The narrative and hypocracy of capitalism

[ZenRaiden]

Business is good for economy, business much dinero. But business no have money for you go worky work baby.

We need hard working people vs. everyone is replaceable.

Hard work pays, but not the people who do it. More the people who provided it.

How do they provide it? Well they provide it by you doing the work? But how can you work if they don't provide it?

Who are they the almighty overlords who give us money. Well they are the people who make us work.

 

[dr froyd]

apparently a large world-wide conspiracy of statisticians, economists, and business owners has decided to make up numbers about labor shortage.... cuz this guy Joey on facebook tells us so

Joey needs to understand one cannot just look at jobless claims to infer things about labor shortage. One needs to look at the quit rate, labor participation rate, job openings, etc etc. All these combined paint a pretty clear picture the labor shortage is real.

 

[ZenRaiden]

labor shortage is real.

Maybe, but who cares?

 

[onesteptwostep]

I'm of the opinion that there aren't enough jobs that actually mean something and provide value to the economy. A lot of the jobs out there, especially in the service sector, are jobs that simply push money around and showcase as if that counts as creating value. I think it's generally a problem of a post-capitalistic economy and the declining birth rate will come to lean off those bullshit jobs. You can easily see this in the bigger cities.. I don't see how it's possible that every 5 million or so abled persons are able to have a sustainable job within their vicinity.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I think its more of a matter of who those jobs provide value to. Today I think older people realize that they shouldn't tolerate any job that doesn't personally give them value, and young people are holding onto their dreams longer than they have before. TikTok star and influencer has never seemed more viable.

Traditionally bullshit jobs are jobs where the majority of the work is indeed meaningless, but there are usually a few key things that someone else would have to do. Not indicative of a bullshit job, but someone who mops the floor has to mop or it won't be mopped obviously.

So we get someone to mop, but how much are we going to pay them? Why contract someone who is going to charge us a lot for something that needs to be done a lot, and is negotiable, when we can put a leash on someone with a meager wage, and make them do whatever we want no matter how trivial.

The Bs jobs thus may not provide some sort of meaningful functionality, but they do have some monetary value. At the expense of, well being a mostly empty job prospect.

So yeah all the good jobs that anyone has any sense to apply to, as advertised anyways, are going to be in high demand and lower supply.

More people are learning to quit as soon as a job description doesn't match the jobs daily tasks, but employers don't lose anything by lying to you. Contacts are the way to go, but once you fulfill the conditions the employer can't obligate you to do anything. This i think explains the "job shortage" more like bullshit surplus.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Tik Tok and social media influencers are hustle jobs and aren't functions which provide value to the economy. They provide advertising space for companies that do provide value, by creating a following in which they can advertise their services or goods. Most internet content creators are an extension or derivatives of marketing, not something which has inherent value in it of themselves. In a way it can help a business sell more of their services or goods, by direct exchange or increasing their image, which in turn increases the functionality and competitiveness of a market, but it doesn't increase its size. It just messes with the supply and demand of something, and doesn't touch upon actually creating value.

Here's an example: a decade back, an electricity company in California schemed a blackout wherein millions of Californians were left without electricity. Here they simply artificially lowered the supply to ridiculous amounts so that they would be able to sell it to the public at higher margins. But electricity being something that has incredible high demand, a small increase in its cost meant that the company would reap extravagant profits. Did they create value here? No, they simply tinkered with the supply so that they would cheat the public. It's basically the same with internet figures, except that they tinker with the demand side rather than the supply. Nothing of value is created to enlarge the economy. The only function they have at the economic level is allowing other businesses to market their goods and services, which is insignificant in the overall grand scheme of the economy.

If you want to create value, you would have to create something that would be called an industry, or something that increases the quality of life.

 

[Cognisant]

Global crisis, governments print money, inflation goes up, cost of living goes up, wages continue to stagnate.

