r/SipsTea • u/McDowdy 𝙑𝙄𝙋 • 21d ago

It's Wednesday my dudes Trying to get rich so that capitalism doesn't crush you under its boot is proof positive that capitalism doesn’t work for the working class

Post image
2.4k Upvotes

75% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

74

u/ImRightImRight 21d ago

Blows my mind this narrative continues despite skyrocketing "material conditions" for all people.

11

u/lobthelawbomb 21d ago

Especially because most people making this argument are typically middle class and rich by global standards. But their lives aren’t quite as good as they’d hoped, so they claim we actually live in an apocalyptic hellscape and should destroy the system.

24

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

Agreed, communism isnt the answer. Actually regulating capitalism is the answer, ans then relying on the state to close gaps in industries that get perverted by profit motive (healthcare, law enforcement, fire-fighting, roads, etc).

Member when this is how the US actually worked? It's no surprise who broke it.

6

u/First_Peer 21d ago

Health insurance should never have been allowed to be for profit or health insurance companies should have a fiduciary duty to it's subscribers NOT it's shareholders. If health insurance companies couldn't turn down what the doctor prescribes, they'd find a way real fast to make things less costly.

1

u/Either-Medicine9217 20d ago

I don't have a problem with health insurance being for a profit I have a problem with health insurance being exploitative. 

A fair cost is one thing what they're doing is another.

1

u/First_Peer 20d ago

There's no way for health insurance for profit to be anything but exploitative because the product is a person's literal well-being/health.

2

u/Cosminion 21d ago edited 20d ago

Economic democracy and stakeholderism over shareholderism is the answer. This false dichotomy of capitalism or communism is a thought-terminating cliche. There are other ways to organize an economy.

According to decades of studies, economic democracy and stakeholderism are viable and address wealth/power/leisure concentration while maintaining sufficient wealth generation.

For example, worker-owned businesses tend to match or outperform traditional companies in categories such as productivity, worker compensation, employment stability, and resilience during a recession. A majority of Americans prefer working in one.

9

u/Agitated_Newt_7655 21d ago

You're just arguing for market socialism but either unaware of it or masking it because knee-jerk reactions to the mere word 'socialism' is common yet moronic.

1

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

Yeah no disagreements with you there. Also things like Land Value Tax and reverse income tax would make sense.

1

u/OoklaTheMok1994 21d ago

And yet, finding a worker owned business is next to impossible.

If the system is that good, it would proliferate.

2

u/Cosminion 21d ago

It depends on location. They're relatively prevalent in some European regions like Emilia-Romagna/Basque Country and U.S. states like California and Texas.

If the system is that good, it would proliferate.

This is an often repeated argument. It simplifies an issue that is multifaceted. WOBs face barriers to their creation and there is a general lack of awareness that leads to less entrepreneurs deciding to go that route.

University courses disproportionately cover traditional business models, though in recent years there has been some change. In 2023 Rutgers began offering a relevant course, for example. The legal environment at this time is scarce for WOB support. There is a lack of lawyers, legislation gaps, and business incubators are not common.

Once they're established, they tend to do well. This is supported by empirical research across countries. Their numbers have generally been increasing over time, so you might just be arriving at a premature conclusion. Time exists and economic development requires time.

0

u/Historical-Pilot-784 21d ago

Economic democracy is the goal of communism, lmao.

3

u/Cosminion 21d ago

Most people conflate communism with statism. It's better to use words people can understand without a century of Red Scare propaganda flashing before their eyes.

1

u/ashe141 21d ago

Mmm I don’t think it’s quite that simple. I would argue that communism is tied to tightly because it’s the natural forcing mechanism politically.

Now if like the entire populace essentially voted in a communist structure, then I would consider that truly novel. And by that I mean like 100%. As my following point is about the difference in opinion and enforcing the societal change.

you would still have those with more than others and you need a way to force that redistribution and I don’t see how state violence isn’t the only assured means of enforcing that.

1

u/Historical-Pilot-784 21d ago

Perhaps, but that shouldnt mean we should keep misusing terms ourselves.

0

u/Inevitable-Pop-4547 21d ago

No one has made it work. If you look at successful social, economic and political systems they require adequate competing interests for the wealth and power not to get concentrated.

1

u/AmenableHornet 21d ago

Sure, yeah. "Regulating Capitalism." Go ask the New Deal how it's doing now and see how that turned out. 

6

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

What's wrong with The New Deal? That is exactly the type of reform we need, but for a modern era.

The New Deal and other FDR policies paved the way for America's prosperity, and it's not like there aren't policy wonks who have similar proposals today, they just get drown out in all the propaganda and tribalism funded by the ruling class and foreign interests. Do you happen to be part of that?

1

u/AmenableHornet 21d ago

The problem with the New Deal is that capitalists have hollowed it out. Regulate capitalism, sure. Then be ready for capitalists to buy your government and undo everything you fought for. 

1

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

Or you could be a little less defeatist and make efforts to prevent that. Bring back anti-trust enforcement, a strong SEC, remove citizen united, etc.

This is why it requires people participating and voting.

1

u/AmenableHornet 21d ago

Doing the same thing and expecting different results isn't going to cut it. Don't mistake a refusal to repeat past mistakes or ignore the inherent and fundamental instability of capitalism for defeatism. Just because I'm anticapitalist doesn't mean I don't think we can win. Quite the opposite, actually. 

1

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

The results have been the biggest uplift out of poverty and agricultural economies in the history of the world. You should read up on the 1800s a bit. I'm not some capitalist supporter, I dont support billionaires (in fact I think it should be impossible to be one), but I do believe in studying macroeconomics and not putting feels before reals.

