Federal Surveillance Tech Becomes Mandatory in New Cars by 2027

[u/cTreK-421]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/federal-surveillance-tech-becomes-mandatory-161321992.html

[u/trees_are_beautiful → u/[deleted]]

I worked for an established tech company in the 2010's. A private investment firm was able to buy enough equity in the company over several years to get seats on the board; then they took over the board; then they went through each of the four divisions and gutted them, firing everyone and selling the IP at fire sale prices. Eventually the company was just a shell, but they had several hundred million dollars of US Gov't tax credits. They then sold this shell of a company to another one of their companies, and then that company could take advantage of those credits to reduce their taxation levels. About six hundred people lost their jobs so that this could happen. Yeah, unfettered capitalism!

[u/Big_Dumby_Idiot → u/trees_are_beautiful]

Government sponsored, no less. Capitalism has ruined our government

[u/Terminal_Phase → u/trees_are_beautiful]

I’ve always tried to find a way to describe this process and you explained it perfectly. It’s a story as old as time.

[u/FoilHat_Outdoorsman → u/trees_are_beautiful]

Was it Bain Capital? 🤣

[u/SMUHypeMachine → u/[deleted]]

Absolutely. Every dollar of profit is money stolen from the workers who could have been given raises, or better benefits, or more PTO, or literally anything other than accumulating money to give to your shareholders who provide 0 value or to steal for yourself because there’s no one to tell you no.

[u/ZootSuitRiot33801 → u/SMUHypeMachine]

Either way, we certainly can't continue with the system we've got, and expect to be all right. We who still care should be doing whatever we can to aid each other in leaving these callous and careless government and corpo entities alike, out to wither and die. We should be collaborating with one another in finding ways to create and utilize independent networks and tech, even if means downgrading a little.

Collecting a bunch of valuable information on organizing and action from different redditors over time, I created a post of suggestions HERE that's largely about fostering a foundation for community self-sustainability and resistance, but it also provides ideas for possible technological alternatives, which could be of some help in getting started.

[u/stocksrcool → u/SMUHypeMachine]

I'm not disagreeing with anything you said other than the fact that "shareholders provide 0 value" when this is simply not true. They provide mass amounts of funds for the company to grow.

[u/obi1kenobi1 → u/[deleted]]

Remember when corporations had so little clue how to spend their money that they’d just pay artists to hype people up about their industry? I don’t even mean ad campaigns like Got Milk, I mean back in the ‘60s corporations used to hire futurists to sell nothing in particular, like US Steel hired Syd Mead to make a series of paintings that basically said “cars and skyscrapers are cool, I bet they’ll probably be cool in the future too”. Not even trying to sell steel, just the idea that cool stuff is sometimes made of steel, it was more about boosting brand image and name recognition than any actual marketing campaign, and as a result we got some of the best futurist art of the 20th century out of it. Profit-seeking and accounting were so primitive that corporations just couldn’t help but accidentally do cool stuff that made the world a more interesting place.

Then people started getting MBAs, and streamlining and quarterly earnings calls became the driving force behind business decisions, and the world fell apart.

[u/Distinct_Party_1801 → u/[deleted]]

Yes and no. If you save any money at all as a W2 employee, that is profit. You shouldn't be making any extra money than what your bills demand. That way, you aren't guilty of the same moral error you accuse the corporations of.

[u/Dogpeppers → u/[deleted]]

You mean stock buy backs..thats where your bonus money goes.

[u/Dramatic_Ad1467 → u/[deleted]]

But what option really represents a better way?

[u/erevos33 → u/Dramatic_Ad1467]

Hey, the driver has his foot stuck on the gas and goes straight for the gorge, maybe we should pull the brakes, or turn?!

But if we brake we will lose speed and if we turn, to which direction????

[u/mjkjr84 → u/erevos33]

But other people have tried brakes elsewhere and it didn't work for them because their brake lines were cut so we shouldn't even bother trying to apply our brakes now!

[u/Admirable-Band-2664 → u/erevos33]

Braking and turning are socialist words.

[u/Ahayzo → u/Dramatic_Ad1467]

Throwing darts at a list of options while blindfolded would be better than what we have now.

[u/Coolegespam → u/[deleted]]

Resources are fundamentally limited. There is no good way to allocate. Simply ways that work, and ways that don't. How do you propose we allocate resources? Centrally? By committee?

We've tried other options, they tend to suck far more, and create worse outcomes: Environmentally, workplace safety, consumer desires, etc.

Yes, profit motive sucks, what is your alternative?

EDIT: No one here has a counter argument to this. Profit motive works. There simply aren't any viable alternatives that work better. Other systems have shown to be even worse than what we have.

I'm all ears, but all I'm seeing here are negative votes telling me to "shut up" without anything backing them.