People are learning to live off the gig economy, side hustles, stock trading, social media, or simply being more self sufficient because participation in the traditional economy is no longer worthwhile.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Tik Tok and social media influencers are hustle jobs and aren't functions which provide value to the economy. They provide advertising space for companies that do provide value, by creating a following in which they can advertise their services or goods. Most internet content creators are an extension or derivatives of marketing, not something which has inherent value in it of themselves. In a way it can help a business sell more of their services or goods, by direct exchange or increasing their image, which in turn increases the functionality and competitiveness of a market, but it doesn't increase its size. It just messes with the supply and demand of something, and doesn't touch upon actually creating value.

Here's an example: a decade back, an electricity company in California schemed a blackout wherein millions of Californians were left without electricity. Here they simply artificially lowered the supply to ridiculous amounts so that they would be able to sell it to the public at higher margins. But electricity being something that has incredible high demand, a small increase in its cost meant that the company would reap extravagant profits. Did they create value here? No, they simply tinkered with the supply so that they would cheat the public. It's basically the same with internet figures, except that they tinker with the demand side rather than the supply. Nothing of value is created to enlarge the economy. The only function they have at the economic level is allowing other businesses to market their goods and services, which is insignificant in the overall grand scheme of the economy.

If you want to create value, you would have to create something that would be called an industry, or something that increases the quality of life.

Certainly a perspective you don't hear about much. I think it's true. It's much like a DJ in a club that is supposed to get men and women to dance and encourage them to spend money that night on drinks or whatever else. (most) of course aren't playing any music themselves, but are using audio files that have already been played. Then of course the musicians that made the music are using technology they didn't make that technology, it goes all the way down to manufactures and gathers that produce the most value. But at the top of the value generation you have in the commercial sector it's, well I don't know how you can be less valuable than a DJ. Neglecting skills DJs may or may not have.

Not that comparable to social media influencers, but I don't know if you can make a blanket statement like that, as I think "content creators" deserve their own category, just for the sake of having it on the record. Years ago an industry like SEO was unheard of, and now thanks to the culture I can market myself as a SEO Specialist and people will think that's a legitimate thing. There are many shortcuts we take that don't add any value to society.

I'm convinced it's standard practice to create artificial shortages on things that have high demand in any product industry. Look up the Nintendo Amiibo. Basically, they were like trading card for Gamers of today. Nintendo knew that they were popular but seemingly didn't try to satisfy shortages. This created a market of able people to buy the entire market then resell them on marketplaces for sometimes 1000x their original price. Not only do they get their typical audience, they attract scalpers too as reliable buyers that will shortcut their expenses for making the product.. It's fucking absurd. I was never into it, it's always been a trend with certain shoe brands, or when a celebrity does a one off fashion apparel deal with someone. They know it's going to sell like crazy anyways, but they rather as I said attract those who want to corner the market because they know they buy in wholesale.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I do hate double posting my b

Global crisis, governments print money, inflation goes up, cost of living goes up, wages continue to stagnate.

People are learning to live off the gig economy, side hustles, stock trading, social media, or simply being more self sufficient because participation in the traditional economy is no longer worthwhile.

Yeah, I agree, at this point you're asking to be punished or are desperate to make ends meet for your family with perks like health care from your employer. Or you're highly educated and want to live a simple life where all you're duties are made for you.

Oddly enough though, unless you're dealing with small business that also do the same, you still depend on the traditional economy. Somewhere you're going to have to deal with someone who has access to resources that are too cheap to pass up. It's unethical to use Apple products and buy Facebook Ad Space, on multiple magnitudes.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Generally I think the current market model is unsustainable, and the low birthrate I think is a natural cure for this systematic excess.

A lot of economists are crying loud about the low birthrate, especially in places like Korea, Japan and China, but I think in the overall scheme of things, it's a natural way for a society to restructure itself so that its people are allotted with meaningful work.

