It's rather incidental if the people at the top in global business realize why they are no longer seeing such an easy steady increase, but I am speculating that they by large will start to eventually. You could be right, but even if they do realize that they messed up I can't see their being overly alarmed by it. Unless they have any moral and ethical concerns that keep them awake at night (which I highly doubt it as evidenced by what I have witnessed thus far), they are largely insulated from a "simple thing" such as a moderate or even a major economic collapse. For it to drastically change their existence it would have to me extreme societal unrest where money is so massively devalued that how much they have essentially won't matter. That's happened to the elitist class multiple times throughout history in many different nations, but as likely scenarios go it seems the least likely by a huge margin.

To an extent that we are seeing a more obvious desperation in companies trying to carve out new revenue streams with more drastic measures (gaming is only one stark example) I feel that on some level they have to at least sense something is coming. They probably just aren't too terribly concerned about it. The executives are certainly going to be less concerned than their secretaries and aids, I can almost guarantee that. Or the thousands upon thousands of people losing their jobs.

Beamer wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 13:17:
The other bubble is why US Ferrari has doubled since 2015, US Lamborghini has increased five fold since 2015, Rolex sales have gone up 1.5x since 2015.

Interesting factoids which I was not aware of. I would agree the C level clowns making the decisions either are not aware of the impact of their decisions, or simply do not care. If I had to guess, I'd say it is more of the latter and less of the former. But that really isn't new, it is just there are more companies now and better communication of what is happening.

ForgedReality wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 13:17:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 12:34:
But it's still capitalism. Communism is still worse. As a broad statement, "capitalism > communism" really isn't so wiiiiiild. It's weird for some of you to pile on that statement of mine. I didn't believe it was a statement that required an entire excerpt on the spectrum.

Are we sure we know the difference between socialism and communism? How about "democratic socialism"? Why do you keep returning to communism as the alternative?

Because you confronted my "capitalism > communism" statement. The Nordic countries -- Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden -- are often described as having "Nordic models" or "social democratic" systems. These models combine elements of capitalism and socialism, but they are fundamentally capitalist economies with strong welfare states.

But I don't want this thread to become an endless debate on what, within the spectrum of capitalism, are the best versions of it. I just said communism bad, capitalism good. Hell, I'd even agree to say communism evil, capitalism less evil. I prefer to stick with my inelegant absolute comment. Leave me alone!

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 12:34:
But it's still capitalism. Communism is still worse. As a broad statement, "capitalism > communism" really isn't so wiiiiiild. It's weird for some of you to pile on that statement of mine. I didn't believe it was a statement that required an entire excerpt on the spectrum.

Are we sure we know the difference between socialism and communism? How about "democratic socialism"? Why do you keep returning to communism as the alternative?

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 12:03:
I'm not an historian but I am at least a student of history. Communism or unregulated capitalism both to me are destined to fail eventually because they rely on working only if they aren't exploited by bad actors. From the time of the robber barons at the beginning of the industrial revolution that has been shown to be a dangerous, and ultimately impossible thing to rely on long term. It seems like there is an obvious fix, except it's not when the Democratic Representative Republic we used to live in is heavily and speedily transitioning to corporatocracy and we currently are going through a crisis of truth. The actual truth matters far less to people than the "truths" they choose to believe.

I don't see an apocalypse coming; rather a disruption or what I call a correction. How painful that correction is remains to be seen, but it is already starting. The signs are pointing very strongly now towards the possibility that we're in the desperation phase now. When you analyze how desperate companies have been trying to maintain the "Line goes up" mentality and the insane rationalizations that they use for layoffs, you're not living in the Twilight Zone. You are witnessing greedy assholes desperately flailing about trying to maintain their lives of ignorance and oppulence while slowly coming to the realization that this was never going to work. The realization that a huge number of normal people already had over a decade ago.

I don't think the greedy assholes are realizing it, though.
Our economy is so bifurcated that people are completely in a bubble. One bubble can't afford a house. The other bubble can't find investment property fast enough. One bubble is largely paycheck to paycheck. The other bubble is why US Ferrari has doubled since 2015, US Lamborghini has increased five fold since 2015, Rolex sales have gone up 1.5x since 2015.

I don't think the greedy assholes that can actually make change have noticed an issue, since their lives are still so good. And since they're still donating tens of millions of dollars to causes that keep that going.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 11:58:

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 09:37:
I now realize I missed a golden opportunity to instead have said "who was a better front man: Ronnie or Ozzy" or "who makes a better car: Ford or Ferrari".

<Snags the dogwhistle from Prez and puts it away>

The answer is:

Samuel Barber and Jaguar.