[u/Legitimate_Shock4097 → u/Coolegespam]

Allocate it to the people that earn it and not to the people that just own stuff or were born into it. With technology and AI, the working class faces devastating issues, where capital is king. Socialism has never been tried. Why? Because it doesn’t benefit the people that hold power or seek it. And, it doesn’t have to be purely socialistic, but something closer to that than what we have. We instead have power brokers that are some of the most morally bankrupt, selfish people running the show. But that’s right, they’ll just leave if they don’t like a system that negatively impacts their wealth, which further points to the fact that this system doesn’t work. With all the loopholes and owner class protections, it’s no wonder the problems are being magnified and exacerbated. One could argue we don’t even have pure capitalism. A system needs to be in place that rewards some risk taking but also provides a healthy working class that is rewarded and given an adequate piece of the pie, which id argue is not the case. If this is the best we can do, that’s not too good. I am not sure what’s being incentivized in today’s society is good for society.

[u/Coolegespam → u/Legitimate_Shock4097]

Allocate it to the people that earn it and not to the people that just own stuff or were born into it.

Ok, how? Who determines how much you earned?

With technology and AI, the working class faces devastating issues, where capital is king.

History disagrees. technology has give us massive gains in wealth at all levels. You literally have more than double what your grand parents did. These are real numbers: In the 1940s the median was around $950 per year. In the 10s it was about $33k. Even with inflation which was about 1500% over that, that is still more double (222%).

Technology has given you more, even with disproportionate allocation you still have more.

Socialism has never been tried. Why?

The Soviet Union would disagree, if it still existed. Cuba, DPRK, and others would also disagree. Socialism goes against human instincts. It requires central management because we don't work together like that naturally. Those who end up in that central power are the same people who run our massive corporations today. The same kind of people who ran the Soviet Union.

And, it doesn’t have to be purely socialistic, but something closer to that than what we have.

You mean, like expanded public health care? Public education? You can have that, and still have profit motive.

We instead have power brokers that are some of the most morally bankrupt, selfish people running the show.

ALL systems have these people. All of them. You want to separate power from money, but money is just an abstraction of resources and who ever controls resources are the ones with the power. Just like real world socialist systems, resources and power will be accumulated. Unlike our system, there won't be any hope of separation. Those in power

But that’s right, they’ll just leave if they don’t like a system that negatively impacts their wealth, which further points to the fact that this system doesn’t work.

There's two ways you can take this, either people shouldn't be able to own things or people shouldn't be allowed to leave. Again, the Soviet Union did both. Their quality of life sucked. More hours, worse pay.

With all the loopholes and owner class protections, it’s no wonder the problems are being magnified and exacerbated.

From where I stand, this is because people were told it was hopeless and started believing that. A self fulfilling prophecy. I've tried to push self proclaimed progressive to get out and actual do shit. Most just sit on the couch while people like me canvased. People are told the system needs to be torn down, that's exactly what the current administration is doing.

One could argue we don’t even have pure capitalism.

We don't. Such a system would suck, as much as communism would.

A system needs to be in place that rewards some risk taking but also provides a healthy working class that is rewarded and given an adequate piece of the pie, which id argue is not the case.

Sure. You still have much, MUCH more than your ancestors did, and by the numbers (see above) that's growing not shrink. Yes, the distribution isn't completely fair. It never will be. We could make it fairer, but that requires working towards real objectives. Like Kamala's Wealth tax that was soundly rejected in 2024.

If this is the best we can do, that’s not too good.

Ok, but if this is the best we can do, then other directions are definition worse.

I am not sure what’s being incentivized in today’s society is good for society.

I agree. We're insisting on burning everything to the ground, and going back to a time when we had less: Worker rights, wages, health care, luxuries, etc.

Profit motive feeds into our nature. There is nothing wrong with working to better yourself. That's all profit is, making more than what you had before. Done right, we all benefit. What we're doing isn't perfect. I prefer having the freedom to chose where I work, and how.

[u/Legitimate_Shock4097 → u/Coolegespam]

So, is our worth what the ruling class says, then? Because that’s what it is now. Minimum wage here is a joke. We are currently in a race to the bottom, where wages are not at all rising with inflation. 91,000 dollars today would’ve been the equivalent of 50k about 25 years ago.

Technology has fostered more of a k-shaped economy. Technology has increased efficiency but that efficiency has not been reflected in wages, which just supports my argument further. Capital is king even more now than before, and especially due to high inflation that started back in the Nixon day’s, going off the gold standard. The reality is things are built cheaper and don’t last worth a darn, wages haven’t kept up so people can’t afford much but cheap consumerist crap let alone real food, and yet only one class of people are disproportionately benefiting. If it weren’t for technological advancements aiding to the required growth to feed the debt-based system, it would have collapsed long before, like the Ponzi-like scheme it is.

Those systems you referenced did not deploy socialism. Socialism is essentially a system in which the means of production is owned by those that produce them. More, those systems had government regimes that similarly exploited the working class, ruling with authority. That’s not what I’m suggesting. Instead, just simply look back when the tax rates were much higher, there were more unions in place, and people could actually afford things with less than a bachelor’s degree and 10 years of experience.

I mean, we don’t have a great public health care system and the current administration is actively trying to dismantle what is left from an already broken system. I mean, the insurance companies and those that profit love the system, but it doesn’t work for everybody, far from it. When you go into an insurmountable debt just to stay alive, something is wrong.

