Keep in mind this is just the tip of the iceberg. Corporations actively lobby for these policies that ensure they get protections and bailouts while workers and citizens foot the bill and they largely get passed as a result of things like Citizen United, and that these lobbies also own and operate the media, which makes them the Kingmakers of your elected officials.
In history classes, we typically call this form of Oligopoly “Feudalism”, not Democracy.
The rich have gotten so rich they have essentially taken over the most important parts of government, and they’re using that power to funnel your tax money AND spending money directly to themselves.
If you sit around and complain, nothing happens. That's just nature, the strong ones get to live.
Nobody is stopping anyone from joining the corps or open a business. Unfortunately, those without talent or unlucky have to live at subsistence level. Communism doesn't work.
I mean sure, nobody is stopping anybody from opening a business or joining the corps, but we can’t all do that, if we all did society wouldn’t function. So isn’t the model in and of itself flawed? Sounds to me like Corps just need to give back to society more, whether that’s directly sending funds, or helping restructure things for the better for the “commoners” if you will.
I feel like people don't realize when a corp posts their profit, that number is after it's already paid all its employees, built new warehouses, etc.. They're kinda just removing that money from the economy and sitting on it.
"The strong ones get to live get to live" isn't an argument for capitalism; it’s social Darwinism.
"Anyone can start a business" doesn’t answer the criticism that concentrated wealth can buy political influence and shape the rules in its own favor. Jumping from "oligarchic capture is bad" to "communism doesn't work" is such a spectacular non sequitur that it practically proves the point about ideological conditioning.
84
u/Uqbar_Orbis_Tertius 3h ago
Well I just became more radicalized thank you