-
"And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for you meddling... wait... Oh, ok, I am getting away with it? Oh. That was easier than I thought..."
-
What I find ultimately hilarious (in a “can’t cry, have to laugh way”) is this. HOW THE FUCK WILL ANYONE BUY THE SHIT YOU’RE PEDDLING WHEN WE’RE ALL BROKE? Like - isn’t it obvious? All this fucking corporate greed can only lead to bankruptcy of your business you short-sighted cunts.
-
They're taught that the long run is simply a succession of short runs and that therefore short term and long term economic thinking and planning are the same,which is,of course, glaringly wrong.
Anything to fill the insatiable hole in them where a soul would be in a real human.
They constantly fall under fallacies of composition or aggregation. To think in the aggregate and long term is largely thrown under the rug.
It's "right" for a single company to slash wages and gut employment to seek higher profit margins... But when every company does it, it ultimately destroys the capacity of the bottom to uphold the top and it collapses.
-
Yeah what you're describing, in computerized maths, is called a "local minimum".
When you're seeking out a global minimum of a function, such as in this example:
You might be tempted to think "well, i start somewhere, then i take one small step after another, always going downhill, until i am at the lowest point". But what happens in practice, is that you get stuck in so called "local minimums". For a visualization:
That is the fundamental problem with being short-sighted (i.e., taking one small step after another, always going downhill). If you really want to find the global minimum, you have to think globally. You have to apply analysis to the whole function, not just local parts of it, to find the best spot.
-
-
Yeah, but if they're in a sufficiently abstracted industry, the domino chain of failing petit bourgeoise will sustain them until retirement. Especially when you've already got enough to live comfortably, might as well squeeze as much juice out as possible, quarter by quarter. The aftermath is someone else's problem.
-
You're stumbling upon a fundamental contradiction of capitalism that Marx wrote about. The rate of profits tends to decline over time and what you're describing is the end result of that. Capitalist always attempt to fight against this contradiction to delay the inevitable crash but they can only delay. Them paying less while working people more is the fundamental way the markets attempt to delay the crash. But, again, it is only ever a delay. We are heading into a crash not seen since the great depression. It's why they are pushing automation and AI so heavily. They are preparing to capitalize on the economic catastrophe that they are creating. Crashes are not "bad" for capital owners. They are a feature that allows for further wealth concentration.
No one can predict the crash though. Not even the billionaires that control the markets. And it can bubble for decades before it pops.
-
I think you fundamentally misunderstand how companies are thinking.
They are thinking "well, if i pay my workers 10% less, surely they have 10% less money to spend, and that means they buy fewer products, and that hurts revenue, but they probably buy some other company's products anyway, so that's other company's loss, not mine."
companies aren't so much an organized hivemind as people seem to be thinking. A lot of them are literally competing against one another, and they don't care whether other businesses struggle because they pay their employees less.
I mean, they often dom't even care if their own employees struggle as long as they continue working for the company. Why would they care about other companies, or even the greater economy in total? They don't. Who should care, though, is the government. The US has an incredibly weak government that does not protect its citizens and give them appropriate subsidies. That's why people are having economic hardships.
-
That's the idea Marxism is based on, that capitalism is a self destructive system.
-
Well, but, will line go up? Will plausible stories be told and further depredations be clumsily obscured, and will the richbro be out of that unfortunate doomed "position" before it gets really bad?
It's pretend world until it isn't. Seems likely we may get close to or exceed "it isn't pretend anymore".
-
-
Do they really think anyone buys these headlines? We’ve been reporting on business and economics for our entire existence, but this one is a real stumper. 🤦🏻
-
A LOT of people actually buy those, and this is scary.
-
A lot of people have observed in the past that there's always a new field of work, whenever an old one gets automated/replaced by some cheaper method of doing it.
That growth has driven demand for human labor ever since, and higher demand for labor means higher wages (since the labor market is a free market - supply and demand). Now that growth seems to be slowing down, and that makes the demand for human labor slow down, and that depresses wages. That is what people are observing now.
People are surprised because they wrongly assumed that growth would continue to be an exponential curve forever. It is not, however, it is probably closer to being a sigmoid curve.
-
-
-
And this despite giving billionaires everything they asked for including the tax breaks that created them in the first place.
Guillotines for a better America
-
Since you guys don’t seem so sure how to get started on this:
-
-
"You ungrateful peasants got stimulus checks during the pandemic that you're still living high-on-the-hog from. Now you're complaining about not getting raises??"
-
They sure love keeping people in the dark.
