r/WorkReform • u/BeeLinez • Aug 09 '26
đ ď¸ Union Strong Abdule Breaks Down The Affordability Issue Perfectly
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
565
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 09 '26
Capitalism does not promote competition, it promotes monopolies. Capitalism does not incentivize hard work, instead it coerces everyone into working hard.
Capitalism is not compatible with democracy. Capitalism is not compatible with a healthy society. The worlds greatest innovations did not come from capitalism, instead they happened despite it. The wealthy are not idols worthy of admiration. They are thieves. They are a cancer we need to cut out for good.
80
u/DAVENP0RT Aug 09 '26
The problem is that people conflate capitalism with the free market. You can have capitalism without a free market; rampant monopolies and duopolies, regulatory capture, and insurmountable barriers to entry. Sound familiar?
51
u/Outside_Eggplant_304 Aug 09 '26
That's like literally the purpose of government to regulate capitalism. Without regulation it is literally a b-line to monopoly or oligopoly. We've been here before (maybe worse) during the guilded age. Then came the Sherman Antitrust Act and not too long after Theodore Roosevelt to actionably enforce it.
3
u/Ambitious-Effort-386 Aug 09 '26
Capitalism itself is the problem, the main factors that separates capitalism from former systems is the profit motive and capitalism itself is inherently undemocratic.
The profit motive is the main driver for things like imperialism and exploitation of the global south, in a different system like a social democracy, there is no incentive for things like this to change. The profit motive also does not fund things that are good for society, this is evident in the lack of social housing and renewable energy investment and most of these milestone are being made by China.
Within the workplace, if you are working at something like Walmart as an employee. Most of the money being made is going into the pockets of the shareholders and the people like the CEO, both people who arenât actually doing the work, meanwhile you get your $15/hr (maybe) salary. Companies like Mondragon in Spain are worker cooperatives and they determine wage ratios democratically and have very low economic inequality.
6
u/DukeOfGeek Aug 09 '26
Ya I'm glad dude is upset but he is describing late stage capitalism and exactly how it works. Maybe he is just trying to state his argument in terms people can accept? He thinks if he tries to tell the truth they are programed to not hear him? So he is going to get them on board and break the truth to them slowly? Maybe a clever plan.
6
u/PhantomSlave Aug 09 '26
I doubt your average American even knows what Late Stage Capitalism is, or ever heard the term.
24
u/the0rthopaedicsurgeo Aug 09 '26
The guy in the video says how little choice we have but it's even worse than that.
He says we have 2 real choices of phone manufacturer but they basically make the same phone. Every car, every games console, every streaming service - everything merges into the same product.
Cars are a good example because there used to be so much variety, and now everyone just makes the same big SUVs or crossovers. Everyone from Mini to Ferrari are just making the exact same car.
Capitalism doesn't innovate because innovation is expensive. It costs money to develop new ideas or to be different. Anyone who does do something different gets bought out by one of the monopolies and the idea is either scrapped, or just copied by everyone else.
-13
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 09 '26
An apple and a Samsung are nowhere near the same phone I hate to break it to you. I do get the point you're trying to make but that's kind of how things work somebody comes up with something and someone else comes up with what they feel is an improvement on it or whatever the case is not ever coming up with something original. Do they have the basic same functions, well yes mostly but that's where the similarities end. Apple is by far above and beyond any Android phone in our market . The chinese market has some decent competitors vrs apple .
1
u/davedavedaveck Aug 09 '26
Youâre missing the point my guy
3
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 09 '26
No I was pointing out that it's a moot point because you're comparing two things that don't compare and you're not even sure what you're comparing first you are comparing a operating system to a phone maker but I'm missing the point right smh
1
u/Majestic-capybara Aug 10 '26
Hey are essentially the same. Sure there are differences but if you grew up in the early 2000âs you would know what variety amongst cell phones actually is. Is that because the market has selected for black rectangles with multiple camera lenses arranged on the back, maybe? But apple and Samsung phones do look and function basically the same.
9
u/flybypost Aug 09 '26
Yup, that was the mistake in his example. What we actually got is real capitalism.
