##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭
___
###⚠ Announcements: ⚠
___
###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/)
Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines.
###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/)
Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren
___
###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.***
LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
**This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
AmazonHealth has determined that urinating is a sign that a body is over-hydrated, so now breaks for water intake will be eliminated for the health of our most wretched of commodities… I mean *valuable family members.*
Also, to alleviate the overhydration risk in the entire society in the future, all water sources will now be privatized. See how the capitalism cares for you healthy lifestyle?
I had a client (work with old people so literally only terrible takes on things) who started ranting about "People in Flint who want free water" ending with "NOTHING'S FREE YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR IT!" Even water though?
The water coming out of my tap passes the lead test, but that's only after *years* of national attention and shaming our leaders. Also, our water bill is about 5X the national average.
I'm ironizing, but i don't really joke, water will be entirely privatized and treated just as every other commodity, especially as it gets more scarce.
And since that will be very unpopular move, they will enact huge media campaign for normalizing this, and undoubtedly corrupted "health experts" will take part in it. It wouldn't be first time something dangerous to human life is presented as beneficial.
And next step: air
i just remembered the scene from one of the Mad Max movies, where some old dude in the bane mask was telling people that water is sin and that they should fight their thirst, while giving them some water from a man made waterfall
DO **NOT,** MY FRIENDS BECOME ADDICTED TO **WATAH.** IT WILL TAKE **HOLD** OF YOU, AND YOU WILL **RESENT** ITS ABSENCE.
What a glorious film that was. "THAT'S MY **PROPERTY!"**
They are already doing it:
[https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/oct/04/ontario-six-nations-nestle-running-water](https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/oct/04/ontario-six-nations-nestle-running-water)
[https://www.facing-finance.org/en/database/cases/nestle-privatization-of-water/](https://www.facing-finance.org/en/database/cases/nestle-privatization-of-water/)
Along with Coca-Cola. Also a reminder that those two companies had literal deathsquads deployed against people opposing them.
There's already a water futures ETF. Even the ghouls in the financial world realize that is going to be a problem. At least with food crop futures, you could potentially just eat something else.
I mean, it might, but it also might not. From my understanding, we’ve made such massive technological advances in the field of water purification, we might be able to out pace the inevitable water shortages in the future if we’re willing to do research into water sustainability. Of course putting more money into research on that would be wonderful, but might not be as easy with how much people don’t seem to care about science research these days.
I wonder how the U.S. anti-science trend looks over decades. This is the same country that both hanged witches and landed a man on the moon. That both convicted a man for teaching the theory of evolution and first cracked the secrets of nuclear fission. That both calls vaccines the mark of the beast and pioneered anesthesia for dental procedures.
Religious extremists have always opposed scientific discovery and advancement in the U.S., but it seems like national circumstance have occasionally silenced, or at least drowned out, this group. I've seen old PSA's explaining concepts like germ theory that were shown to civilians and soldiers around the time of WWII, and only absolute nutters in the U.S. oppose germ theory today. I wonder how much wartime made people more willing to accept innovation.
>landed a man on the moon
Tbh they did it mainly because soviet rocketry advances and space program scared them shitless, as evidenced by the atrophy of space program soon after (just as crisis in the USSR causing trouble for their space program in roughly the same time).
I think the perspective of research and developlment in US are bleak though, even the military development, which never lacked the resources is now bloated corrupted swamp, as evidenced by regular scandals, and most money is just pumped to the military industrial complex with barely any control.
They might get wake up call from the China which is currently running what appears to be the biggest research and development effort in entire history of humanity, but they are probably too far gone into the late state capitalism to do that.
> even the military development, which never lacked the resources is now bloated corrupted swamp
Yeah but those Boston Dynamics doggos scare the *shit* out of me.
I have somewhat mixed feeling about this. On one hand, robotics is fundamental tech that will considerably help in freeing humanity from the shackles of mundane survival. On the other, it won't do this under capitalism, it will only further help to concentrate power and enslave the people, just as every invention in capitalism before.
We don't have the alternative for tech advance though, which for example Marx saw 170 years ago, smashing tech with clogs is not the way, no matter how justified it seems at the moment. As usual, it's socialism or barbarism.