I think the transition to that point would be difficult to witness, but I think it's the natural order of things. People don't want to work in meaningless bullshit jobs, but there's too much people around, disallowing every person to be allotted a mandatory position in the economy.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Workers and especially working class people want to have safety stability.
This goes for all working class people be it a professor or a car wash worker.
Be it miner or a NASA engineer.

Some job provide this and some do not.

Obviously some people need to feel like their job is not bullshit, but....

psychology says people need to feel some value in what they do, be it even minor value.

However most people, especially poor, will not object to getting money, even if their job is bullshit, so long as it is stable.

Here is what working class does not want.
Not getting payed on time.
Not getting payed on merit or enough.
Not having stable environment. Not knowing if you get promoted, not knowing how to do a objectively good job, not knowing how to improve your work or how to progress in work.
Worrying about the system fucking you over, your boss is not giving the salary you could get or a salary you need or deserve based on what you do.
Worrying that tomorrow you get booted out of your job, because reasons.
And of course all that bullshit about working overtime, and not really having the ability to benefit from the job you have.
If your job sucks the energy out of you, and suck the life out of you how does making the money really benefit you in the end.
People don't want to just work, but people work to live.

However lot of work today is built around a principal you live to work.
This is acceptable for people who are career oriented or people who want to work hard to get further in imaginary hierarchy. Its good for competitive people and highly industrious people. But these people are minority.

Most working class people want to do the same thing they were schooled for.
Go to work, fill in the answer on the test and go home.
Do the work and go home.
No worries about the future, no financial worries, no other worries.

That is how you get happy and productive working class people.

Not everyone has to be like this.
For example those who are investors or those who do jobs where security is not part of the job, this might be a different animal entirely.

But most working class people are simple.

The fact is though most working class people today are not retarded.

You can't throw a few candy at them and expect them to be happy.
The more intelligent people get the less room for fucking them over.

 

[Black Rose]

playing videogames has immediate feedback which makes them fun.

fun jobs provide:

productivity and accomplishment

the fruits of labor

enrichment

humans like it when we get results, the dopamine loop.

humans need things to do that satisfies the human spirit.

when people have purpose there lives are meaningful.

a dead end job provides no purpose.

it is a waste of time.

 

[Thurlor]

I don't understand this insistence that people must work to be fulfilled and happy. At the most I will acknowledge that we feel the need for a sense of purpose in our lives. But that purpose does not need to come from work.

Besides what does that mean for the unemployed? As far as I am aware zero unemployment is not desirable. Unemployment is required for growth. Does that mean we are sacrificing the unemployed people's fulfillment and happiness for the economic stability of the majority?

 

[ZenRaiden]

You can always make lots and lots of money.

Once you know how it can be done it might even be easy.

Work is usually associated with hardship and sacrifice and what not.

Sometimes, maybe, yes?

Lots of times this hardship and sacrifice is man made inability to do things properly rather than actually the job being hard.

Work smart not hard.

The idea that working hard pays the bills no longer applies.

Many jobs are still good.

However many more jobs are no good for anyone.

Working class people have a sea of options, but many of them are pretty bad options.

Its not an excuse, its just fact.

What that means working class people will have to refocus their attention to figuring out how to play the system.

If the system plays you eventually you wise up.

The real leverage your employer has over you is simply that you need work and job.

And you don't understand the system.

Many working class people just want to work, want sense of security and obviously they work to provide and have some sense of comfort as well.

I mean comfort at home not necessarily at the job.

Work life balance is different, but most people in the working class are part of working class, because their work life balance is to break even.

This is simultaneously a life strategy for people and simultaneously what employers can exploit.

Of course being a workaholic and highly productive go getter gets you more chances of success.
But not everyone of those really succeed either. Its just that they tend to represent the majority of people who succeed overall.

The profit is higher if you rig the system against employees.

The trouble is employees can do the same.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I don't understand this insistence that people must work to be fulfilled and happy.

