Why do hard working middle class Americans trust corporations

[randys]

more than a person working in a government system where there is no for profit motivation for them to lie, steal, overcharge, etc?

Just curious.

I know, I keep this stuff up and my next Forza 7 question about why in the hell is my seat view changing each time I start a new game happening, you are all gonna tell me to POUND SAND

Nah, you wouldnt do that. You might tell me to stop starting 18 new threads each week with a separate question, though. I am working on not doing that.


Our only hope is communication, not shutting that off between left and right.

I am a huge fan of Jim Jefferies and became so when he did his gun routine which most here are I assume familiar. He has a show on Comedy Central and his guest last night was the LAST person I expected to see there, the gun enthusiast former Team Six Navy Seal who shot Bin Laden.

Turns out they became friends when Jim sought him out to talk about guns, something like that.

 

[Danoff]

Because profit raises standard of living and generates wealth?

 

[randys]

For capitalists, and unless you are a capitalist, then it works against you, always has.

A capitalist is not someone who works for AT&T for $150,000 a year and makes a few bucks off the market with their investments and 401K, before you answer.

 

[Northstar]

more than a person working in a government system

I can choose to not do business with a private enterprise, I can’t do that with the government.

where there is no for profit

You should probably look up what lobbying is.

motivation for them to lie,

How do you tell when a politician is lying?

Their lips are moving.

steal,

I don’t recall ever being asked if I wanted to pay into Social Security.

overcharge, etc?

Ever get a tax refund?

 

[Danoff]

For capitalists, and unless you are a capitalist, then it works against you, always has.

A capitalist is not someone who works for AT&T for $150,000 a year and makes a few bucks off the market with their investments and 401K, before you answer.

Well that persona is not... necessarily... a capitalist in their thinking. But their actions are capitalist. So I can argue that they are.

 

[randys]

Well that persona is not... necessarily... a capitalist in their thinking. But their actions are capitalist. So I can argue that they are.

But they arent. And this is important because they THINK they are.

It is a very important distinction.

 

[Joel]

William Blake called it mind forg'd manacles, Marx called it False Consciousness, Gramsci called it Hegemony, and Althusser called it Ideology.

"I will lick the boot, because one day I will wear the boot!"

 

[Danoff]

But they arent. And this is important because they THINK they are.

It is a very important distinction.

But they are... because they're taking capitalist actions by selling a service in exchange for value which can be traded for goods and services.

William Blake called it mind forg'd manacles, Marx called it False Consciousness, Gramsci called it Hegemony, and Althusser called it Ideology.

"I will lick the boot, because one day I will wear the boot!"

What boot?

 

[randys]

But they are... because they're taking capitalist actions by selling a service in exchange for value which can be traded for goods and services.



What boot?

No, a capitalist makes his or her money off of money.

Plays the market, doesnt work, no labor. None of us here are that.

May of us THINK we are, want to believe we are, we arent.

a person who has capital especially invested in business

 

[Northstar]

No, a capitalist makes his or her money off of money.

What’s wrong with that?

If it wasn’t for people with enough money to loan some out, none of us would have a job.

Plays the market, doesnt work, no labor.

Doesn’t work? How on earth have you gotten to that conclusion?

 

[Joel]

If it wasn’t for people with enough money to loan some out, none of us would have a job.

If there were no lords to rent out their fiefs, the peasants would have no land to farm!

 

[Danoff]

No, a capitalist makes his or her money off of money.

I see, there are two definitions. One is yours, and one (the one I'd more expect someone to be referring to) is practicing, supporting, or based on the principles of capitalism. Ok, so your preferred definition of capitalist is someone who trades in capital, essentially. That's a super arbitrary distinction. Capital is not inherently different from the value that it represents. If I trade in manufacturered goods, or I trade in currency, I'm trading in things which represent value. Labor also represents value, and is something most people trade in.

So, tell me, why is your capitalist the only one who benefits from profit?

Plays the market, doesnt work, no labor. None of us here are that.

Uh... I've made my bank work quite a bit to make money off of their money - significant labor actually.

May of us THINK we are, want to believe we are, we arent.

I have money invested in various appreciating assets. So I am to that extent. So is your example guy who has a 401k invested in the market.

If there were no lords to rent out their fiefs, the peasants would have no land to farm!

lol.... lords do not provide land, it exists independently. Lenders do provide value (in the form of currency), which does not exist independently, which enables many startup companies to hire.

 

[Northstar]

If there were no lords to rent out their fiefs, the peasants would have no land to farm!

So your job magically appeared out of nowhere?

 

[randys]

What’s wrong with that?

If it wasn’t for people with enough money to loan some out, none of us would have a job.



Doesn’t work? How on earth have you gotten to that conclusion?

Capitalists sit by the pool, smoke dope and look on their iphones to see how much their stock made them that day.

A true capitalist does that. Which is why none of us are.

 

[Danoff]

Capitalists sit by the pool, smoke dope and look on their iphones to see how much their stock made them that day.

A true capitalist does that. Which is why none of us are.