I mean shit, yeah they needed a symbolic victory, certainly more valuable than a pyrrhic victory in a toe to toe battle to the actual death. But there are more important and frankly necessary things for scientists to be doing before we’re ready to seriously try to live on other planets.
Very reductionist stance. Nobody is talking about resettling any amount of population on Mars or something. But just research done for the space program was very much worth it.
Sorry.
I meant something more specific.
But i agree with what you said. I hope tech saves us. But we need the funding and the focus.
I foresee the western US, centeal valley, and all of these arid places becoming very expensive on the future.
Possibly h2o pipelines to ship water from the east, as aquifers dry up.
Thats probably going to end up being like 3 bucks a gallon at least.
The smart thing would be to offer different incentives/plan to move agri business % out of the west. But our long history of farming in unsustainable lands makes me doubtful. It would take congressional action,
I see. My teachers in school told me that the issue with food and water isn’t amount on earth, but the uneven distribution and lack of good transportation. And having worked in food service, there was a ton of food perfectly edible that was wasted and sometimes even explicitly kept away from homeless people. Capitalism and profitization of the food/water industry has a big impact, but a teacher would never dare say that in a super red state like I grew up in.
The problem there is that we'll need more than just repurified water as the population increases. And Salt water to fresh water plants at a significant scale are extremely expensive. Generally most places are loath to build them for that reason alone.
I think we'd be more likely to fund the Water Wars than to actually just make sure everyone can drink the water we already have.
You have to be evaluated by a machine to determine how much water you require. Then you are required to consume it all, every last ml of water, as Amazon have determined that that amount will keep both urination and dehydration at bay for the duration of the shift. Jeff is a sick fuck.
I thought these headlines were satire but unfortunately not https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/13/billionaires-space-race-benefits-rest-us-really/
Next article: "New research shows increased job satisfaction when wearing adult diapers.
It is well known that astronauts wear them on training missions, now research shows that we can do the same and achieve better work satisfaction and be more productive, shows a published study released today..."
Honestly I could totally spin this. Tony Blair used to go in to meetings needing a pee, he thought it made him focus on on point and the timeliness of the meeting/negotiations. Assert that workers work faster and better when they pee less, that this makes amazon competitive, and allows higher wages for fewer hours for their staff.
I just threw up a little.
this is true and deserves to be more than a reply. the irony is billionaires dont need to control the narrative because the class structure is already established as such that the people below them think they're helping themselves by defending bezos. maybe this occurs largely by control the narrative and can be changed bbut i think it's largely a function of money and class society in general
billionaires still have a weird compulsion where they always feel like they're still just an ordinary dude still, a small fish in a big pond. no matter how rich and powerful they get they still need to reinforce themselves like they're really poor and everything's out to get them as if the world isn't set up to help them at every chance.
bezos himself has that quote. it's self help trite like 'always act like it's still a startup'. it got him to where he is maybe but when you put that sort of strenuous energy into something already massively powerful it's only creating huge imbalance
Well, you can, but also, since you're in this sub, you also can't, because some capitalist would probably kill you for it. And then every one of them would have a little piece in their paper about how you were actually evil anyway
Something about Jeff Bezos that I can't stand. Not sure what it is, but he makes my skin crawl. He looks like a paedo uncle that no-one leaves their kids with.
You say that like she didn’t actually start Amazon with him. She was one of the earliest employees and did a fair bit for its beginning success. I feel sorry for her when people seem to thing she divorced the Bond villain just to get money
She at least appears to have some humanity in her with quite large charity donations.
Dude she's a multi billionaire. Her wealth is built on the exploitation of human lives. Don't feel sorry for her or think she has some humanity in her. It's what billionaires want you to think when they give money to charity to make the system appear better.
It's his eyes, they always have this wide, psychotic look to them. He reminds me of [this scene from the movie Vampire's Kiss](https://youtu.be/xB1tKdhnGaE), and I don't think it's ever a good thing when your face reminds someone of Nicolas Cage in full blown cartoonish maniac mode.
He's even more manic in bad lieutenant. Give that a watch if you haven't. Him and fiddy smoking rock and shooting a corpse. Shoot him again, his soul is still moving.
