2026-10-12 12:57 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.ml 2026-10-12 13:09
Capitalism requires brutal resource extraction, by force, from poor countries and that is usually done by killing, bombing, and using other forms of violence to enforce this extraction of resources. We (USA) are literally doing it to Venezuela and other countries right now. I’m guessing you are American if you think capitalism with strong safety nets is the best. You mean Capitalism with Strong safety nets for YOU. Not for people from South America, Africa, South Asia, etc. Americans (among other euro countries and some Scandinavian and east euro countries too) would have to give up a few apparatuses of luxury for the world to be able to afford even half of what we enjoy on a daily basis.
-
@azimir@lemmy.ml 2026-10-12 13:27
Wait… So all of those rich and billionaires in socialist countries are just figments of imagination? Also, have you looked at how terrible the US upward mobility rankings are now? Under Capitalism you aren’t likely to move anywhere unless you’re born into it.
-
@selokichtli@lemmy.ml 2026-10-12 13:40
That last sentence is a mixed economy system, which should probably be the best, current way of doing things. Taking the benefits of each successful economical system. Yes, communism was successful in converting Russia from am agricultural-servant Barton to an industrial powerhouse. Also, communism didn’t collapse by itself, the USA made everything they could to boycott it, and they will do because they are afraid of it. They are perpetrating their own silent genocide in Cuba, just to ingrain in or brains that communism is sentenced to collapse.
-
@oeuf@slrpnk.net 2026-10-12 14:15
I agree with a lot of what you say. But I’m not sure that social mobility being desirable should be taken as self-evident. I believe equality is good for us, so if social mobility results in greater inequality, for me that is bad. And of course social mobility goes both ways when there are finite resources. It can go downwards. You recognise the need for social safety nets, and I would say that these are both more necessary and harder to supply in a more unequal and ‘socially mobile’ economy. At least that is what is happening in English-speaking countries like mine and yours. The basic assumption is that we should be able to work our way from poverty to prosperity, but I’m saying that all of us should be kept somewhere roughly between the two.
-
@holy_scroller@lemmy.zip 2026-10-13 05:07
This is the only reply of currently 40 that tries to honestly answer the question and of course it is down voted. People are not reading this post for honest takes, just gripes about “brainwashing”, “ignorance” and “neoliberal conspiracies.” It’s basically an eco-chamber of grievance. It’s pretty easy to make an argument for any position, and no one else even tried.