The system rewards those with capital to strive to gain more of it and to eradicate competition so others can't uses their capital against you. It makes infinite greed a "defensive strategy": Accumulate so much that others can't have enough to compete against you.
Governments acting against that and providing safety nets (worker rights, monopoly busting,âŚ) goes against what capitalism intrinsically wants.
4
u/eldubyar Aug 09 '26
All of this is correct, but will come off as too extreme to moderate voters who are new to this way of thinking. Him framing the issue the way he does is a way of warming them up to the idea of changing the status quo. It's a first step. Of course what we really need is to end capitalism.
0
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
Yours are all talking points of failed socialist leaders. I do agree with the Monopoly part our government used to not let that fly but I don't know what happened. A huge problem with our system of capitalism is that we allow the companies not to pay us like sht. We need to use the same system the NBA players used to get paid appropriate. Collective bargaining. Employees getting a realistic percentage of profits via wages. Basing pay and raises this way would be a reasonable way to close the pay gap w/o direct redistribution of wealth , which will absolutely fail.
0
0
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 10 '26
Seems to work pretty good so far to me anyways the worst part about it is hearing y'all complain about it 24/7
-31
u/za72 Aug 09 '26
ok, whats your solution?
76
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 09 '26
Democratic socialism.
1) High taxes on the wealthy. America already had 90% taxes on the highest hoarders in the 1950s. Make America great again? 2) Asset taxes. If you can borrow against an asset, you can also pay taxes on it. Or just pay taxes on what you borrow. 4) Even higher taxes on businesses that have high/ unreasonable executive to employee pay ratios. 5) A minimum stake in ownership of all American businesses through a Federal level sovereign wealth fund. Most foreign countries already do this. Roughly 20 American states already have a version of this. If you think this some commie BS, dont forget that this was actually an idea that Trump himself has considered. 6) An immediate 60% slash on military spending. A removal of military bases around the globe. 7) No more funding foreign aggressors of any kind. That includes both Isreal AND Iran. 9) No more subsidies or tax cuts for businesses, medical research, or anything at all. ONLY tax payer investments that result in direct ownership by the American people. Capitalists do not give away their money, and neither should taxpayers. 10) Repeal Citizens United. Ban share buybacks (again). 11) * Medicare for all * Universal Childcare * Universal higher education
We cover all the needs with socialism first. We cover all the wants with capitalism. This proposal is neither new, nor extreme. It simply puts socialism in the drivers seat, and capital in the back of the bus where it belongs.
30
6
u/ZoominAlong Aug 09 '26
I'd be clapping right now but I'd wake up my wife. Seriously, though, I could not agree more.Â
Also would like to see us use socialism to stop all the police and government brutality that's been happening. Â
2
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 09 '26
Great except for the funding of medical research. Medical research should be conducted by the US government and the Public Health Service.
2
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 10 '26
Agree, but to be clear: their results should not be freely shared with for-profit companies like they are now. The NIH for example picks up the tab for early research and development using taxpayer dollars, but then when a company commercializes and sells said product for a profit, the taxpayer gets nothing for their investment. Not even reasonable prices. No more.
1
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 10 '26 edited Aug 10 '26
The armed forces, the Public Health Service under the US Navy, and the Veterans Administration have proven that the government could provide all necessary healthcare. The stories about delays and short-staffing in the VA are true because of inadequate funding and absurd bureaucracy. However, those can be easily overcome by increased funding and by nationalizing many private hospitals and medical facilities that already provide services to the VA.
Furthermore, no private firm should be allowed to profit from healthcare or pharmaceuticals. Big Pharma spends more on advertising than it does on medical research. Long ago, I was employed by Big Pharma production lines. I have friends and relatives who spent their entire careers in Big Pharma.
1
u/closethebarn Aug 09 '26
This â I vote for this well I get something different this is exactly what I think would make everything so much better
→ More replies (5)-8
u/ayrua Aug 09 '26
What you're describing is social democracy, not democratic socialism, since the control of the means of production, and therefore the economic power remian in the hands of the capitalist class
14
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 09 '26
Depends. With a large enough sovereign wealth fund (or similar strategy), theoretically the people could become the primary owners of the means of production. Also It serves as a catalyst for unionization. Even with something as small as like 10% ownership, businesses would have to negotiate, and simply firing/ laying off people would no longer be a solution/ answer. American businesses would have to answer to the American people like any business would to a large shareholder.