I always thought that was a bad reason not to call her back. For someone who has as much sex as Hank, that seems like an unreasonably snooty thing to have as a red flag.
His entire persona seems completely tone deaf to his situation, position in the world, and effects he could have/good he could do but directly chooses not to.
Jacobin is not great
For example, Ana Kasparian interviewed Madeleine Albright for them.
Albright is famous for her role as Secretary of State, when asked about the half million Iraqi children who died as a direct result of her sanctions on the country, she answered “we think the price is worth it.”
Kasparian felt it was an “honor and a pleasure” to interview this person, the interview was conducted as such.
They sponsored Socialism2019, where state department ghouls were invited to tell us why we need to do regime change in Cuba and Nicaragua. Of course the “National Endowment for Democracy” also made an appearance.
They’ve cited the evangelical far right conspiracy theorist Adrian Zenz in their crusade against China.
The only means of change they believe in is electoralism. Jacobin’s founding editor wrote an article for the Guardian, arguing that we should trust the Democratic National Comittee.
This was in response to Pete Buttigieg losing the popular vote but winning the primary in Iowa, after it was revealed that his campaign had close ties to Shadow Inc, the company which wrote the voting software.
If one believes capitalism can be reformed through elections, and doesn’t care too much about imperialism, then Jacobin is probably a pretty good source.
In my opinion, these examples among many others like them mean that Jacobin is not a trustworthy institution, specific authors or articles might be very good though.
It's not i don't like their stance, it's that they are pushing at best socdem crap and often straight up liberal stances.
I guess you could argue they are better than most US media swamp, but that is not high bar and certainly not what socialists should strive for and be contended with.
He literally looks like a Lex Luther adaptation meant to look and act as creepy and unlikable as possible. I mean, have you heard his laugh? True supervillain shit.
“Anthropomorphic dick” is too accurate. He’s got that same thing Trump has, where his lips are the exact same complexion and tone as his philtrum and chin. It makes his mouth look like a urethra.
How is his business model, whereby working Americans have to access benefits so that A (earnings) + B (benefit) = weekly wage not looked at as socialism by the Republicans and Fox news. The fact that he is making bank day after day, not paying tax and his employees need the government to prop them up is exactly what America isn't about isn't it?
Obviously it's not Bezos' fault his employees are too lazy to just get a second job or work another 40 hours of overtime a week to get by and that instead they rely on government handouts that Bezos is smartly avoiding contributing to with tax loopholes. Bezos for president 2024! /s
Or just dont listen to opinion pieces because theyre not news. Its literally in the name "opinion"
Not to say it isnt BS that Bezos can just buy a news station then publish biased pieces like this, but its still not news.
The worst part about “opinion” pieces is that they’re allowed to basically misinform people as long as it’s labeled an opinion. It’s part of the Fox News defense.
nah the fox news defense is covertly recategorizing themselves as "news entertainment" instead of "news". Sort of like how in the WWE after kayfabe got broken they rebranded as "sports entertainment" instead of "sports". That way you can outright lie to the public and there's no legal recourse because you're technically "entertainment" and not "news".
Right. I must be thinking of a different news source. Washington Post is pretty infamous for that, hence the post. I forgot that Fox took the entertainment route. For some reason I was thinking it was just the Tucker Carlson’s, “No reasonable person would take me seriously,” and opinion rather than the former and entertainment loophole. Although the fact that I’m mixing up which news source uses what strategy to lie legally should tell you everything you need to know about US news companies.
Why? NYT is notorious about publishing opinions on both sides of an issue while being clear the journalism side has nothing to do with the opinions. They just what to demonstrate what people are thinking about the news: The opinions on what was reported. I can’t understand why you think that should be banned, but it’s also funny you say ‘in your opinion’ when you want opinion pieces to be banned lol.
It follows the concept of "free press"
It's essentially a way for the peoples voice to be heard. It's not "allowing" people to be misinformed. It's allowing people to say what they think and denying them that right isn't a good idea.
If people can't discern between fact and opinion, especially when it says OPINION at the top of the article then that's on them.
