politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
As long as private shareholders are having record quarterly earnings, almost all economists, hired by wealthy organizations largely to push the narrative that benefits those organizations, will of course declare victory.
Economists also generally defend our "free market" rigged crony capitalism as the only way too. They're literally the priesthood of this grift.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rent-homelessness-harvard-report-center-for-housing-studies/
The homelessness epidemic is getting worse. Our people are dying in the streets in record numbers, please, go down to your nearest homeless tent city in every major population center in the US and tell them they're being dramatic.
This economy no longer cares about customers or employees. The Reagan/Kemp grift eviscerated the customers first, employees second, investors last model. Now it's private shareholders first and only demanding companies sabotage their long term future to goose their next quarter with layoffs, anticompetitive behaviors, and tax cheats. Why care about the products/services you literally exist to provide when you're part of an oligopoly, buying and killing any potential competitors trying to improve your economic sector's product/service? At that point, you can make shadows of what you used to make and your captive consumer base has nowhere else to go. Despite its primary selling point, market capitalism's end goal has been thoroughly proven: to END competition.
Capitalism is eating its own tail having conquered the monopoly board and having no more meaningful new markets left to metastasize in and exploit.
There needs to be laws passed that change the structure of “fiduciaries”
Companies should exist for their employees first, customers second, and then shareholders, in that order. Pay the people creating the product/service as much as possible, put out the best possible product/service at the most competitive rate possible, and if there’s anything left over the shareholders get their cut.
Ironically, if corporations actually did this, they’d likely have plenty of success. It’s just mind boggling that the lazy fuckers pushing numbers around on a computer screen are the ones considered fiduciaries
There is such a business structure. It's called a worker co-operative. They're pretty common in some areas (e.g. grocery) where they are able to compete with and even win against traditionally-owned grocery store chains. For example, one of the largest grocery co-operatives in the US, WinCo foods, competes with and actually beats the likes of Walmart and Kroger (called Fred Meyer here) in the price department. They do have some outside investment (IIRC), but the stores are mostly owned by the employees that work there.
I think we ought to encourage these types of businesses through extremely favourable tax treatment. I'm talking a 0% tax rate on dividends paid by co-operatives to workers. At the same time, it's understandable that most people start businesses for personal profit, which drives the creation of most businesses, so I think a hybrid system wherein the owner starts with a maximum of 50% equity in the company is fair, and the rest is owned by the workers. Imposing an expiration on the owner's shares (say, 50 years?) would mean that after the founders die, the entire company will be owned by the workers, while not extinguishing the motivation for people to establish businesses in the first place.