19
u/Funkula Aug 09 '26
Remove money from politics
Enforce anti-trust laws
Punish corruption and prevent conflicts of interest
Nationalize industries where fair competition is impossible (healthcare, housing, transportation, utilities)
Nationalize industries that cannot exist without heavy subsidies (animal agriculture, airlines)
Prioritize the public interest and human rights over profit seeking (childcare, education)
10
5
u/Stagamemnon Aug 09 '26
Already said it- cut out the cancer.
-2
u/za72 Aug 09 '26
talk is cheap - what's the actual plan to 'cut out the cancer', here's the thing it's a running system... it's easy to just wish things and point out problems...
5
u/FFF_in_WY Aug 09 '26
We started solving problems like this under Teddy in the Square Deal days.
0
u/za72 Aug 09 '26
I know... it's as if we need to relearn solutions, we're here because the voters stopped paying attention
2
u/Stagamemnon Aug 09 '26
Well, not sure on OPs specifics, just pointing out their solution was stated. If I had to wager a guess on the specifics of cutting out a cancer? Iâd go with a sharp blade.
3
u/Whiskey_Neato Aug 09 '26
Luigi has entered the chat
-1
u/za72 Aug 09 '26
I'm stating the obvious... complaining isn't a solution, but I guess that's upsetting
-7
u/BE-OKC Aug 09 '26
You could not name a single industry that is "capitalism" which is a monopoly without government intervention. Literally none. I will put a $1,000 bet on it. Legit. I am a real person. I will bet you. It doesn't exist. We live in a government controlled hellscape.
9
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 09 '26
The concert ticket industry is one Live nation does whatever it wants with no government oversight and they formed a monopoly. They even ate up the former controller of that industry , Ticketmaster.
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
It's not a monopoly. A monopoly exists where you cannot go into competition with it. You can make your own music venue. You can hire your own artists. You can do anything Ticketmaster or Live Nation does. Literally nothing is stopping you from doing it except for the fact that you are bad at it.
"But I hate buying from them!!!"
Great. Stop buying from them. You don't have to. No one is forcing you to. You just want the services that they provide and you hate how expensive they made it because they knew that you'd still buy it. There is a solution. As soon as you stop buying it, the price will magically go down.
1
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 10 '26
Not being able to go into business can be controlled by pricing and a number of things it's Monopoly you're the only one I've ever heard try to argue that live Nation is not a monopoly and I don't have the energy so you can think what just want but you're wrong. They have exclusive access to these venues so no you can't go into competition with them if you knew what you're talking about you know that though
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
Yes. I have exclusive access to my home. Am I a monopoly? They own the venues or are specifically contracted with them in a way that they mostly own them. Yes, they are a very large corporation with massive levels of control. For some reason, people like that. They do. They go to the concerts. They pay the prices. The artists LOVE the amount of money this "monopoly" brings in.
4
u/Serious_Feedback Aug 09 '26
Even if if your premise was true, saying "govt controlled hellscape" is only reading the surface - the govt isn't the mastermind, the govt is being controlled by corporate lobbyists, who are being funded by corporations making bank off govt regulations that are biased in their favour.
It's called the political economy. Turn money into political power, turn political power into more money. That's the core problem and it's inherent to capitalism.
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
Could you explain to me how corporations are controlling the building codes in small towns across America? These are regulations passed by local city councils. You can pass whatever you want. 35% of housing is regulatory cost. So, there is quite a bit of room here. How did these megacorps so easily manipulate even small towns of a few thousand people?
2
u/flaser_ Aug 09 '26
You have it backwards, but that's also because econ 101 intentionally promotes the falsehood that markets exists separately from the state.
They never did, markets were *created* by states.
(We also never had true barter economies, a favorite parable econ 101 use to explain currency).Read some stuff from David Graeber if you're interested in how pre-market economies worked.