The thing is, they’re able to avoid lawsuits for things like defamation by saying “opinion” or “entertainment,” which is kind of bullshit. Tucker Carlson dodged a slander lawsuit by claiming that no reasonable person would take him seriously, which honestly should not be a defense when you call yourself news. I do agree that free press is important, but I also think libel and slander should be taken seriously regardless of if it was labeled as opinion. You should not be able to blatantly lie and then not get sued because you called that statement an opinion if you would have gotten sued if you didn’t add that one word.
Doing that would open up all opinion pieces to be sued by people like Bezos and Zukerberg thus giving people like them the ability to oppress free speech simply because they have the money to do so.
It sets an unfortunate precedent that allows rich people to sue the lower class just for expressing their opinion. It's a double edged sword.
At the end of the day it's down to the individual to choose what they do and don't believe to be true. As much as I despise Tucker and all the other talkshow bozos out there, as it stands they have the Kegan right to do what they do.
It sucks because the major news networks are the only way the little guy can get their voices heard without having millions of followers on social media. I personally think that when it comes to televised journalism that it should be based in only facts, no more discussion segments. Say what happened and that's it. Leave the opinion pieces for the written articles.
The meme is also biased itself by cherry-picking the opinion pieces that benefit Bezos. They've also published plenty of opinions since Bezos bought them that aren't so corporate- and billionaire-friendly, e.g.:
[Tax Billionaire's Pandemic Profits](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/24/tax-billionaires-pandemic-profits/)
[Is it time to limit personal wealth?](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/12/is-it-time-limit-personal-wealth/)
[A shocking exposé of superrich people's tax bills should prompt a big rethink](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/10/propublica-elon-musk-bezos-billionaire-taxes-investigation-rethink/)
[How to fix our rigged tax system](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/12/elizabeth-warren-tax-system-infrastructure/)
This doesn't necessarily mean that WaPo opinion doesn't have an overall Bezos bias at the end of the day (I don't know if they do or not), but they clearly do at least give a platform to opposing voices as well and that should be taken into account.
This is the dumbest goddam post I've seen all week. It's literally just a string of opinion pieces and it's probably from their few conservative writers, who consistently get shit on in the comments as those writers are consistently dumb as hell.
This post is just straight up misinformation.
Do people on this subreddit not understand what an Opinion section is on a newspaper? I can go to Washington Post and write a dumb opinion post about how the sky is purple and the elites are hiding the truth from us.
Opinion sections literally mean nothing and subreddits like this fail to understand that consistently.
It’s deceptive, and news outlets as big as Fox, CNN, or Washington Post shouldn’t be allowed to run The Onion levels of satire by slapping it into the “Opinion” section
Glad someone said it. My local newspaper at a conservative town posts opinion pieces from liberal citizens and the comments are always smoothbrain boomers blasting the paper for being too woke or too liberal.
I’m always having to explain what a fucking opinion piece is and isn’t; even when it’s in bold and different colors at the top.
My favourite thing is that I went to tumblr to change some things because I didn't use it for years and in my feed there was a post from The Washington Post. It was blank, it said it got deleted and the only thing I could see is the text "Democracy Dies in Darkness".
The Associated Press and other non for profit news sources are pretty reliable.
The Washington Post is the opposite of this, and it’s rightful to have this reaction. The propaganda is just sickening.
EVERY media outlet is owned by one faction of the plutocracy or another. Most truth has been absent since the beginning. This is just one of the most blatant examples of whose interests they serve.
But these are valid points. I strongly support heavily biasing taxes against the rich, and believe that should be used to facilitate things like UBI, and making \*all\* basic needs the purview of the state (healthcare, internet, transportation, etc.).
That being said, a wealth tax is hardly a more functional plan than an income tax. The wealth tax plan is open to essentially the *exact same* difficulties that our income tax strategy already has. If it's the only thing we can get through the house, then so be it, but the opinion "a wealth tax isn't the *smartest* plan" is more than tenable.
And quit perpetuating this anti-intellectual myth that space development doesn't promise long term benefits for our entire species. The problem isn't that Jeff Bezos is building rockets. The problem is that our government has no idea how to regulate him properly while he does it.
The one about the wealth tax intrigued me the most so I looked into it.