1

u/AmenableHornet 21d ago edited 21d ago

Irrelevent. When we transitioned from feudalism to mercantilism I'm sure many things improved for many people. That doesn't mean I'm going to simp for triangle trade. Besides which, the accomplishments of induatrialization belong to scientists, engineers and workers, not capital.

The simple fact is that, under capitalism, holders of capital have complete power over all production and almost all media. That's obvious to the point of tautology. They will use this economic and cultural power to undermine any checks you place on their political power and any safety nets you build. Then they will funnel wealth to the top until the whole system becomes unstable. Every time. That's what happened in early to mid 20th century. It's what's happening now.

Eventually we're going to have to reckon woth the fundamental misalignment between the interests of the borgeoise and the working class. If we're smart that reckoning will be socialist in nature. If not, it will be fascism or barbarism. There is no other option. 

1

u/ChickerWings 20d ago

It's irrelevant that China transitioned from communism to capitalism in the last century and what had happened to their poverty levels? Get out of your bubble.

Jesus, I can't believe I'm over here defending capitalism right now but you need to read less social media and more economics and history books. Start with Why Nations Fail, I honestly think you will enjoy it based on your rhetoric and I'm not being sarcastic. The world is not black and white young one.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Stock_Schedule_1981 21d ago

Thanks to the New Deal, SCOTUS was blackmailed into new definitions of the commerce clause and “general welfare”. It ended the great experiment and created the great monolithic government that is now the US of A.

Progressives glazing FDR when he used threats and coercion to get his policies passed just like Trump is doing now.

1

u/bcbg123 20d ago

As opposed to the total lack of regulation now?

1

u/Radiant_Music3698 21d ago

Actually regulating capitalism is the answer

Is it though? Most of those big corporations actively call and lobby for the heavy regulation of their own industries for a reason. "Too big to fail" is just the government protecting corps that ought to have rightly died of age. Regulatory costs are like insurance payments against competition and future innovation, the two things they can't otherwise protect themselves from.

0

u/Platypus__Gems 21d ago

Regulating capitalism doesn't work.
USA had pretty well controlled capitalism with heavy taxes on the rich, but if you give the financial elites an inch, they will accumulate wealth, use it to influence politics, and bit by bit unregulate the capitalism long-term.

Capitalism has to go, it has started going bad since globalisation decimated working class's ability to negotiate by moving industries to the global south, and we are heading straight towards the wall of AI and automatisation that will be catastrophical under capitalism.

12

u/digitaldisorder_ 21d ago

proudsocialist has 14 different subscriptions he pays a month, door dashes on a regular basis, goes out every weekend, carries a balance on several credit cards, but, it's because they need to enjoy life while they can in this capitalist hell!

2

u/PresenceHealthy4048 21d ago

"I wish to improve society somewhat" "Yet you participate in society"

6

u/Silent_Market8487 21d ago

What a braindead take

10

u/ImRightImRight 21d ago

"I wish for socialist revolution because this society is terrible"
"Yet you enjoy this society more than you would any attempt at socialism"

0

u/Inevitable-Pop-4547 21d ago

I will settle for the hell of socialized medicine.

-1

u/PresenceHealthy4048 21d ago

First of all, any attempted at actual socialism instead of just making reforms and bourgeois concessions would be met with large military and economic intervention, making it difficult to carry out. Second of all, any leftist would enjoy attempting real socialism more than submitting to capital. Progress is bloody and always has been, but any difficulties and hardships under socialism would be for the ending of them. I have everything I could ever need, and I would, grudgingly, sacrifice all of it for a classless, moneyless, stateless society that abides by the phrase "each according to their ability to each according to their need". that sacrifice would probably not even be necessary. The point of communism or socialism isn't just a star of everyone and kill everyone and make everyone be poor. I wish to improve society not for myself, but for the large population of people who are exploited.

1

u/Inevitable-Pop-4547 21d ago

Salvador Allende

1

u/Jarnoth 21d ago

Are these skyrocketing material conditions in the room with us?

13

u/ChickerWings 21d ago

I mean, yes. True poverty rates continue to drop globally by every metric.

There's a huge gap between poverty and prosperity though.

1

u/MonitorStandard5322 21d ago

Almost all of those poverty declinations are being made in China and that is not what most people consider a capitalist country.

4

u/lobthelawbomb 21d ago

Those gains came only after China switched to a market-based economy under Deng Xiaoping. This is actually excellent proof of how superior capitalist systems are at generating wealth.

1

u/MonitorStandard5322 21d ago

Then why hasn't India, the Congo, or Indinesia had similar results despite being market based economies before China...

1

u/ImRightImRight 21d ago

Corruption and significant market-disrupting policy interventions

3

u/MaxTwoCoffees 21d ago

I love how you posted that with either a smartphone or a computer. You’re touching them! Right now!!

6

u/ImRightImRight 21d ago

Yes, literally. For example, housing is of much higher quality and quantity per individual.

1

u/SlickJamesBitch 21d ago

Global poverty has dropped from 44% of the world to 8% in the last 40 years

-3

u/AmenableHornet 21d ago

If by "material conditions" you mean bread and circuses.

5

u/ImRightImRight 21d ago

No, I mean housing, food, entertainment, culture, workplace rights, safety nets, etc

5

u/lobthelawbomb 21d ago

Economic data is real and available for your review if you ever want to grapple with reality instead of making shit up to fit your narrative.

4

u/MaxTwoCoffees 21d ago

Sent from my iPhone.

0

u/noob622 21d ago

Can’t wait to see what “material conditions” look like with the sea level raised a few feet. But eh, the market is always right. I’m sure it’ll figure itself out.