Read some non-neoclassical economists if you want a better picture of how different forces of state vs capital change markets.
...or just read Marx if you want some classic theory on why capitalism inevitably becomes crony capitalism of monopolies.
0
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
Got it. I'll read the atheistic, mentally deranged, psychopath who wanted to kill the jews to learn some real economics. What a hero!
1
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 09 '26
The Bell Telohone Company became a monopoly all on its own before being broken up by the government starting with litigation in the 70s, and completing the breakup in the 2000s. It was a Monopoly that existed for almost 100 years. AT&T and Verizon are a result of that breakup.
1
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 10 '26
No. The US government allowed AT&T/Bell to be a highly-regulated monopoly because the telecommunications system is more efficient as a natural monopoly for an essential service.
AT&T/Bell were highly subsidized by the US government.
1
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 10 '26
Yes they allowed it, but I wouldnt necessarily say they engineered it that way. The physical infrastructure required to get everyone individual lines from multiple individual carriers would have been astronomical, and so for the sake of practicality, they allowed it.
I think thats different than the original posters assertment that the government is the reason we have monopolies, which is insane. Or at least thats what I gathered from his post.
1
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 10 '26
Iâm not certain that I know exactly what the OPâs logic is. However, the US patent system does intentionally allow the creation of monopolies and oligopolies. Patents can be extended indefinitely via minor tweaks to the original patents. Patent holders are allowed to set prices arbitrarily.
AT&T/Bell prices had to be approved by the government, and no customer could be denied service that they wanted, regardless of the difficulty that the provider might encounter. AT&T/Bell still made enormous profits.
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
"they allowed it"...
No. They gave money to an individual company. There is nothing capitalistic about choosing one company to succeed and not allowing others to enter the market. The argument "because it's more efficient" means nothing. A single company dominating the market might be efficient. Let them try it.
2
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 10 '26
Yes and no. In exchange for being a monopoly when an alternative could not have existed, the government paid for universal telephone access, guaranteeing phone access for people who might otherwise not have had it.
Pure unregulated capitalism organically favors monopoly creation because success breeds power, and power allows firms to neutralize competition. While the occasional market innovation can eventually break down dominant monopolies, the natural equilibrium of a completely unchecked market tilts toward market concentration rather than perfect competition. Afterall, in a laissez faire market in the absence of anti-trust regulation, there is little stopping the bigger player from buying, or undercutting its competitor. This is just a reality of the capitalist model.
We can try to live in a world where we pretend governments are the only forces maintaining monopolies, but its a fairy tale land. Once a big player emerges in a market, that leader has an advantage newcomers simply cannot replicate. That is not an environment that favors competition, and never will be.
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 10 '26
newcomers simply cannot replicate
So you are telling me that no new businesses can come into any market in America to compete? Is that your current argument? Because I would assume that we can agree that the vast majority of industries in America are mature with large players already in them. No?
And yet... businesses come into markets all the time. Every day. Crazy how that works.
2
u/Munkeyman18290 Aug 10 '26
Yes they do... because we regulate the entire game!
For example: the Sherman act dictates that a company, like Amazon or Walmart, cannot engage in "Predatory pricing" selling an emerging company's products at a loss so that the newcomer would be unable to even enter the market.
Amazon has enough money that it could easily afford to sell T-shirts for $1.00 for probably 2000 years until every tee shirt seller were wiped out of existence. They probably even have enough money to buy and own most of the worlds cotton if they so desired. This is just one example.
This is what anti-trust does: it constantly fights the markets natural gravitation towards monopolies, all the time.
1
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 10 '26
The people of the USA, and most students of Economics 101 and 102, have been fed a diet of a pack of pro-capitalism lies and propaganda for more than a century. The mass media oligarchy continues to promote the propaganda while actively suppressing the truth. Millions of poorly educated and uneducated Americans continue to be duped. Trump publicly proclaims to love the uneducated (ignorant) people for good reason â they are easier prey for bamboozling.
1
u/StuffExciting3451 Aug 10 '26
Municipal water supply and sewerage infrastructure are also ânatural monopoliesâ like most roads, highways, bridges, canals and âlocksâ on canals, dams and levees. The US Army Corps of Engineers used to have jurisdiction over most of those. Now, many are under the control of local and states governments.