/---\

It was a long day yesterday and a short night so bear with me if things sound a little incongruent. Brain's erratically misfiring like it has a coil with a winding that is going bad but hasn't died quite yet.

To say that the only two options are capitalism or communism is either weirdly antagonistic, blindly myopic, or naively jejune. There is a broad spectrum between the two.

America is the worst example of capitalism. If the Ferengi from Star Trek were real, they would be Americans. We engage in the most unhinged, unregulated form of capitalism. We bend the knee to corporations at every opportunity and at every level. We care little for people but worship corporations. We worship sociopaths because they are rich, not because they are good people. We think they are "good" because they have generated enormous wealth without looking critically at all the damage they, and their corporations, have done in the pursuit of that wealth. We have witnessed the greatest wealth transfer in human history to the smallest number of a population. Queen Isabella would have soaked her bloomers to have had access to that kind of wealth.

Meanwhile, our healthcare system ranks dead last among all first world nations. Our education system is also one of the worst among all first world nations and, by far, the most expensive. It'll cost you $158,500, on average, for a bachelor's degree from a public four year college and that is with in-state fees. If you are paying out of state fees, add an additional 40% to that total.

Our quality of life index is 35 in the world. Poland beats us. Poland!

We have people working 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet. The less intelligent among us idolize "hustling" without realizing that doing so just exacerbates the problem. It does so it because normalizes the idea that you are worthless if you are not generating an endlessly increasing revenue stream.

As a society, we look down on the poor and strip them of any value. We see them as "less than" and treat them accordingly. Hell, just look at the way Americans treat the homeless. Instead of actually facing the problem, and its causes, we like to passive voice it all with phrases like "temporarily experiencing being unhoused" and other meaningless tripe that is, quite frankly, absolute fucking bullshit. A person is not "temporarily unhoused". They are hungry, in need of medical care, worried about security, shelter, and safety. We could address that. But we don't. Because that would cost money and wouldn't make any money.

Weirdly, we're also the only country in the world that treats Christianity like it is a sport. Something to attend and laud but never actually participate in. It's apparently an anathema in this country to actually perform the tasks required of you as determined by your theological dogma. But, of course, there is a large chunk of our population that will proudly proclaim their Christianity and trumpet that we are a "Christian nation". But, again, they're not going to spend any of their own money or even campaign that their government spend their money to feed the poor, house them, see them get well, or provide them shelter. We won't tax the wealthy to provide those services because inconveniencing the wealthy is a greater sin than ignoring the duties required of you as an adherent to a religion that explicitly tells you to do all of those things.

Unregulated American capitalism is one of the worst examples of human behavior. It is destructive, counterproductive, and is quite literally destroying the world around us.

But it's still capitalism. Communism is still worse. As a broad statement, "capitalism > communism" really isn't so wiiiiiild. It's weird for some of you to pile on that statement of mine. I didn't believe it was a statement that required an entire excerpt on the spectrum.

European capitalism is better than American capitalism. This is, I believe, true.

I'm not an historian but I am at least a student of history. Communism or unregulated capitalism both to me are destined to fail eventually because they rely on working only if they aren't exploited by bad actors. From the time of the robber barons at the beginning of the industrial revolution that has been shown to be a dangerous, and ultimately impossible thing to rely on long term. It seems like there is an obvious fix, except it's not when the Democratic Representative Republic we used to live in is heavily and speedily transitioning to corporatocracy and we currently are going through a crisis of truth. The actual truth matters far less to people than the "truths" they choose to believe.

I don't see an apocalypse coming; rather a disruption or what I call a correction. How painful that correction is remains to be seen, but it is already starting. The signs are pointing very strongly now towards the possibility that we're in the desperation phase now. When you analyze how desperate companies have been trying to maintain the "Line goes up" mentality and the insane rationalizations that they use for layoffs, you're not living in the Twilight Zone. You are witnessing greedy assholes desperately flailing about trying to maintain their lives of ignorance and oppulence while slowly coming to the realization that this was never going to work. The realization that a huge number of normal people already had over a decade ago.

This comment was edited on Jul 8, 2024, 12:14.

ForgedReality wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 11:47:
To claim that communism is the only other option than failing, late-stage capitalism is wiiiild. Especially when literally no one mentioned communism first, and I can all but guarantee literally zero people are advocating for it. Just straight up crazy pills. 🙄🤦

People just want guardrails so that we don't have someone making tens of billions a year telling us the issue is the guy making $1k.

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 09:37:
I now realize I missed a golden opportunity to instead have said "who was a better front man: Ronnie or Ozzy" or "who makes a better car: Ford or Ferrari".