Realistically you don't need much at all in life.
Not even money. You can just work for free.
In fact you can just be fine doing very little for very little pay.
Like selling old postage stamps on internet.

But society needs working class people to exist. Because as of yet there are no robots or animals that can do the work.
So there is got to be people.
And its usually the employers who have demands not the employees.
So do you really need to be happy? Do people even need to be happy? Or fulfilled?
Not at all.

However a good question would be what makes people happy in the first place, or what makes them fulfilled......

Usually I noticed that happiness and fulfillment go hand and in hand with productivity.

Jobs are not theme parks obviously, but you know if you spend half your day at work and its not fun and fulfilling, why even work?

 

[dr froyd]

I'm of the opinion that there aren't enough jobs that actually mean something and provide value to the economy. A lot of the jobs out there, especially in the service sector, are jobs that simply push money around and showcase as if that counts as creating value. I think it's generally a problem of a post-capitalistic economy and the declining birth rate will come to lean off those bullshit jobs. You can easily see this in the bigger cities.. I don't see how it's possible that every 5 million or so abled persons are able to have a sustainable job within their vicinity.

most bullshit jobs are in the public sector, for the simple reason that they are subsidized by taxpayer money. A private-sector enterprise cannot sustain such jobs in the long run because they compete with other businesses and usually operate on razor-thin margins

i.e. if a particular private-sector job exists, it is probably a net-positive for the business, and hence net-positive value creation for the economy

 

[dr froyd]

I don't understand this insistence that people must work to be fulfilled and happy. At the most I will acknowledge that we feel the need for a sense of purpose in our lives. But that purpose does not need to come from work.

well isn't "work" ideally doing what you like and get paid for it? Personally I'm literally doing at work what I would do as a hobby

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I don't understand this insistence that people must work to be fulfilled and happy. At the most I will acknowledge that we feel the need for a sense of purpose in our lives. But that purpose does not need to come from work.

Besides what does that mean for the unemployed? As far as I am aware zero unemployment is not desirable. Unemployment is required for growth. Does that mean we are sacrificing the unemployed people's fulfillment and happiness for the economic stability of the majority?

I think we are blinded by this in some respect, perceptively biased due to.. common sense? Bringing up values is getting redundant and might not land for some. Work isn't what fulfills you necessarily, it's what the work gets you. We are so focused on fiat currency, but that isn't the point.

The people who are the most unhappy, I think, are those that don't want to work but want to have a meaningful life (in the context of human relationships). If I'm a slacker, but maybe want the to be at least as important as some sort of community board member for a neighborhood association or some other equivalent, then I'm going to need take on more responsibilities. If I'm a slacker and don't care about having a important role in a community, but something else, depending on high that bar is, I'm either out of luck or very lucky.

If I work in a big corporate environment with dozens, hundreds, and sometimes thousands of employees, and I hold a valuable step in the process, then I get to feel important. This has been working until recently. Even in the late 80s and 90s, as shown with movies like Matrix of which the directors were in their 30s, people already realized they were gerbils in a hamster cage. They didn't own anything. They belonged to the Matrix.

So these people, who I have no right to demean honestly, have switched to at least hustling for themselves.

I think culturally speaking the populace is trying to figure out the balance between capitalizing on their resources (their own time and health included), and enjoying them. Or at least that's what it seems many are trying to learning to do.

In a world where ruthless capitalist are rigged to win, they're always going to win. The masses are able to only hold them accountable for so much, and many want to be ruthless capitalist themselves. Many who have sense of all that I'm writing, whether accurate or not, elect or "defect" to reform and replace the system. Do we want this?

 

[scorpiomover]

I don't understand this insistence that people must work to be fulfilled and happy. At the most I will acknowledge that we feel the need for a sense of purpose in our lives. But that purpose does not need to come from work.

Even the very, very wealthy, still required that their children become soldiers or priests or mothers/housekeepers. When you do something that gives you a purpose, for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, whether you choose that job or not, whether you need to earn money to live on or you are independently wealthy, we call that "work".