Now we're talking about "true capitalists" which you've defined for yourself. What was your point again?

 

[Northstar]

Capitalists sit by the pool, smoke dope and look on their iphones to see how much their stock made them that day.

A true capitalist does that. Which is why none of us are.

You make it sound so easy, it makes me wonder why you aren’t doing it.

 

[KungFury]

The only answer to this thread I can think of.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I hate big corporations.

Of course I still use Amazon, Burger King and Microsoft, but I feel so dirty. I do use independent coffee shops though - it's usually better wi-fi.

 

[KungFury]

I hate big corporations.

Of course I still use Amazon, Burger King and Microsoft, but I feel so dirty. I do use independent coffee shops though - it's usually better wi-fi.

Wi-fi provided free of charge from some hipsters server in the back?

 

[mustafur]

Who trades stock in 2017 its all about Crypto, even idiots will be millionaires.

 

[Azuremen]

Capitalists sit by the pool, smoke dope and look on their iphones to see how much their stock made them that day.

A true capitalist does that. Which is why none of us are.

I get the feeling of some bitterness here and a very warped lens on what some people do.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Capitalists sit by the pool, smoke dope and look on their iphones to see how much their stock made them that day.

A true capitalist does that. Which is why none of us are.

That's a helluva way to live. We should all be capitalists by the sounds of it.

 

[randys]

You make it sound so easy, it makes me wonder why you aren’t doing it.

Point is a lot of people defend capitalism thinking they are capitalists, they arent . Their labor is used by capitalists.

Pretty simple concept actually.

 

[Famine]

Their labor is used by capitalists.

"Sold to", not "used by".

 

[randys]

"Sold to", not "used by".

For a fraction of what it is worth.

 

[Exorcet]

more than a person working in a government system where there is no for profit motivation for them to lie, steal, overcharge, etc?

They profit from staying in power. It pays them and it gives them the ability to further any agenda they might have. I don't think of this in terms of trust. It's easier to be upset with an entity that takes your money and fails though.

Seeing as this popped up from the Net Neutrality thread; I don't imagine that ditching current regulation will bring about a utopia. I'm actually well aware of the potential consequences and the negative impact that they can have on me. That I don't like something doesn't mean that I should be able to force my views on others though.

For a fraction of what it is worth.

I feel like I'm getting a fair deal.

 

[randys]

How do you think this stuff happens?

https://www.thenation.com/article/20-people-now-own-as-much-wealth-as-half-of-all-americans/



20 People Now Own As Much Wealth as Half of All Americans
The US is caught in a vicious cycle, with rising political inequality driving an ever-rising concentration of wealth at the top.
By Joshua HollandTwitter
DECEMBER 3, 2015

• 
  
  Charles Koch, CEO of Koch Industries Inc., is listed by Forbes as the fourth-richest person in the United States today. (AP Photo / Topeka Capital-Journal, Mike Burley)
  
  
  report released on Wednesday by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) reveals. According to “Billionaire Bonanza: The Forbes 400 and the Rest of Us,” just the twenty individuals at the top of the pile—a group that could fit into a Gulfstream G650 luxury jet, according to the study’s authors—now control more wealth than the bottom half of the population. That’s 152 million people living in 57 million households.
  
  And there’s a stark racial divide at the top. The 100 richest households own more assets than the entire African-American community (there are just two black people on the Forbes 400 list, one of whom is Oprah Winfrey). And just 182 individuals on the Forbes list have more assets than America’s entire Hispanic population.
  
  But Chuck Collins, director of IPS’s Program on Inequality and the Common Good and a co-author of the report, tells The Nation that their study likely underestimates the scope of the problem. “Our wealth data is a tip of the iceberg,” he says. “So much wealth among the über-rich is hidden, either in offshore tax havens or in these loophole trusts where money is shuffled around into private corporate accounts or between different family members, and it disappears from taxation or any sort of oversight or accountability. So there’s a huge amount of escaped wealth that isn’t even factored into these statistics.”
  
  And Collins says it’s only getting worse. “These inequalities really undermine our quality of life,” he says. “We need to explain to people who say ‘So what, I don’t care how much the Forbes 400 has’ that it really does touch on all of our lives, deeply and profoundly.”
  
  
  
  
  It’s only when you look past the numbers that the scope of the problem comes fully into focus. A 2009 study published in the British Medical Journalcompared income inequality (which is less extreme than wealth inequality) in the United States and 14 other wealthy countries, and found that our skewed income levels corresponded with 893,914 avoidable deaths per year compared with those other economies. That’s more unnecessary deaths than are associated with tobacco use, car accidents, and gun deaths combined.
  
  Stephen Bezruchka, a professor of public health at the University of Washington, told me in an interview last year that stress is a key driver of those outcomes. “What happens is those lower down the economic ladder experience more stress,” he said. “They secrete more stress hormones until they’re burned out. Stress is our 21st-century tobacco.”
  
