this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2023
1588 points (97.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
5833 readers
2555 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, I'm a leftist, I just think landlords have their place, billionaires are job creators, and if we disrupt the status quo too much the global south might stop giving us resources for nothing- A Great Mind
Im sorry but you're fired from being leftist.
I also believe unions are the devil so I suppose I can't fight this, have a nice day.
True. What is the nation if not the workers of that nation. So what's good for the nation is good for the workers. How do we measure what's good for the nation? By looking at what's good for the top 1%
Yeah that's just logical, is owning things not a job?
c/gatekeeping
At that point they don't work with us. Doesn't necessarily mean we have to be rivals.
I think exactly that way and am as left as you can be in the Finnish mainstream party system, with the exception of small sub-1% parties like the Communist Party.
Landlords & Billionaires = living, breathing taxation waiting to happen
Even if we were to tax a billionaire by 80%, they would probably still be a billionaire. However, they would also indeed be creating jobs, wealth and sustainable growth. School systems, medicine, hospitals, city infrastructure, job placement programmes, you name it, they fund it.
Corporate tax is also grossly under-utilized.
Capitalism isn't bad if you tax it hard and use the money for the welfare of citizens.
Not really. They don't create jobs, at best they are the organizers. And since they are usually heirs, there might be much better people to manage such a large organization. We don't need them at all.
The best course of action is to remove the possibility for people concentrating such vast amounts of power in the first place. Billionaires can always buy legislation back, which is why that tight regulation or taxation will never really happen under capitalism.
I mean just look at how inactive democrats are at office compared to current conservatives at passing the things people actually want. We have been trying this forever already, but they are most probably in the pockets of bigger fish at this point.
None of that stops you from, say, joining an union though.
I'm answering from the perspective of living in a country with functional democracy, so it's hard to see the power the wealthy have over it.
Lobbying and representative campaign funding are more transparent here. No party has majority seats alone, coalition governments are a necessity. Legislation is consensus driven.
Finland is very much operating in a capitalism driven economy while still supplying its citizens socialism driven security.
Capitalism is like fire. It's a good tool, but a bad master. With appropriate legislative checks in place, it won't get out of control.
In the States it already has, but that doesn't mean that capitalism is bad. Just that nobody was tending the fire.
Don't be mistaken, the billionaires still rule in there too, they just somehow allow you a better life. Usually this comes because they have neocolonies abroad to exploit intead of you. This is usually the case in europe. The only real masters of capitalism are the burgeois and how they are choosing to use it.
Finland seems to be the one exception in the world where I dont think you've been that historically aggressive with fucking others over (at least compared to the rest of europe), but theres probably some neocolonialism over africa to mantain it, I'm not that familiar with Finland to say much for sure.
In any case we can't base our assumptions around an exception when the overwhelming majority of capitalist "democracies" never really worked for the common people.
edit: China seems to be implementing a bit of both, as an example.
On a global scale you're right.
If we're discussing the scope of a nation, strong enough tax laws and safeguards for unions prevent ludicrous growth within its own contained system. This can allow people to experience a reasonably fair society.
Finland definitely is still benefiting off of cheap labour from poorer nations though. How to solve that especially if our country wants to retain its status, I would not know where to start. World domination?
The opposite, we end capitalism. We really can't expect to carry the scorpion across the lake without repeatedly being stung. There are many political branches that tells us how it could be, and even some that have been applied in the real world with varying degrees of success but generally, we need to start working amongst ourselves like we used to do in the past and remove those actually in power, not only their squabbling representatives every election. It's about time. Safeguards only delay the problem, those are being systematically dismantled all around the world because capital is running out of space to expand.
What's your worry about status? I see a nation with good infrastructure that isn't heavily depending on exploitative dynamics on other countries as a nation without much to lose, honestly. Things tend to not go as well as planned on places where it was already bad in the first place.
If one country begins sharing resources and wealth, it will get stomped by the others that don't.
Capitalism can't be stopped without a violent revolt of colossal proportions. We're talking billions of people dead, displaced or left vengeful. It's a recipe for disaster.
Peaceful options won't work at global scale. Even if people begin to vote with their hearts en masse, it won't change nations where voting is moot.
I'm against violence, so the best I can see happening in my lifetime is me understanding and living with the system we inhabit and trying to alter what little I can in my small country for future generations.
Nobody is advocating for sharing with bad actors. Billions of people dead? No, revolution is violent but history shows it is usually very far away from this number. Capitalism killed more in the third world.
I'm not thrilled for getting state violence on my ass because I want a better life either, but I don't think capitalism will ever be able to deal with climate change, which will be the biggest killer in humanity. In fact it is only getting worse and we are running out of time fast. We have been trying gradual change for decades with barely any actual results...
If we don't support the landchads, the wagies and rentoids might take control and believe they have rights