Besides what does that mean for the unemployed? As far as I am aware zero unemployment is not desirable. Unemployment is required for growth.

Unemployment means that when a fat-cat capitalist factory owner wants to hire more workers, there's always going to be some poor people who want to work but are not currently working, and so are available to be employed immediately.

Does that mean we are sacrificing the unemployed people's fulfillment and happiness for the economic stability of the majority?

Yes.

But then, how many other things are done in countries to make things easier for the mega-rich at the expense of the poor?

 

[ZenRaiden]

So these people, who I have no right to demean honestly, have switched to at least hustling for themselves.

How do you not hustle for self.

Literally everyone does that, because most times of the day most of the time for most people the alternative does not exists.

Yes there is exception to the rule, but thinking about it how would you do the opposite even if you wanted, be it this or that.

The disconnect between worker and work is pretty obvious and has been talked about a lot.

The current culture of workplace is kind of play pretend that you care, but you are there only for money nothing else.

Now obviously sans black and white thinking there is nothing wrong with that.

But the results speak for themselves.

Now back to my OP, employers think of work people as resource.
Which is kind of obvious.
But people aren't machines.
So to keep them alive and well you are spoon feed all kinds of bullshit.

That is propaganda. Which again if you like it "not bad all"

What people who employ people don't understand that people run a similar cost benefit analysis as employers do.

Its not just that people don't want to work or are lazy.
But if you are going do something its got to be worth something.
I mean is it not the very argument people made against communism????
And that again is the same hypocrisy.

If peoples motivations come from money, why aren't you giving them money?

Employers are capitalist when it suits them, but become red communist when it does not.
See that kind of thing is just typical bullshit.

 

[dr froyd]

in reality most people get to live like kings for doing cush low-intensity jobs. You can finance a mortgage, a car, computers, iphones and all the shit you might want - by moving numbers between cells in an excel sheet. That is facilitated by entrepreneurs who created businesses by taking all the risk and all the sacrifices that most people are not willing to take. A very small fraction of entrepreneurs succeed, and then get to be called greedy capitalists by the very people whom they employ.

this image that is painted in this thread, of a proto-capitalist society taken straight out of Marx' Das Kapital, is pretty disturbing to see in its lack of realism

you want real hypocrites, look at those who want a cheap mortgage but then complain about "reckless banks" when everything goes tits up, those who don't want to pay more than 20 bucks for their shirt but then complain about companies using cheap labor, and those who are typing out their Marx quotes on computers made by capitalists and made affordable by free-market competition

 

[Black Rose]

I don't see any working alternatives. I don't want America to become like China. Fact is you would need to change to government or money system. Occupy wall street was a flop. Most of that energy went to Berni and Trump.

 

[ZenRaiden]

in reality most people get to live like kings for doing cush low-intensity jobs. You can finance a mortgage, a car, computers, iphones and all the shit you might want - by moving numbers between cells in an excel sheet. That is facilitated by entrepreneurs who created businesses by taking all the risk and all the sacrifices that most people are not willing to take. A very small fraction of entrepreneurs succeed, and then get to be called greedy capitalists by the very people whom they employ.

this image that is painted in this thread, of a proto-capitalist society taken straight out of Marx' Das Kapital, is pretty disturbing to see in its lack of realism

you want real hypocrites, look at those who want a cheap mortgage but then complain about "reckless banks" when everything goes tits up, those who don't want to pay more than 20 bucks for their shirt but then complain about companies using cheap labor, and those who are typing out their Marx quotes on computers made by capitalists and made affordable by free-market competition

Hehe, true, but that is not the issue OP was about.

Entrepreneurs are good people, but that does not mean they don't lie to the people work for them.

Literally companies are driving up their profits by lying to people and not giving them the money work for.

There is one thing Marx talked about and that is class struggle.

Its one class of people pitted against other.

