Plebcouncilman

joined 2 months ago
[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not too poor to buy things, only poor enough that you’ll consider it twice before buying another plastic piece of shit you don’t need off of Amazon. It’s absolutely messed up that the ONLY reason we can consume as we do is because we moved all the pollution and exploitation to where we can’t see it, so that we can consume with a clean conscience. I don’t know how you can defend this shit, because I can’t. If your country’s economy depends on the exploitation of the people of another’s that just colonialism disguised as free market trade.

China was an example because it’s the most well known one. Second I never said that the implementation was good itself, I just think the concept of universal tariffs is very much solid especially in terms of ethics (which Trump somewhat frames it that way, of course his intentions are both bad and not well thought out so it’s only superficial ) with the caveat that it results in short term destruction of wealth which depending on the point of view is not so bad. I at least don’t think the levels of speculation in our markets is good and anything that pops that bubble is a good thing.

I think it’s the one thing everyone can agree on.

But you have to be aware that it depends greatly on your point of view of how economies should work. Do the dynamics of economics exist simply to push up the GDP or do they exist to create abundance and prosperity that everyone can take part off? The current economic system as it works simply exists to push up the GDP increasingly through financial alchemy, speculative assets and debt. Neoliberals will hold that this is good, but I’m not convinced because my eyes and ears tell me different. This is not a sustainable economic system, even if it looks good on the surface. Or more specifically it is not a sustainable economic system for the middle class. It is schrodingers economy in a way, good and bad existing in superposition.

This is why China keeps gaining ground, they plan for the long term and have high tolerance for short term pain. Their corporations don’t sweat a bad year, look at Huawei for example. An American company I think would rather sell of its assets and give every exec a gajillion dollars before going though the trouble of rebuilding themselves from being banned from one of their largest markets. Our corps only plan on a quarter by quarter basis, our government on 4 year terms, and entire organizations change plans on a bad day at the stock market. It’s frankly ridiculous how short sighted we’ve become, and our economy really is emblematic of that short sightedness.

Right, that’s sort of what I meant but I always try to be a little more provocative because otherwise there’s no discussion. Tariffs are a good idea if you use them right, and plan on how they will be used strategically. I would still do it in a similar way that Trump did it, meaning it would apply to all countries but especially for those that keep wages low through exploitation and pollution, in such a way that the average cost of production in those countries for all major exports is the same as domestic production.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Golf isn’t that expensive. Not more expensive than any other hobby to be fair. He makes it expensive because he only plays in his own courses and overcharges the hell out of The White House. What they spend on renting golf carts alone is a fortune. He’s a crook, but he’s so open about it that it really doesn’t affect him. Any other president would be torn to pieces about this, because they likely have shame and would try to hide actions like this. Trump normalizes depravity.

That’s antisemitism!

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I just wrote elsewhere, these tariffs are left coded like you wouldn’t imagine. If Bernie had done this, the left (not the left as in democrats but the left as in communists) would be carving his face on Mount Rushmore.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

This man has got to be the most punchable face in the entire world. Milhouse looking fuck.

You just know he pays black guys to fuck his wife in front of him.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Democracy has never, not once in the history of democracy, meant that every one gets to participate. That’s the idea of it, but it’s not the reality of it. The concept of citizens is there to explicitly denominate those who can and can’t participate in it.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I subsist entirely on the negative energy generated by people on the internet.

Also I just ate a sausage and egg sandwich and I eat about a pound of chicken every day because who the fuck needs ethics when you got muscles.

[–] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Beef is murder.

Edit: this was a joke that elicited the reaction I expect.

 

I’ve been permabanned from Reddit for harassment. I was fucking with some guys that liked anime in a non anime subreddit, I simply called them Chinese cartoons and they got mad, bigly. Anyways I trolled too much using that account so apparently they figured it was better to cut me off the website entirely. I would like to use Reddit still, but every account gets banned as soon as I make it. It tells me I can appeal but I can’t actually because that was more than a year ago.

If I delete that account and all associated accounts, and make new account not associated with them (new email), will it get banned too? I know reddit bans are not just IP bans but also use device ID and all that shit. Will I have to buy a new computer exclusively for Reddit? Or does my device becomes unflagged the moment I delete the banned account?

I need help with this shit. I like lemmy but there’s just not enough people here.

 

Since Meta announced they would stop moderating posts much of the mainstream discussion surrounding social media has been centered on whether a platform has a responsibility or not for the content being posted on their service. Which I think is a fair discussion though I favor the side of less moderation in almost every instance.

But as I think about it the problem is not moderation at all: we had very little moderation in the early days of the internet and social media and yet people didn’t believe the nonsense they saw online, unlike nowadays were even official news platforms have reported on outright bullshit being made up on social media. To me the problem is the godamn algorithm that pushes people into bubbles that reinforce their correct or incorrect views; and I think anyone with two brain cells and an iota of understanding of how engagement algorithms works can see this. So why is the discussion about moderation and not about banning algorithms?

view more: next ›