The U.S. surgeon general calls mental health the “defining health crisis of our time.” On a special edition of Meet the Press, Kristen Welker dives into the growing crisis and how to solve it.
The choice is theirs: they can give up their ill-gotten wealth directly (philanthropically), or they can be taxed out of existence (peacefully), or they can be fined out of existence (criminally), or they can be guillotined out of existence (violently). What they can't do is continue to exploit and devastate all of society for their personal benefit.
If they make the first three options impossible, they make the fourth option inevitable.
This is absolutely not the solution either.
This is how the means of production is owned in modern society. Shares. The problem isn't the idea that corporations look after shareholders. The problem is that the workers aren't shareholders. Workers are compensated primarily with dollars; executive-level management is compensated primarily with shares. When the worker starts receiving shares of future profits along with their hourly pay, the major problems are solved.
The choice is theirs: they can give up their ill-gotten wealth directly (philanthropically),
This is wishful thinking, if you wish in one hand and shit in the other which fill faster.
or they can be taxed out of existence (peacefully), or they can be fined out of existence (criminally),
These two options are at the barrel of a gun, so violently. I don't know why you don't seem to get that. Whose guns you may ask. Theirs. So more wishful thinking.
or they can be guillotined out of existence (violently)
We're here. Please catch up. However pointless violence will get us nowhere. A proper revolution must have goals to upend the current system and replace it with a better one. Much ink has been used to model this more can be read about it at marxists.org
This is how the means of production is owned in modern society. Shares. The problem isn't the idea that corporations look after shareholders. The problem is that the workers aren't shareholders. Workers are compensated primarily with dollars; executive-level management is compensated primarily with shares. When the worker starts receiving shares of future profits along with their hourly pay, the major problems are solved.
This is a continuation of the capitalist system and would be a tragedy if we revolted and got this.
Edit: rewrote some stuff, I should be less glib you seem to be earnest.
Surely you don't just mean that there are workers along with capitalist shareholders, right? Shares as a speculative asset are valuable in a context of expected growth, and any system based on endless growth towards no other end is going to produce conflict with out finite planet and its finite resources, as we're already seeing around the world. Co-ops won't save you from the basic contradictions of capitalism, and that's without getting into the need of capitalism to have a destitute lower class (whether domestic or abroad) or how even the co-op employees are really just overseeing their own exploitation in order to stay competitive (as we see today with co-ops). You need to challenge yourself a little more to think beyond the paradigm of liberalism.
The choice is theirs: they can give up their ill-gotten wealth directly (philanthropically), or they can be taxed out of existence (peacefully), or they can be fined out of existence (criminally), or they can be guillotined out of existence (violently). What they can't do is continue to exploit and devastate all of society for their personal benefit.
If they make the first three options impossible, they make the fourth option inevitable.
This is how the means of production is owned in modern society. Shares. The problem isn't the idea that corporations look after shareholders. The problem is that the workers aren't shareholders. Workers are compensated primarily with dollars; executive-level management is compensated primarily with shares. When the worker starts receiving shares of future profits along with their hourly pay, the major problems are solved.
I don’t want shares of a company, I want capitalism to end.
This is wishful thinking, if you wish in one hand and shit in the other which fill faster.
These two options are at the barrel of a gun, so violently. I don't know why you don't seem to get that. Whose guns you may ask. Theirs. So more wishful thinking.
We're here. Please catch up. However pointless violence will get us nowhere. A proper revolution must have goals to upend the current system and replace it with a better one. Much ink has been used to model this more can be read about it at marxists.org
This is a continuation of the capitalist system and would be a tragedy if we revolted and got this.
Edit: rewrote some stuff, I should be less glib you seem to be earnest.
They've already chosen to not do the first three. I hope your guillotine is sharp, you're on the schedule this week.
Surely you don't just mean that there are workers along with capitalist shareholders, right? Shares as a speculative asset are valuable in a context of expected growth, and any system based on endless growth towards no other end is going to produce conflict with out finite planet and its finite resources, as we're already seeing around the world. Co-ops won't save you from the basic contradictions of capitalism, and that's without getting into the need of capitalism to have a destitute lower class (whether domestic or abroad) or how even the co-op employees are really just overseeing their own exploitation in order to stay competitive (as we see today with co-ops). You need to challenge yourself a little more to think beyond the paradigm of liberalism.
This is so unbelievably stupid.