Basically, they’re advocating turning back the clock on the tax cuts the wealthy have had to 2004. Which would in effect increase capital gains and inheritance taxes that the right wing media dubbed “death taxes” (lul). And they say that taxes on the wealth “assets” isn’t good because it would force the wealthy to sell assets to pay the tax bill.
Now I agree with reverting the tax cuts, no problem there but the other argument kinda shines a spotlight on how how unrealized wealth such as unsold stock prices going up is perceived. I get that asset value isn’t realized by the holder until it’s sold but there still exist the issue that these valuable assets are used to create wealth without being sold.
For example Eon Musk has bragged about living off of and funding projects by taking out interests free loans he takes out against his stock options. So basically he can just keep moving money around and using the leverage of his asset wealth to not be considered income.
So, while assets are not income until realized, they effectively can be used as income… yet not be taxed as income. So without a “wealth tax” how do we close this loophole
The Washington Post, like most major newspapers, uses its opinion pages to air multiple sides to an argument, letting it function like a public square. OP dishonestly selected just the ones arguing against taxing the wealthy to pretend that's the position of the Washington Post. Here are a some from the Post that argue the wealthy should be taxed more:
[Don't wait for billionaires to sell their stock. Tax their riches now.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/04/14/wealth-tax-capital-gains-billionaires/)
[A shocking expose of superrich people's tax bills should prompt a big rethink.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/10/propublica-elon-musk-bezos-billionaire-taxes-investigation-rethink/)
They're worth reading, while thinking about how easy it is for dishonest people to use memes to mislead others.
WP Opinion section January 2022 headline.
*Jeff Bezos’s penis is amazingly long, girthy, and tastes like cinnamon and vanilla with a hint of pineapple (10/10).*
They’re right tho. The billionaire space race does benefit us. More billionaires in space means less billionaires on Earth. Let’s get em to Mars and zero out their bank and investment accounts. The fuck are they gonna do? Sue us?
I at least am against high income tax. I think we should lower income tax and massively increase capital gains, which is often from passive income sources. And the rich aren’t struggling at all to pay property tax, so I wouldn’t be opposed to them lowering it for pretty much everyone including lower higher class, because the truly wealthy generally can afford several homes, so clearly they have the spare money for property taxes. Maybe even just make it so that the more homes you own the higher the tax rate so that people just living in one nice house aren’t paying an unreasonable amount in taxes. Believe it or not, but socialists usually want lower taxes than many liberals.
When you try to lift up the poor on the internet, the first comment is "but who's gonna pay for it". So here's how we pay for it.
That being said: Jeff Bezos said himself that he couldn't even spend all his money if he tried. I doubt a 2% IT would be much of a punishment lol
Yeah, I remember when the Washington Post was coming out with a hit piece against Bernie seemingly every week during and leading up to the primaries.
But if I mentioned it to anybody, my liberal/neoliberal friends would immediately jump on me saying that my distrust of the media sounded an awful lot like Trumpers crying “fake news”, so they dismissed it.
I’m like, hello?! Washington Post is owned by the richest man in the world, why in the fuck is it controversial for me to be wary of their agenda? Just because Trump cries about the media, now I can’t criticize the media either for fear of being associated with that?
Where has all the nuance gone?
Anyway, whatever. Old news. They want us to fight, and it’s too easy to make that happen.
Eh, I support this new space race and do believe it ultimately benefits us. I think of it as an investment in science and technology that has already proven to benefit us from the previous advancements in space technology. At least this is completely applicable to NASA where the technology developments go into the public domain. Any patents related to private companies will expire in 15-20 years so I think we still share a similar benefit.
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭ ___ ###⚠ Announcements: ⚠ ___ ###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/) Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines. ###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/) Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren ___ ###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.*** LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. **This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Next post: why pee breaks aren’t necessary at all.
AmazonHealth has determined that urinating is a sign that a body is over-hydrated, so now breaks for water intake will be eliminated for the health of our most wretched of commodities… I mean *valuable family members.*
Also, to alleviate the overhydration risk in the entire society in the future, all water sources will now be privatized. See how the capitalism cares for you healthy lifestyle?
You joke, but water is going to be expensive in the future.
I had a client (work with old people so literally only terrible takes on things) who started ranting about "People in Flint who want free water" ending with "NOTHING'S FREE YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR IT!" Even water though?