Marx was not pointing fingers and talking about who is evil and who is good.

There is no evil and good in this. Its just plain facts.
The evil of this is the result. Not the people.
One cannot even argue that those who perpetuate this nonsense are evil.
They are merely part of system that promotes it.

Most progress was not just capitalism it self.

Progress in science was made by scientist. Not capitalist.

Progress in technology was made by scientist, engineers, etc.

Not capitalist.

Capitalist half logic, is circular.

Its like anything anyone does under capitalism, means because of capitalism.

The circular logic makes sense only, because people are spoon fed propaganda.

The alternative to this propaganda is not Marxism. That is also propaganda.

The fact anyone who is anti capitalist gets framed as communist is propaganda at work. Remain of Cold War.

You don't have to be a communist to see flaws in system.

And yes, people have it better to day in some ways.

That is because progress is part of modern world.

Marx's work is relevant today, but not applicable as concept.

It made a lot more sense in his time.

His work was and is still relevant in theory.

But since his time things have changed drastically.

One thing that did not change is class struggle, although the distinction between class is not the same clear cut red tape as it used to be.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

How do you not hustle for self.

Literally everyone does that, because most times of the day most of the time for most people the alternative does not exists.

Yes there is exception to the rule, but thinking about it how would you do the opposite even if you wanted, be it this or that.

The disconnect between worker and work is pretty obvious and has been talked about a lot.

The current culture of workplace is kind of play pretend that you care, but you are there only for money nothing else.

Now obviously sans black and white thinking there is nothing wrong with that.

But the results speak for themselves.

There is a "total value" from any one, or any set of transactions.

Say if you are a YouTube influencer. I produce media, of no descript type, and get a 50/50 revenue split from the ads that that video generated. Half to me and same to YouTube. Depending on how I look at it, getting 50% of the total value.

But my math is wrong. The total value ought to include YouTube for example hosting my video and trying to promote it with it's proprietary algorithm. Their value doesn't end in ad revenue and algorithms. Of course there is a feedback loop with consumers and creators also feeding the algorithm. But this total miscalculation of total value is what what I meant.

We realize that in the wage economy our hustle was serving our employers more than us, and that is just something that most people can't accept, and rightly so. People the most educated they've ever been. Why should I work for dove soap, when they'll replace me to maximize profits. Why not start my own soap company and be the one who misappropriates the streams of value distribution.

Now back to my OP, employers think of work people as resource.
Which is kind of obvious.
But people aren't machines.
So to keep them alive and well you are spoon feed all kinds of bullshit.

That is propaganda. Which again if you like it "not bad all"

What people who employ people don't understand that people run a similar cost benefit analysis as employers do.

Its not just that people don't want to work or are lazy.
But if you are going do something its got to be worth something.
I mean is it not the very argument people made against communism????
And that again is the same hypocrisy.

If peoples motivations come from money, why aren't you giving them money?

Employers are capitalist when it suits them, but become red communist when it does not.
See that kind of thing is just typical bullshit.

I wasn't taught the way of bullshit unfortunately. Not sure if that's a good or bad thing. I have no idea how you can look someone in the eye and try to make them believe your actions are driven by some morally depraved idealism that should have no instance in reality. As if fairness and sustainability we're infectious.

in reality most people get to live like kings for doing cush low-intensity jobs. You can finance a mortgage, a car, computers, iphones and all the shit you might want - by moving numbers between cells in an excel sheet. That is facilitated by entrepreneurs who created businesses by taking all the risk and all the sacrifices that most people are not willing to take. A very small fraction of entrepreneurs succeed, and then get to be called greedy capitalists by the very people whom they employ.

this image that is painted in this thread, of a proto-capitalist society taken straight out of Marx' Das Kapital, is pretty disturbing to see in its lack of realism

you want real hypocrites, look at those who want a cheap mortgage but then complain about "reckless banks" when everything goes tits up, those who don't want to pay more than 20 bucks for their shirt but then complain about companies using cheap labor, and those who are typing out their Marx quotes on computers made by capitalists and made affordable by free-market competition

I never saw the gripe against pencil pushers. Blue collar, pink collar, and white collar jobs are all necessary. Seems like it's mostly jealous people. Not saying they don't have the right to be, if being a pencil pusher is a path that wasn't available to them even though they would have the skills, but it's such a obvious virtue signal no one has the responses to defend.

