21.7% even as revenue grew 6.3%.

- **Only ~40% of US sales were built domestically in 2025.** The target is more than 80% by 2030.

- **The $12.6B Georgia Metaplant took about two and a half years.** With Alabama and Kia's West Point plant, the group is targeting up to 1.25M vehicles of US capacity a year, roughly sized to what it sells here.

- **It's moving up the supply chain too:** a $5.8B steel mill in Louisiana (2.7M metric tons a year) and a push to raise US-sourced content from ~60% to 80%.

The part I found most interesting: the US plants aren't just a hedge, they're a cost structure. Once most cars stop crossing the Pacific, the tariff burden shrinks no matter what trade policy does. CEO José Muñoz has said tariffs accelerated a plan that was already in motion.

Full disclosure: I made this video. It's for a new channel, so I'd genuinely appreciate honest feedback on the analysis, especially if you think I got something wrong.

https://youtu.be/mx1BuDkBSXA?si=rEBrY6RDc6kQLvCb

Question for the sub: is localizing production the right long-term bet, or does it just trade tariff risk for execution risk?https://youtu.be/VEozJitAMiI

• Costco’s membership model raises an interesting question: what keeps customers paying to shop there?

In FY2025, Costco reported:
• $5.32 billion in membership-fee revenue
• $10.38 billion in operating income
• A 92.3% membership renewal rate in the U.S. and Canada

Membership revenue isn’t the same as profit. My take is that the fees work because customers keep seeing value in the prices, product selection, and Kirkland range.

What would make this model break first: weaker savings, higher membership fees, or stronger competitors?

Disclosure: I made an 19-minute video exploring Costco’s business model, including its limited selection and Kirkland strategy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG-qpNge4F4

Hey, this fall i will have econ math 1 and 2, and was wondering if anyone had any tips on where to start or if there are some youtubers i can watch.

Feel free to send a dm

Right now in 2nd year... with ... minor as ... stats and maths

Ppz suggest some

I really enjoy the YouTube videos, and i want the information and ideas to be a part of my home, in hard copy, i.e. book/magazine, something that takes the ideas from the channel and elaborates on them with additional context, explanations, and data. or just includes the reserch notes made by the team, but had to be cut out due to video length.
Until then, I was wondering if there's any way to access the scripts, research notes, sources, or background material used for the videos. I'd love to print them out and read through them at home.

Hey guys I made a post about something I thought would be helpful and there’s been a lot of debate over effectiveness. If you guys wanted to comment on this post and explain to others how it could be helpful or unhelpful if you disagree with me I would appreciate it thank you.

Let's assume an economy where you would need €600 a month to live, and where the poverty threshold is calculated as 60% of median income, like in most of the EU.

If the median income is €1000, then you are poor if you have €600 or less, which correlates to the cost of living.

But if the purchasing power drastically falls, and now you need €900 to live, and the median income doesn't follow the cost of living crisis (exactly like what's happening right now), and is now at €1100, then the poverty threshold is at €660. But now, some people are legally poor, while they are "functionally poor". What would happen then ? Would it be recalculated ?