<Snags the dogwhistle from Prez and puts it away>

The answer is:

Samuel Barber and Jaguar.

/---\

It was a long day yesterday and a short night so bear with me if things sound a little incongruent. Brain's erratically misfiring like it has a coil with a winding that is going bad but hasn't died quite yet.

To say that the only two options are capitalism or communism is either weirdly antagonistic, blindly myopic, or naively jejune. There is a broad spectrum between the two.

America is the worst example of capitalism. If the Ferengi from Star Trek were real, they would be Americans. We engage in the most unhinged, unregulated form of capitalism. We bend the knee to corporations at every opportunity and at every level. We care little for people but worship corporations. We worship sociopaths because they are rich, not because they are good people. We think they are "good" because they have generated enormous wealth without looking critically at all the damage they, and their corporations, have done in the pursuit of that wealth. We have witnessed the greatest wealth transfer in human history to the smallest number of a population. Queen Isabella would have soaked her bloomers to have had access to that kind of wealth.

Meanwhile, our healthcare system ranks dead last among all first world nations. Our education system is also one of the worst among all first world nations and, by far, the most expensive. It'll cost you $158,500, on average, for a bachelor's degree from a public four year college and that is with in-state fees. If you are paying out of state fees, add an additional 40% to that total.

Our quality of life index is 35 in the world. Poland beats us. Poland!

We have people working 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet. The less intelligent among us idolize "hustling" without realizing that doing so just exacerbates the problem. It does so it because normalizes the idea that you are worthless if you are not generating an endlessly increasing revenue stream.

As a society, we look down on the poor and strip them of any value. We see them as "less than" and treat them accordingly. Hell, just look at the way Americans treat the homeless. Instead of actually facing the problem, and its causes, we like to passive voice it all with phrases like "temporarily experiencing being unhoused" and other meaningless tripe that is, quite frankly, absolute fucking bullshit. A person is not "temporarily unhoused". They are hungry, in need of medical care, worried about security, shelter, and safety. We could address that. But we don't. Because that would cost money and wouldn't make any money.

Weirdly, we're also the only country in the world that treats Christianity like it is a sport. Something to attend and laud but never actually participate in. It's apparently an anathema in this country to actually perform the tasks required of you as determined by your theological dogma. But, of course, there is a large chunk of our population that will proudly proclaim their Christianity and trumpet that we are a "Christian nation". But, again, they're not going to spend any of their own money or even campaign that their government spend their money to feed the poor, house them, see them get well, or provide them shelter. We won't tax the wealthy to provide those services because inconveniencing the wealthy is a greater sin than ignoring the duties required of you as an adherent to a religion that explicitly tells you to do all of those things.

Unregulated American capitalism is one of the worst examples of human behavior. It is destructive, counterproductive, and is quite literally destroying the world around us.

To claim that communism is the only other option than failing, late-stage capitalism is wiiiild. Especially when literally no one mentioned communism first, and I can all but guarantee literally zero people are advocating for it. Just straight up crazy pills. 🙄🤦

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 10:40:
I'm okay enough to participate in discussion on here, but to be frank I really don't want to address this anymore.

Understood.
I think we're close. If you ever want to hang out for a beer, or some Goldeneye, let me know.

But to address an important distinction that I feel needs to be highlighted, we here in the US operate within a weird socialist/unregulated capitalistic hybrid economy that has formed a corporatocracy around it. Many countries that have a capitalist economy but regulate it sensibly and don't live in a corporatocracy have comparatively far less severe problems of this nature. As my grandma used to say, you don't always have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Dude, I love you man. Can I have your Bud Light though?

(I haven't gone completely insane; just an obscure reference to dumb commercials from the 90's.)

Did we just witness a bromance throuple in the making? How romantic.

Back on topic, I think the games industry gets such a (deserved) bad rap because the revenue it pulls in is insane compared to the high skilled labor/management it requires but currently pays such low cost for. I think/hope that it will regulate a bit on its own over time as currently the profession is so new that world + dog thinks they are qualified but aren't. By qualified I don't mean just handling high pressure, though that's part of it, but that so many think they can make a good game but actually cannot. Companies will figure out that hiring quality people = profits and if they don't they will go out of business. Not soon as there is so much money floating around the industry and experienced bad actors are still not properly recognized as damaging but eventually.

Without going into self-important rambling that would make me cringe that I even considered it, no I'm not okay. I'm a lot more okay than some other people in the world who literally have to worry about where their next meal is coming from or whether a rocket launched deliberately at their civilian apartment building by a supposedly professional army will kill them in their sleep, however. I'm okay enough to participate in discussion on here, but to be frank I really don't want to address this anymore.