Before digital took over, analog computers we're used to do people's information entry and management, with fucking punching holes and filling in blanks. Now it can be automated to a high degree, big fucking deal, it still needs to be done or the business can't function.

If said "harder" working Entrepreneurs is a cheap scape, and could do that spreadsheeting, then they would. But they usually don't have the appetite for it or are too busy so they delegate. They usually delegate to the lowest bidder unless other people are going to look at whatever is being made. Even then, they're expecting that the service be super amazing while having the lowest budget possible.

I don't see any working alternatives. I don't want America to become like China. Fact is you would need to change to government or money system. Occupy wall street was a flop. Most of that energy went to Berni and Trump.

It's all rooted in the social aspect really. We aren't subject to evolutions pressures so we are just trying to maximize our comfort as we get pelted with the chronic anxiety we as a species have. Now that there is nowhere to point that anxiety, and there are very clear things that agitate it, we really want to get rid of those things. And why not?

If our system would so much as collapse if we change a couple things like, affordable healthcare, colleges, housing for all, then I say let that bitch collapse. At the very least mental health agencies that can be held accountable to curbing our obviously precipitating mental health crisis that has been developing.

 

[onesteptwostep]

I'm of the opinion that there aren't enough jobs that actually mean something and provide value to the economy. A lot of the jobs out there, especially in the service sector, are jobs that simply push money around and showcase as if that counts as creating value. I think it's generally a problem of a post-capitalistic economy and the declining birth rate will come to lean off those bullshit jobs. You can easily see this in the bigger cities.. I don't see how it's possible that every 5 million or so abled persons are able to have a sustainable job within their vicinity.

most bullshit jobs are in the public sector, for the simple reason that they are subsidized by taxpayer money. A private-sector enterprise cannot sustain such jobs in the long run because they compete with other businesses and usually operate on razor-thin margins

i.e. if a particular private-sector job exists, it is probably a net-positive for the business, and hence net-positive value creation for the economy

The private isn't as efficent as you think they are. The term bullshit jobs come from private companies who try to meet job quotas so that they would be able to recieve their subsidy checks from the government, not necessarily from the public sector. A company could recieve more funding if they have over 500 employees, for example, and would hire people to do some meaningless work so as to meet that quota.

 

[Black Rose]

I don't see any working alternatives. I don't want America to become like China. Fact is you would need to change to government or money system. Occupy wall street was a flop. Most of that energy went to Berni and Trump.

It's all rooted in the social aspect really. We aren't subject to evolutions pressures so we are just trying to maximize our comfort as we get pelted with the chronic anxiety we as a species have. Now that there is nowhere to point that anxiety, and there are very clear things that agitate it, we really want to get rid of those things. And why not?

If our system would so much as collapse if we change a couple things like, affordable healthcare, colleges, housing for all, then I say let that bitch collapse. At the very least mental health agencies that can be held accountable to curbing our obviously precipitating mental health crisis that has been developing.

but giving the poor healthcare means the middle class pays more because the government cannot rain in the healthcare industry. Who pays? not the rich but the middle class. You just brought up a fundamentally broken system collapse would mean systemic failure. But why not collapse if it brings something new? what if it just brings systemic failure. Government is not a solution unless it's a working government and good luck with that.

 

[sushi]

the problem is probably inflation unemployment and business cycle, oversupply and underdemand. goods produced must be sold above and make a profit. Market shit at allocating resources and value.

also debt and land rent, creating a leecher class that does nothing.