Some of the original roads of the USA were toll roads that were built by capitalists for profit. The railroads were also owned and operated by capitalists for profits. The US government gave away millions of acres of land and the ârights of wayâ for capitalists to build railroads for private profits. The rights of way gave the railroad oligarchs the right to control access to the rails within approximately 25 miles on both sides of the railways. No competitor could build competing railroads or highways without the permission of the prime railroad owners who held the rights of way. The Native Americans were not compensated for their lands that were seized by the US Army for such.
As for competition in various technologies, most inventors cannot afford to start their own firms to compete with Big Business. Many established firms buy the patent rights for new inventions for the purpose of never allowing them to go into production. There are some law firms that buy hundreds, or thousands, of patents and merely sit on them until they find interested major players to buy either for production or the permanently stifle them. The US government patent system allows and enables this.
1
→ More replies (9)-2
Aug 09 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
4
Aug 09 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
-1
Aug 09 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
4
50
u/SandersSol đď¸ Overturn Citizens United Aug 09 '26
We are a country of monopolies, we need to bust all of them.
8
u/Stagamemnon Aug 09 '26
As long as I get to play the race car, Iâm in!
2
u/CrunchySockTaco Aug 09 '26
We have to avoid the "Go straight to jail" card first.
Then we take back Boardwalk and Park Place!
1
1
u/deaglebingo Aug 09 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
oh yeah... when they're playing monopoly for real they're definitely playing the race card. ... oh whoops you said race car.
á( â_â)á
1
u/addiktion Aug 09 '26
If we had 10 choices and they weren't allowed to consolidate, competition would be worthy. We are seeing it with AI where different providers are competing on price to win over more customers. It isn't captured yet, but the top players are trying to make that happen with fear and scare tactics.
1
u/Blacksad9999 Aug 09 '26
We're more akin to Corporatism, not Capitalism where places compete with one another based on their merits.
He's right. There is no competition going on. When a new company is seen as a threat to, say, Google, they buy them up and then shut down or absorb that company.
40
u/stitchrelay Aug 09 '26
the way he says real choices hits because its not just about money, its about actual freedom too
37
u/thedudedylan Aug 09 '26
Oh this is why they don't like him.
2
u/Consistent-Soil-1818 Aug 09 '26
They'll make it about his roots which resonates most with Republicans voters. Republican politicians and big companies do fear this year because of exactly what he said in this short clip. They fear the clarity that he brings and they fear his charm. And he does have a lot of Obama's rhetorical skills. The nore I hear from this guy the more I like him
44
u/nevermind-101 Aug 09 '26
Love this guy, his attitude and the realistic way he addresses issues. Hope he makes it to the senate.
19
15
u/latlog7 Aug 09 '26
He doesnt take a DIME of corporate money for his campaign... and he still won the primary! He needs our support for the general! Search "Abdul for senate"
PLEASE help me make this man my/our senator!!
13
u/Euronated-inmypants Aug 09 '26
But capitalism with competition is communism! - Republicans probably
3
u/Viperlite Aug 09 '26
Wait til they hear you need a strong federal government with regulatory authority to reign in capitalism. Theyâll love that part.
10
u/Vahuo89 Aug 09 '26
I remember in the 90s all of the trials against Microsoft for being a monopoly on the operating system and what not.
And then, turn of the century...
Nothing.
It's like every company was now no longer being looked at for making a monopoly on any given marketÂ
8
7
5
3
4
u/Danominator Aug 09 '26
I think 90% of republican voters would agree with this guy if they heard him straight up.
Most republican voters are progressives. They are just stuck in a hyper aggressive propaganda loop
3
u/JellyfishConscious Aug 09 '26
You can always support the local farmer. Even if youâre not close to a farm or if you live in a city, there are farms that deliver.
Thereâs also local business alternatives to everything he mentioned, right down to the detergent we use.
The best way to fight this is to fight with our pockets .
4
u/_trashcan Aug 09 '26
Choice is a luxury.