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 09:54:
I don't want to put you on ignore either. I hate the fact that Beamer seemingly can't resist taking the bait when antagonized, but I don't have him on ignore because he talks highly intelligently and engages in nuanced, contextually-aware discussion. He is at his weakest in my opinion when he devolves to retaliatory dismissive insults and the same inelegant absolutes. Beamer and I used to have much the same debate dynamic as you and he currently have. When you tone down the rhetoric and speak nuanced and respectfully, and are willing to have even your most staunch beliefs challenged, you would be amazed at how civil a conversation could become. (And before you say anything, this suggestion applies to ten times as many people of a differing persuasion on this board as you) Not always; those with whom I have been unsuccessful with achieving a mutual respect I put on ignore. This is a pretty progressive board, so I will flat-out say that you are going to always be in the minority. I suspect that you already know that, but it bears repeating in case it's not apparent to you or anyone else.

We both settled down, me in particular, but also you. Plus, the world changed from those days back in, I dunno, 2008?
Now, you're easily one of the best reasons to come here, though you've gone in the past week or two from loving to call someone saying something dumb dumb (whether it was a drive-by rando or a regular poster you really enjoyed.) You've been really trying to be a peacemaker lately.

It feels odd asking this to someone not enjoying a good dunking and instead wanting harmony, but is everything ok? I can't tell if you're sick of this shit, or just sick of shit. If it's the latter, I think we all have movie recommendations other than Ferrari to enjoy. If it's the former, oh man, 2024 is going to be an awful year for all of us, as it's going to get infinitely worse.

I don't want to put you on ignore either. I hate the fact that Beamer seemingly can't resist taking the bait when antagonized, but I don't have him on ignore because he talks highly intelligently and engages in nuanced, contextually-aware discussion. He is at his weakest in my opinion when he devolves to retaliatory dismissive insults and the same inelegant absolutes. Beamer and I used to have much the same debate dynamic as you and he currently have. When you tone down the rhetoric and speak nuanced and respectfully, and are willing to have even your most staunch beliefs challenged, you would be amazed at how civil a conversation could become. (And before you say anything, this suggestion applies to ten times as many people of a differing persuasion on this board as you) Not always; those with whom I have been unsuccessful with achieving a mutual respect I put on ignore. This is a pretty progressive board, so I will flat-out say that you are going to always be in the minority. I suspect that you already know that, but it bears repeating in case it's not apparent to you or anyone else.

Prez wrote on Jul 8, 2024, 09:24:
Dude, when you speak in inelegant absolutes and say things like "what the fuck else, you fools?" you can't then decry that you aren't spoken to normally. This alternating antagonistic/innocent obliviousness is tiring, and I actually agree with you in some aspects. This is my last appeal for you to speak to others in the way you supposedly want to be spoken to or I'm going to have to put you on ignore. Unlike some people, I don't feed off drama like it was some invigorating energy drink laced with meth; I fucking HATE it. "Just ignore it" doesn't work when every thread that could possibly be an interesting discussion devolves into pointless bickering that sounds on par with two 10 yo boys arguing over who would win a fight between Batman and Spiderman.

(Batman would win though.)

Batman would win.

An inelegant absolute is OK sometimes, don't you think? Especially when you have capitalism in one hand, and communism in the other

I'd hate it if you put me on ignore, Prez. I'll try to keep the inelegant absolutes to a minimum. For the record: I wasn't referring to anyone in this community with the "you fools" part -- just the people in general who shit on capitalism but can't come up with a better alternative. That wasn't Beamer's tripwire though, I don't think. I think he wanted me to mean something more insidious than what I meant with my comment about movies. My point was very laid back and subjective and not at all trying to start some controversial argument: 30 years ago, movies were simple and good, now they cost billions and suck.
That's it.

I now realize I missed a golden opportunity to instead have said "who was a better front man: Ronnie or Ozzy" or "who makes a better car: Ford or Ferrari".

Dude, when you speak in inelegant absolutes and say things like "what the fuck else, you fools?" you can't then decry that you aren't spoken to normally. This alternating antagonistic/innocent obliviousness is tiring, and I actually agree with you in some aspects. This is my last appeal for you to speak to others in the way you supposedly want to be spoken to or I'm going to have to put you on ignore. Unlike some people, I don't feed off drama like it was some invigorating energy drink laced with meth; I fucking HATE it. "Just ignore it" doesn't work when every thread that could possibly be an interesting discussion devolves into pointless bickering that sounds on par with two 10 yo boys arguing over who would win a fight between Batman and Spiderman.

(Batman would win though.)