Fuck, i didnt know you were a closet communist.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I don't see any working alternatives. I don't want America to become like China. Fact is you would need to change to government or money system. Occupy wall street was a flop. Most of that energy went to Berni and Trump.

It's all rooted in the social aspect really. We aren't subject to evolutions pressures so we are just trying to maximize our comfort as we get pelted with the chronic anxiety we as a species have. Now that there is nowhere to point that anxiety, and there are very clear things that agitate it, we really want to get rid of those things. And why not?

If our system would so much as collapse if we change a couple things like, affordable healthcare, colleges, housing for all, then I say let that bitch collapse. At the very least mental health agencies that can be held accountable to curbing our obviously precipitating mental health crisis that has been developing.

but giving the poor healthcare means the middle class pays more because the government cannot rain in the healthcare industry. Who pays? not the rich but the middle class. You just brought up a fundamentally broken system collapse would mean systemic failure. But why not collapse if it brings something new? what if it just brings systemic failure. Government is not a solution unless it's a working government and good luck with that.

If our education system actually did what it was supposed to do, prepare citizens for the real world, I wouldn't have a problem with what you're saying but it doesn't.

We are basically a super high-powered PC with an operating system from the 1700s and shitty patch updates. The population itself making up the high quality parts, but being subject to the godawful operating system that is intentionally left to be god awful.

Neither of us can make a sound argument here because it's unfalsifiable. Point is, the system is still shit, has been shit for from what I can tell 200 years at making sure fundamental needs and justice are satisfied. Anyone who says something doesn't need to change is dishonest, severely misinformed, or clinically retarded.

 

[ZenRaiden]

If our education system actually did what it was supposed to do, prepare citizens for the real world, I wouldn't have a problem with what you're saying but it doesn't.

Fun story from school. In our education system we learn about various literary authors,.

It took 3 years for some students to remember some of the authors, because we did not read them or understand them. We just study their names, and maybe a quick summary of their work.
Literally no one is smarter.
To add insult to injury even teachers don't really know much about those people, be surprised if they even read them personally.

Its not that students cannot remember the authors or the teachers teach bad.

Its literally something no one cares about and has no rhyme or reasons.

Yes the obedient students who want an A get to remember their names, but honestly they are not smarter or dumber. They just made the conscious choice to make a point to get an A.

Our schools system and judging from other schools I have been is about telling people to jump through meaningless hoops and get rewarded.

0 uderstanding 0 knowledge 0 memory training, because lets be honest remembering few names is not that hard.

School system producing cheap labor.

The hypocrisy is that employers want skills that were taught marginally or not all.
Communication skills, cooperation skills, organizing skills, attention to detail, logical skills, negotiating skills, people skills etc.
Many skills don't ever get even trained or introduced in schools.

But what do employers want??? They want students to enter job market get zero training and solve every problem the job throws at them.



Not one subject in school teaches any of this.

Kids are going from test to test from chapter to chapter breezing through facts without any understanding or deeper connection to real world.

Its extremely surface level.

The good news is that if you already know this you don't have to invest time into school and just pay attention to the job market.

The job market dictates what you need to know.

Also it means 99 percent people entering the job market no matter how smart of how much they study are just as bad as you who did nothing in school.

And if you want to make money you just skip the part where employers are demanding nonsense learn something useful and just make lot more money for lot less work.

Literally no one in school will tell you how to get a job, navigate the job market or research your job options.

This is because if you knew all this your value would go up, but the value for your employer who wants to enslave you goes down. He cannot push you around or get you drunk on water.

 

[sushi]

most employers i met here are half retarded.

just play stupid and go along with what they want until you saved enough to move to another job.

the problem is that is you dont want to make it look too bad on your resume and reccord Market and labor is terrible at allocating humans to the right job and career.

Here the culture is that you have to act more stupid than your employer even if you are 5 or 10X smarter. authority and experience seniority is always right.