Please downvote this dweeb into oblivion
got the same energy as guys on game forums going on about how they could make the worlds best selling game if only Microsoft would answer their emails
That's because my uncle, John Microsoft, is too busy banning my enemies from XBL to take his calls. Pity.
Here’s how capitalism can save the planet
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha :michael-laugh:
When I read "evolution of capitalism" I joker laughed so hard into my monitor that the feds monitoring my traffic could hear it from the van.
Straight_Depth 45 minutes ago
I'd rather just have communism, thanks.
An old head from the sub!
It seems you didn't fully read it given that you commented 4 minutes after the posting - in my estimation it takes at least 15 minutes to read.
This guy is so close to examining people's skull sizes to determine their reading speed
In what world does this take 15 minutes to read, I'm a slow as fuck reader, and the only way I could see it taking that long is if I read it out like a speech in my head
That’s how OP reads it to himself. Imagining himself standing at a podium in front of a massive green cogwheel representing the world sustainablist movement.
The most brain damaging bit, is not any of his specific proposals but the idea that any of this could ever be accomplished. Like achieving this level of technocratic change is as difficult as a full on socialist revolution; and socialists atleast have the intelligence to cut off the head of the capitalist snake.
YES! Fucking exactly it. No self-respecting capitalist will ever willingly go along with this. Just look at the clusterfuck the WEF is doing with their great reset bullshit and how even today's capitalists are giving it the side-eye. Enacting such sweeping reforms would require so much gunpoint legislating that the capitalists would probably just perform a coup and magic away the technocratic revolutionaries. And that's ignoring the elephant in the room of the capitalist using their uuuhhh, capital, to simply buy politicians or the very legislative offices themselves and undo the reforms in the first place.
Reminds me of a point machiavelli made that basically boiled down to never half ass taking someone's powet.
Defanging the capitalists by asking them nicely to keep their mouths closed and promise not to bite anyone
Or as Omar Little put it "You come at the king, you best not miss"
Not that Stalin specifically was right, I don't know enough about the specifics of his actions. My point is that either you make peace with someone or you don't and you remove their ability to pose a threat to you. So if someone can be trusted to support you, it's ok to leave them with power. However if someone will always be working against you unless you leave them with an amount of power you deem unacceptable you should completely defang them.
Sustainablism is a centrist approach to economic thought, the design of which should appeal to everyone across the political spectrum. It encompasses the ideals of universal access to food, shelter and the like while clinging tightly to the free market, private ownership and the maintenance of a class system. It is capitalist with respect to rules and processes and socially conscious with respect to outcomes.
Imagine sitting there and typing this out and smiling to yourself that is is a cool and good thing
Have fun in North Korea!
Yes, I will, thank you very much. I'm gonna tour the DMZ from the fun side and moon the ROK guards and their dumb shiny helmets.
"Surely there must be SOME way we can make infinite growth work in a finite world!"
He just keeps going on and on and on and on and on and on. It's Das Kapital scribbled on a napkin at 3AM. It's a neoliberal dungeons and dragons campaign.
https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/lnl04g/sustainablism_once_you_know_what_it_is_youre/go2adxo?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
Motherfucker is either doing a highly advanced bit or he's actually this deluded.
I read through his manifesto trying to find the part where he's going to shoot up his middle school. It's astounding that they'd write 18 pages about a subject they haven't read 18 pages about. I don't think I could write a 18 page ML manifesto with anything worthwhile to contribute and he made a whole ideological Willy Wonka factory full of fun nonsense and rigid social hierarchy.
Yeah, my absolute favorite part of all this is the total necessity of an entrenched class sytem of capital and consumer equally sharing the risk of any enterprise as if it wouldn't fall apart the instant the capitalist decides it.
No no, there's going to be total transparency to prevent corruption. Imagine capitalism, which we need, but with things like a Securities Exchange Committee to regulate the market. That capitalist can't hurt the consumer because we'd have a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Of course it'd be sustainable, there'd be labour unions even though... holy shit his whole thing rides on 50% employee ownership of businesses and the word "union" doesn't appear once. Lmao what.
Let us compare price-setting under conventional capitalism and Sustainablism. Under the former, no firm will:
• increase prices beyond the point where customers are willing to purchase the good or service produced by the firm: no willingness to pay = no sales = no firm = no profit for the owners
• decrease prices beyond the point the firm can cover the cost of producing the good or service: no means of production = no sales = no firm = no profit for the owners13
Firms naturally seek the highest possible price for their goods and services, and customers seek the lowest possible price. This tension is settled by the free market and the forces of supply and demand.
In contrast, Sustainablism establishes or assumes the following to achieve equilibrium:
• firms are composed of employees (specifically, the managerial class14) who set the prices of their goods and services
• sales are executed with customers, who accept the sales price
• this setting and acceptance of prices is required for a transaction to take place
• transactions create profits for owners
• owners want continuing profits
• because owners want continuing profits, they will make decisions that ensure the long-term life of the firm (rather than its destruction)
• Sustainablist firms are 50:50 owned by employees and customers
• Because ownership of Sustainablist firms is held equally by employees and customers, they must therefore fairly resolve any underlying tensions to set prices so that transactions can take place for themselves, as owners, to realize profit
I legitimately cannot see a difference here besides using different words to describe the same thing.
I'm amazed you managed to parse any meaning out of that. Like yeah no shit owners want to make profit so they'll keep customers "happy" insofar as it is profitable to do so. OR they could collude with other owners in related sectors to create artificial monopolies, force out any competition, and charge what they want for an awful product. Or they could create nothing at all and gather capital exclusively through their hypothetical value as determined by the magic bullshit generator of the stock market.
But you see, if customers own 50% of the company, they’ll want to pay higher prices solely from their pockets to make more profit that they have to split with all the other customers and workers.
And I guess if they’re not happy with the price or product they can stop being a customer but does that mean you’d have to give up your ownership? I don’t know if he addressed this anywhere because it was too long and I didn’t read much of it.