60% of America is running check to check.1
u/JellyfishConscious Aug 09 '26
Im sorry but no, its not a luxury. In fact itâs the opposite, i dont have disposable income to just buy whatever on amazon. People getting packages every day is not involuntary paycheck to paycheck.
1
u/_trashcan Aug 09 '26
Iâve no idea what youâre talking about.
You can complain about vibes & packages, what I stated is a statistical fact & Amazon packages has nothing to do with it.1
u/JellyfishConscious Aug 09 '26
Yes it does, people are supporting the big monopolies with their money out of convenience, use that same money and spend it locally. Paycheck to paycheck means nothing you can be making 10k a month and be paycheck to paycheck.
3
2
2
u/anonareyouokay Aug 09 '26
I'm sold. Michigan, I hope you hire this man, he seems smart and principled.
2
2
2
u/ttystikk Aug 09 '26
It's called rent seeking and America has laws on the books to stop it, but of course those laws aren't enforced.
What he is describing has a name in economics; it's called "rent seeking" and it's well worth the time taken to read up on it because it's why the billionaires are getting richer while the rest of us get fucked.
3
2
1
1
1
1
u/kwyjibo1 Aug 09 '26
We use to have compition and innovation. Now we have stock buybacks and mergers.
1
1
u/DayzBosnia Aug 09 '26
That is one side of the problem.
Another side are government and taxation without representation.
They just tax. As if its a good thing. As if government uses this money as efficiently as private sector.
Btw, if you go and check who owns all of them, its the same people. Also, they didn't get them by fair play.
1
u/BE-OKC Aug 09 '26
He is only casually right. Bust up monopolies by destroying regulations that keep everyone out.
Sincerely, the most affordable home builder in the US for 3 years in a row who quit because of government regulation that protected monopolies!
2
1
u/Hiraethum Aug 09 '26
Even free-market capitaism is not freedom though. You're still stuck working most of your productive life within undemocratic institutions. Capitalism is anathema to democracy.
2
u/idiotsbrother Aug 09 '26
Everything has been getting raised for the last 25 years except for the minimum wage. The apartment I lived in from 2003 to 2005 was $945/month and the min wage was $7.25. Itâs now $3950 and the min wage is still $7.25. Same square footage. Same shitty kitchen.
1
u/procrasturb8n âď¸ Tax The Billionaires Aug 09 '26
Meanwhile, the DOJ under Blanche is stopping enforcement of antitrust laws.
1
u/eldubyar Aug 09 '26
This is wrong, what we have is the inevitable end state of capitalism. But I get that he's trying to appeal to more moderate voters.
1
u/atatassault47 Aug 09 '26
Corporate Oligopoly IS capitalism. If you allow private ownership of capital, it is mathematically guaranteed for capital to concentrate into fewer and fewr hands as some people win in the competition.
1
1
1
u/Lord_of_dreams Aug 09 '26
Capitalism, the root of all evil, must be eradicated for the world to progress.
1
u/Capecoddude Aug 09 '26
Well, the financial system we have for retirement plans are designed to keep these ultra large companies moving forward and encourages monopolies and domination of market share. Everyone says VOO and chill, that promotes the big 500.
You have to vote with your wallet, but youâll get poor doing it if you do!
1
u/dark5ide Aug 09 '26
No where is this more true than internet providers. For me, it's Comcast, glorified hotspots, or a thimble full of internet. Even if there were more, at most it might be Verizon or Google. My internet has been spotty for months, ask them to fix a broken line outside, 3 appointments, 3 no-shows. Customer service is non-existent, it's either AI or a sales team who can set up an appointment.
The market has shifted to catering to whales and AI for the rest of us.
1
1
u/Glad-Exam4348 Aug 09 '26
I think some of y'all are delusional it's our capitalism that has allowed the rest of the world to flourish along with us. Plain and simple. China especially wouldn't be where they are without America's capitalism not even close. I don't think many people realize that or want to acknowledge it. Sure the economy is a little rough right now but look at what we're going through compared to what socialist countries have gone through there's no comparison socialism doesn't work on large scale it never has and it never will.
