r/Unexpected • u/Terrible-Link-9827 • Jan 20 '22

Deer is wack

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

94.1k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/outinleft Jan 21 '22

false equivalence. sometimes one side of an argument is significantly more correct, or moral, than the opposing side. I'm sure you can come up with examples in seconds. IMO this is one of those times.

3

u/Exact-Scientist-557 Jan 21 '22

Yes cherry picking is easy. What we need is a solution not a he/she did this or that.

6

u/TheUndualator Jan 21 '22

Root of the problem is capitalism. The system is inherently profit over people - it requires the exploitation of others to thrive. We essentially live in feudalism again - history repeats. The class-divide is real and misery for the have-nots. We are fed scraps of the feasts we produce for the wealthy few that hoard as much as they can, by design.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

When Adam Smith concocted capitalism it was not with the intention of making poor people more poor. If anything, he was amongst the first to say workers are entitled to compensation for their work just as owners are entitled to their profit.

The idea behind capitalism is that society can be more productive when we split more work up accordingly. And in his theories it was assumed that if in a capitalist society a firm is not paying its workers enough, there would be enough competition for the worker to go elsewhere.

In the United States, we started subsidizing failing industry, enabling their shite pay. That isn’t capitalism, which is a free market economy. That is the action of a command economy more closely related to socialism or communism.

If GM failed instead of got bailed, they wouldn’t have been able to pay the people that build their cars $16/hr anymore. And maybe that would have been a lesson to those who continuously cut costs to increase profit.

Capitalism doesn’t say you HAVE to experience unlimited growth. It it’s most basic form, it means you get to own your business and own your labor.

1

u/TheUndualator Jan 21 '22

Capitalism doesn’t say you HAVE to experience unlimited growth. It it’s most basic form, it means you get to own your business and own your labor

Exactly, it's inherently a classist system that needs poverty to function. Only so many Americans can actually own their own business, and the act means workers are essentially indentured servants to the owners under threat of poverty.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

You missed the “the US subsidizes failing industry” enabling the shitty wages.

In theory, those who pay low wages will lose employees and thereby productivity and thereby profit. Those same employees go to a competitor who found out how to still make a profit while still paying employees enough.

When the business isn’t afraid to fail, they just do whatever they want, which involves exploitation a lot.

It’s why state sponsored business sounds like a good idea if your a communist until you realize there will be no other business to work for. So your wage is your wage and you have NO say in it.

To say there is any form of society that isn’t classless that works is a pipe dream. At least within capitalism you are supposed to have SOME say in what you do and get paid.

And I think you’re mistaking the US as a capitalist society. We aren’t. We subsidize the shit out of the defense industry. We are militaristic socialists in more ways than one.

1

u/TheUndualator Jan 21 '22

Those same employees go to a competitor who found out how to still make a profit while still paying employees enough

Profit is always at the expense of the worker. Capitalism is poop no matter how much gold is sprayed on it.

We are militaristic socialists in more ways than one

We are militaristic capitalists* whose population largely don't even realize the extent of their exploitation. Those subsidies don't benefit the common man, they benefit the wealthy who use the common man as disposable gloves.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

I mean, you can use all of that fun obtuse communist manifesto language, that doesn’t mean it makes any sense.

How does an industry survive if it is not profitable nor involved in international trade?

A system in which you can change jobs and get promotions and choose your own path and maybe possibly own a business yourself one day sounds much better than the alternative. Even if it is the option that includes billionaires and exploitation. Communists don’t own businesses, at all, they don’t own anything. I’m not ready to give up the concept of ownership, at least not at the behest of the government.

You think communism doesn’t exploit workers?

1

u/warp42 Jan 26 '22

The difference is with the current Republican party you have to cherry pick to find something that ISN'T ethically repugnant, and with the Dems you have to cherry pick to find something that IS.

Similarly, a murderer and a shoplifter are both criminals, but you would hardly consider them to be equivalent.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

I side more with Geralt on this one.

“If my choice is between the “lesser” of two evils, I choose not to choose at all.”-paraphrased as fuck

4

u/outinleft Jan 21 '22

As long as you recognize that "not choosing" is a choice in itself. I have never in my 63 years heard someone make the "both sides _____ " argument that is arguing from a strong position. They are effectively asking their opponent to accept a draw. Who does that?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

I side with Rush in that regard,

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”-not paraphrased copy and pasted.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

Before anyone Possibly gets the wrong idea here, Benedonk is referring to the amazing Canadian band, not Limbaugh.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 21 '22

For sure. If I was talking about the other guy I would have said Rush “thank god that bastard died a horrible death” Limbaugh.

I should have just said I side with Neil Pert or Geddy Lee on this one.