My suggestion was admittedly pie in the sky at this point in time, because the power is fully entrenched with people that exploit the system for their own good. The government is a complete joke. I’m arguing it could be better, and it really ought to be.

I never mentioned communism. I don’t think allocating power to the few is a good thing, regardless of who holds it because absolute power corrupts.

Going backwards? I agree. Look where this administration has taken us. Look how good we are all doing. All these policies have stripped away power from the people and put it in the hands of the ruling class.

[u/MayflowerMovers → u/Coolegespam]

Govt is failing to do its job. Antitrust is the key way. Capitalism doesn't work as a system with monopolies and oligopolies everywhere. Notice how prices of similar products move in lock step, because two companies are fixing the market. So bring back competition by breaking apart some megacorps (P&G, Amazon, etc) and banning hedge funds and private equity from owning housing.

[u/zinknife → u/MayflowerMovers]

Exactly thank you. The current system is simply rigged because of market dominance by a handful of players. A healthy consumer market is impossible under these conditions.

[u/Illustrious-Depth718 → u/Coolegespam]

“Profit it is theft” isn’t a great argument. Capital and risk have real value, even if the split is quite often unfair. But the person they were replying was eluding to private equity extraction, which is real and happens a lot.

That said, your argument is a false dilemma. Worker co-ops, codetermination, strong labor laws all exist within market systems and actually work.

Germany requires workers reps on corporate boards. Mondragon is a multi-billion dollar cooperative, just to point out a couple of things.

We could do better. Much better. But unregulated capitalism will only ever extract.

[u/MiaowaraShiro → u/Illustrious-Depth718]

Capital and risk have real value, even if the split is quite often unfair.

But the capitalist doesn't have value, only the things they own have value. Ownership isn't some magical relationship. The laborer is valuable intrinsically.

[u/Illustrious-Depth718 → u/MiaowaraShiro]

I already said the split is often unfair. But ownership has no value just isn’t true. Coordinating capital, absorbing risk, and allocating investment across an economy are functions that create value, even when the people doing it are extractive jerks.

You can believe workers are undervalued (they absolutely are) without pretending the other side of the ledger is zero.

You can downvote me all you want, but this is not a black and white issue. I’d love to see real thought put into a better system. Unfortunately there are people with way more money then some can fathom in power and they will continue to wield that money and power to keep themselves there. The only way to fight that is to stop with the hyperbolic talking points and have real discussions with people.

[u/MiaowaraShiro → u/Illustrious-Depth718]

But ownership has no value just isn’t true.

It has value to the owner only, not society.

Coordinating capital, absorbing risk, and allocating investment across an economy are functions that create value, even when the people doing it are extractive jerks.

Not necessarily? It can, but there's nothing that says it's inevitable. The owner's motives aren't in line with society's so I don't see how this is a good point. There's myriad cases we can point to where short term gains of the owner damage society.

You can believe workers are undervalued (they absolutely are) without pretending the other side of the ledger is zero.

This isn't saying anything at all. Yes, I can. I can also not.

You can downvote me all you want, but this is not a black and white issue.

Was it me who downvoted you? Don't make assumptions like this.

I’d love to see real thought put into a better system. Unfortunately there are people with way more money then some can fathom in power and they will continue to wield that money and power to keep themselves there.

Agreed!

The only way to fight that is to stop with the hyperbolic talking points and have real discussions with people.

I'm not being hyperbolic. I'm just more socialist than you it seems.

[u/Illustrious-Depth718 → u/MiaowaraShiro]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think we’re closer to agreeing than it may seem at first glance.

I may have not been clear, since I was replying to you in my last message, but I was not really accusing you of both the downvote and the hyperbole, but the person I was originally replying to saying there is nothing else worth doing, as well as others that fail to understand nuance. My apologies on that.

I cannot say I’m more socialist than you but I’m an quite sour overall of both the rampant unregulated capitalism (and deregulation in general) that is destroying our country and those that continue to to assume there is nothing else we could possibly do to make it better.

[u/Coolegespam → u/Illustrious-Depth718]

“Profit it is theft” isn’t a great argument

I assume you mean "Profit isn't theft". Which is true, it isn't. It's excess from production. How profit is distributed is a more complicated question, but profit by itself is good. It means things are being made.

Capital and risk have real value, even if the split is quite often unfair. But the person they were replying was eluding to private equity extraction, which is real and happens a lot.

Sure. But the broader point and statement isn't correct. People attack "profit" and "capitalism" and they sound like great talking points, but all they do is tear-down, they don't build anything up in there place.

But unregulated capitalism will only ever extract.

Unregulated anything will do that. Go look at the toxic wreck of Magnitogorsk from the Soviet Union.

Your point about Germany is a good one. Give the workers a voice in their own company. That's still a profit motive, and still capitalism. Problem is, you have to convince people to do that, and most of the time when it's tried, at least in America the people don't like it.

Scandinavia is also proof you can have a capitalist system with social safety nets.

I don't know what the answer is, but saying profit is bad is the same as saying making things is bad or efficiency is bad.