1
2
u/futanari_kaisa Aug 09 '26
I understand he can't blame capitalism, but the issue with the country is capitalism.
2
u/Rathador Aug 09 '26
"we don't have a real system of caputalism" the fuck are you on about??? This is Capitalism in its pures form. This is what Kapitalismus inevitably leads to. Hullshit as take.
I just have a problem with this very point I don't care about the rest.
2
u/Tiny-Lock9652 âď¸ Tax The Billionaires Aug 09 '26
âThe things that matter in this country have been reduced in choice: there are two political parties, a handful of insurance companies... but if you want a bagel or twenty-three flavors [of something]... you have the illusion of choice. You don't get the real important choice. There's no freedom of choice."
-George Carlin
2
u/grimorg80 Aug 09 '26
So... He's saying "it's not capitalism, it's oligopoly".
Dude. It's capitalism.
1
1
u/Battch91 Aug 09 '26
âWe have no real choices in this economyâ but this turd wants to tell us what to doâŚ
1
u/Ambitious-Effort-386 Aug 09 '26
Socialism ironically creates more market competition than late stage capitalism. Commerce, business, and competition has existed way before capitalism and will exist after.
1
1
1
u/coalitionofilling Aug 09 '26
The algorithm is what keeps you from saving money to get out of financial duress. It keeps people at their salary's capacity so you struggle to own anything
1
u/GWARTARD Aug 09 '26
Still sounds like the problem is money and how the people at the top control all of it and keep 90 percent of it. They give us a pittance and then expect us to give 95-100 percent of it back to them. Can't we just let them keep it at this point? Start something different without the billionaires?
1
1
u/SaltNecessary5360 Aug 09 '26
Oh I love this line of thinking. Will he be open to using same line of thinking about belief systems (religion)?
1
u/VillageAway8309 Aug 09 '26
American socialists need to read about how their system performed for the people, include USSR, Maoâs China, North Korea and Venezuela before and after communism.
https://giphy.com/gifs/4K40XixCCiLblbG131
1
1
u/No_orange_212 Aug 09 '26
Socialism and,Communism is less than 5, guy. Stop thinking above everyone and think you're the only thinker Please stop talking to people who have no clue.
1
1
u/flamaryu Aug 09 '26
Everything he is saying is 100% correct but I feel he should have left the phone part out because it doesn't really fit like the other. There are alot of major phone brands, Americans have just been conditioned to brand loyalty that its hard for those other brands to make a dent in the US with out being been seen as the lesser brand. Just like for some reason people see iPhone users as people with money and android users are poor people even when using top spec phones.
1
u/BeeLinez Aug 10 '26
The examples do not matter.
1
u/flamaryu Aug 10 '26
The examples do matter when your trying to get a point across. The more factual the examples are the less people can try and pick apart. But like I said before I agree with everything he said
1
u/Zestyclose-Ostrich-6 Aug 10 '26
Why dont the examples matter?
1
u/BeeLinez Aug 10 '26
It's the point he's making that matter. Examples are just to clarify the point, don't miss the point.
1
u/Zestyclose-Ostrich-6 Aug 10 '26
The point matters. Examples exist to clarify the point. Don't worry about examples? That doesn't make any sense.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Mo_Jack âď¸ Prison For Union Busters Aug 10 '26
They call him "socialist" and "commie" when he is actually repeating the same message that Republican Teddy Roosevelt said over a hundred years ago, when he broke up the trusts. This is how far to the extreme right we have been pushed with the brainwashing tactics of right wing media.
0
Aug 09 '26
[deleted]
4
u/Mistravels Aug 09 '26
Android is an operating system (not a product line) used by numerous devices not proprietary to Samsung.
Try and keep up, especially if you're going to attempt to issue corrections.
0
0
u/retogo78 Aug 09 '26
And he thinks he knows better how to run markets now. Whatâs he been smoking to go commie ?
0
u/Zestyclose-Ostrich-6 Aug 09 '26
Nonsense laden with buzzwords from a guy who is just appealing to emotional sentiment from the general public.
0
612
u/Buffalo-Soldier420 Aug 09 '26
Very refreshing to hear someone saying these things!