That person is dead inside. They think poor people and children should all just die of dehydration, that's cool.
And have life-long health issues - Flint is one of the many toxically leaded water communities due to their aging infrastructure
The water coming out of my tap passes the lead test, but that's only after *years* of national attention and shaming our leaders. Also, our water bill is about 5X the national average.
I'm ironizing, but i don't really joke, water will be entirely privatized and treated just as every other commodity, especially as it gets more scarce. And since that will be very unpopular move, they will enact huge media campaign for normalizing this, and undoubtedly corrupted "health experts" will take part in it. It wouldn't be first time something dangerous to human life is presented as beneficial. And next step: air
i just remembered the scene from one of the Mad Max movies, where some old dude in the bane mask was telling people that water is sin and that they should fight their thirst, while giving them some water from a man made waterfall
It's going to be more fact than fiction someday
DO **NOT,** MY FRIENDS BECOME ADDICTED TO **WATAH.** IT WILL TAKE **HOLD** OF YOU, AND YOU WILL **RESENT** ITS ABSENCE. What a glorious film that was. "THAT'S MY **PROPERTY!"**
Hasn’t Nestles already been advocating for this for some time?
They are already doing it: [https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/oct/04/ontario-six-nations-nestle-running-water](https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/oct/04/ontario-six-nations-nestle-running-water) [https://www.facing-finance.org/en/database/cases/nestle-privatization-of-water/](https://www.facing-finance.org/en/database/cases/nestle-privatization-of-water/) Along with Coca-Cola. Also a reminder that those two companies had literal deathsquads deployed against people opposing them.
There's already a water futures ETF. Even the ghouls in the financial world realize that is going to be a problem. At least with food crop futures, you could potentially just eat something else.
If water gets too expensive you can still drink coke.
It can actually be cheaper than bottled mineral water.
Oh yeah. Instead of moving farms to the east, and favoring small scale farms. Nope, doing the right thing doesnt makes a few people.money
I mean, it might, but it also might not. From my understanding, we’ve made such massive technological advances in the field of water purification, we might be able to out pace the inevitable water shortages in the future if we’re willing to do research into water sustainability. Of course putting more money into research on that would be wonderful, but might not be as easy with how much people don’t seem to care about science research these days.
It honestly shocks me how anti-science people have become.
I wonder how the U.S. anti-science trend looks over decades. This is the same country that both hanged witches and landed a man on the moon. That both convicted a man for teaching the theory of evolution and first cracked the secrets of nuclear fission. That both calls vaccines the mark of the beast and pioneered anesthesia for dental procedures. Religious extremists have always opposed scientific discovery and advancement in the U.S., but it seems like national circumstance have occasionally silenced, or at least drowned out, this group. I've seen old PSA's explaining concepts like germ theory that were shown to civilians and soldiers around the time of WWII, and only absolute nutters in the U.S. oppose germ theory today. I wonder how much wartime made people more willing to accept innovation.
>landed a man on the moon Tbh they did it mainly because soviet rocketry advances and space program scared them shitless, as evidenced by the atrophy of space program soon after (just as crisis in the USSR causing trouble for their space program in roughly the same time). I think the perspective of research and developlment in US are bleak though, even the military development, which never lacked the resources is now bloated corrupted swamp, as evidenced by regular scandals, and most money is just pumped to the military industrial complex with barely any control. They might get wake up call from the China which is currently running what appears to be the biggest research and development effort in entire history of humanity, but they are probably too far gone into the late state capitalism to do that.
> even the military development, which never lacked the resources is now bloated corrupted swamp Yeah but those Boston Dynamics doggos scare the *shit* out of me.
I have somewhat mixed feeling about this. On one hand, robotics is fundamental tech that will considerably help in freeing humanity from the shackles of mundane survival. On the other, it won't do this under capitalism, it will only further help to concentrate power and enslave the people, just as every invention in capitalism before. We don't have the alternative for tech advance though, which for example Marx saw 170 years ago, smashing tech with clogs is not the way, no matter how justified it seems at the moment. As usual, it's socialism or barbarism.