  A recent study by Princeton economists Angus Deaton and Anne Case found that the mortality rate among white, middle-aged Americans with limited education is increasing, while those of every other group—and the citizens of every other advanced country—continue to fall. The increase in deaths among this group is attributable to what The New York Timesdescribed as “an epidemic of suicides and afflictions stemming from substance abuse: alcoholic liver disease and overdoses of heroin and prescription opioids.” One theory, offered by Sam Pizzigati, is that this population suffers from “thwarted aspirations,” having been raised with expectations of upward mobility that never came to fruition.
  
  SIGN UP!
  
  Collins says that these levels of inequality also tear at our social fabric. No longer do Americans feel like we’re all in the same boat; we now “live in parallel universes.” As a result, he says, “people create mythologies about each other”—like the “makers versus takers” rhetoric that reared its ugly head during the 2012 presidential election.
  
  The concentration of wealth at the top isn’t the result of some sort of organic process. The top one-10th of 1 percent of American households controlled about 7 percent of the nation’s wealth in the mid-1970s. By 2000, their share had grown to about 15 percent, and today it’s well over 20 percent. Those at the very top didn’t become three times as smart or lucky or good-looking in the intervening years. They’ve benefited from changes in things like trade policy, the tax code, and collective-bargaining rules—all policy changes they’ve used their wealth to champion.
  
  The IPS report offers policy recommendations that might help turn the tide. It suggests cutting off a variety of “wealth escape routes” that people who hire armies of tax accountants enjoy; raising the floor with minimum wage hikes, better access to healthcare, debt-free higher education, and paid family leave; and leveling the political playing field with campaign finance reform. Others have proposed a variety of wealth-building programs like universal savings accounts that might be subsidized for low-income savers.
  
  But that brings us to the obvious roadblock: Studies by Princeton’s Larry Bartels and Thomas Hayes at Trinity University have found that our elected officials are highly sensitive to the interests of the wealthiest Americans (and overwhelmingly belong to that group themselves), pay some attention to those of the middle class—and the views of the poor don’t factor into legislators’ voting tendencies at all.
  
  And what do the interests of the rich and powerful look like? A 2013 study by Bartels, Benjamin Page, and Jason Seawright found that those in the top 1 percent are heavily involved in politics, and they tend to focus their advocacy on advancing their own narrow self-interests. On average, they’re less likely than the population as a whole to support robust social safety nets, public education, and expanded access to healthcare. Other studieshave found that the affluent “showed reduced sensitivity to others’ suffering” when compared with working- and middle-class people. That’s who’s in charge.
  
  With stranglehold the wealthy have on our politics, it’s hard to see where this cycle ends. And while we have the greatest degree of wealth inequality in the developed world, this isn’t an American problem. In Europe, the rise of far-right, ultranationalist parties has been linked to rising inequality—and declining economic security for the middle class. Thomas Piketty, author of Capital in the Twenty-First Century, argues that sky-high inequality in the Middle East is a major reason terrorist groups like ISIS find fertile ground for recruitment.
  
  One reason for hope, according to Collins, is that the public’s awareness of just how problematic these hugely wealthy dynasties are becoming has increased. “People are realizing that a certain amount of inequality is part of how our society works, but these are absurdly extreme levels of inequality,” he says. And while we can talk all day about policy fixes, those things “won’t matter unless we actually build a movement to tax wealth and invest it in things that create opportunity for everyone else.”
  

They profit from staying in power. It pays them and it gives them the ability to further any agenda they might have. I don't think of this in terms of trust. It's easier to be upset with an entity that takes your money and fails though.

Seeing as this popped up from the Net Neutrality thread; I don't imagine that ditching current regulation will bring about a utopia. I'm actually well aware of the potential consequences and the negative impact that they can have on me. That I don't like something doesn't mean that I should be able to force my views on others though.



I feel like I'm getting a fair deal.

The only forcing of views is being done by trump and his rightwing cabal, ending net neutrality and the only reason average citizens who will be hurt by it defend it, is tribalism.

 

[Famine]

Please don't double-post. We have Edit and Multiquote buttons.

For a fraction of what it is worth.

If you're selling your time for less than it's worth, you're not only doing yourself a disservice but everyone else too - by reducing salaries.

Try selling it for what it's worth next time.

How do you think this stuff happens?

Generally by very few individuals having revolutionary ideas and being able to produce and market them successfully.

How many people do those 20 people employ?

 

[Northstar]

Point is a lot of people defend capitalism thinking they are capitalists, they arent . Their labor is used by capitalists.

Pretty simple concept actually.

That doesn’t change the fact that you are massively under estimating the amount of work and intelligence it takes to make a lot of money in the financial field.

 

[randys]

Please don't double-post. We have Edit and Multiquote buttons.

If you're selling your time for less than it's worth, you're not only doing yourself a disservice but everyone else too - by reducing salaries.

Try selling it for what it's worth next time.

Generally by very few individuals having revolutionary ideas and being able to produce and market them successfully.

How many people do those 20 people employ?

Double post?

I wont do that, if you show me where I did so I will know what you mean.