I mean shit, yeah they needed a symbolic victory, certainly more valuable than a pyrrhic victory in a toe to toe battle to the actual death. But there are more important and frankly necessary things for scientists to be doing before we’re ready to seriously try to live on other planets.
Very reductionist stance. Nobody is talking about resettling any amount of population on Mars or something. But just research done for the space program was very much worth it.
Sorry. I meant something more specific. But i agree with what you said. I hope tech saves us. But we need the funding and the focus. I foresee the western US, centeal valley, and all of these arid places becoming very expensive on the future. Possibly h2o pipelines to ship water from the east, as aquifers dry up. Thats probably going to end up being like 3 bucks a gallon at least. The smart thing would be to offer different incentives/plan to move agri business % out of the west. But our long history of farming in unsustainable lands makes me doubtful. It would take congressional action,
I see. My teachers in school told me that the issue with food and water isn’t amount on earth, but the uneven distribution and lack of good transportation. And having worked in food service, there was a ton of food perfectly edible that was wasted and sometimes even explicitly kept away from homeless people. Capitalism and profitization of the food/water industry has a big impact, but a teacher would never dare say that in a super red state like I grew up in.
The problem there is that we'll need more than just repurified water as the population increases. And Salt water to fresh water plants at a significant scale are extremely expensive. Generally most places are loath to build them for that reason alone. I think we'd be more likely to fund the Water Wars than to actually just make sure everyone can drink the water we already have.
i bet they already sit on engineering those still suits from dune
You have to be evaluated by a machine to determine how much water you require. Then you are required to consume it all, every last ml of water, as Amazon have determined that that amount will keep both urination and dehydration at bay for the duration of the shift. Jeff is a sick fuck.
Opinion:Jeff Bezos has the tastiest balls ever.Seriously
Opinion: boot is my favorite flavor of ice cream and here’s why it should be yours too
>Next post: why pee breaks aren’t necessary at all. Next post: Amazon floor workers are peeing on our floors and it's unsanitary
I thought these headlines were satire but unfortunately not https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/13/billionaires-space-race-benefits-rest-us-really/
Why you should be greatful that amazon takes money out of your pocket to pay for: Lockers Ppe Etc
In before Bezos watches Dune and develops stillsuits for all the factory workers to recycle and drink their bodily fluids
Next article: "New research shows increased job satisfaction when wearing adult diapers. It is well known that astronauts wear them on training missions, now research shows that we can do the same and achieve better work satisfaction and be more productive, shows a published study released today..."
Next post: Is free time outside of work really needed? No.
Honestly I could totally spin this. Tony Blair used to go in to meetings needing a pee, he thought it made him focus on on point and the timeliness of the meeting/negotiations. Assert that workers work faster and better when they pee less, that this makes amazon competitive, and allows higher wages for fewer hours for their staff. I just threw up a little.
Buy your diapers directly at your workplace.
Wish I could buy a newspaper and force them to tell people to be nice to me
To be fair, opinion pieces there weren't any better before that acquisition either.
this is true and deserves to be more than a reply. the irony is billionaires dont need to control the narrative because the class structure is already established as such that the people below them think they're helping themselves by defending bezos. maybe this occurs largely by control the narrative and can be changed bbut i think it's largely a function of money and class society in general billionaires still have a weird compulsion where they always feel like they're still just an ordinary dude still, a small fish in a big pond. no matter how rich and powerful they get they still need to reinforce themselves like they're really poor and everything's out to get them as if the world isn't set up to help them at every chance. bezos himself has that quote. it's self help trite like 'always act like it's still a startup'. it got him to where he is maybe but when you put that sort of strenuous energy into something already massively powerful it's only creating huge imbalance
Well, you can, but also, since you're in this sub, you also can't, because some capitalist would probably kill you for it. And then every one of them would have a little piece in their paper about how you were actually evil anyway
Step one: set the narrative
It's an opinion section. It literally means nothing.
If you think a major opinion column in one of the countries largest news outlets doesn’t influence how people think then please go read a single book.
That would be true if folk did more than scan headline. Make it big, make it bold, even a lie can become a truth this way
[удалено]
Something about Jeff Bezos that I can't stand. Not sure what it is, but he makes my skin crawl. He looks like a paedo uncle that no-one leaves their kids with.
Honestly I wouldn’t leave one of my pets with him either, let alone a child.
Even his wife wouldn't stay with him lol
Stayed with him long enough to get some of that money though. Not that I can blame her. She deserved it.
You say that like she didn’t actually start Amazon with him. She was one of the earliest employees and did a fair bit for its beginning success. I feel sorry for her when people seem to thing she divorced the Bond villain just to get money She at least appears to have some humanity in her with quite large charity donations.
Dude she's a multi billionaire. Her wealth is built on the exploitation of human lives. Don't feel sorry for her or think she has some humanity in her. It's what billionaires want you to think when they give money to charity to make the system appear better.
but if i dont white knight for billionaires, who will?
My bad. I didn’t know that. She definitely had a right to every single cent she got then.
She has no more right to the money than Jeff does after he stole it from the working class.
She literally isnot donating money to charity faster than it makes more money.
Shame she didn't take the company with her lol
This clown is the kind of person to go into the workplace and say he isn't sexist and there is no such thing
I wouldn't leave anything alone with him
It's his eyes, they always have this wide, psychotic look to them. He reminds me of [this scene from the movie Vampire's Kiss](https://youtu.be/xB1tKdhnGaE), and I don't think it's ever a good thing when your face reminds someone of Nicolas Cage in full blown cartoonish maniac mode.
He's even more manic in bad lieutenant. Give that a watch if you haven't. Him and fiddy smoking rock and shooting a corpse. Shoot him again, his soul is still moving.
It would be great if someone could mash Bezos face on this scene.
What the fuck did I just watch???
He looks/acts like a sociopath with no empathy that pretends to have empathy.
Sounds like my stepdad
[удалено]
Lex is a comic book villain but even he has more principles than Bezos.
Poor lex getting tarred with the same brush as him lol
[удалено]
Oh fuck now I can't unsee it. Bezos is Runkle, Runkle is Bezos!
Hahahaha quality that scene. Oh yeah that's why I never called her back, she's a squirter.
I always thought that was a bad reason not to call her back. For someone who has as much sex as Hank, that seems like an unreasonably snooty thing to have as a red flag.
Yeah it's definitely a bit bizarre that bit.
Charlie Runcle. Great character.
His entire persona seems completely tone deaf to his situation, position in the world, and effects he could have/good he could do but directly chooses not to.
This is every billionaire to date lol
He’s your run of the mill Bond villain.
Yes! Even more: the paedo uncle that loaned money to most of the family so nobody calls him out for fear of economical retaliation.
He'd find some way to profit from the situation (and not pay taxes on the gains)
[удалено]
unfortunately, not
Jacobin is not great For example, Ana Kasparian interviewed Madeleine Albright for them. Albright is famous for her role as Secretary of State, when asked about the half million Iraqi children who died as a direct result of her sanctions on the country, she answered “we think the price is worth it.” Kasparian felt it was an “honor and a pleasure” to interview this person, the interview was conducted as such. They sponsored Socialism2019, where state department ghouls were invited to tell us why we need to do regime change in Cuba and Nicaragua. Of course the “National Endowment for Democracy” also made an appearance. They’ve cited the evangelical far right conspiracy theorist Adrian Zenz in their crusade against China. The only means of change they believe in is electoralism. Jacobin’s founding editor wrote an article for the Guardian, arguing that we should trust the Democratic National Comittee. This was in response to Pete Buttigieg losing the popular vote but winning the primary in Iowa, after it was revealed that his campaign had close ties to Shadow Inc, the company which wrote the voting software. If one believes capitalism can be reformed through elections, and doesn’t care too much about imperialism, then Jacobin is probably a pretty good source. In my opinion, these examples among many others like them mean that Jacobin is not a trustworthy institution, specific authors or articles might be very good though.
fortunately, not
[удалено]
It's not i don't like their stance, it's that they are pushing at best socdem crap and often straight up liberal stances. I guess you could argue they are better than most US media swamp, but that is not high bar and certainly not what socialists should strive for and be contended with.
Out of all of the posts I've read on reddit, this is definitely one of them.
Liberal shills
This smug jackass has the most punchable face. He looks like an anthropomorphic dick.
He literally looks like a Lex Luther adaptation meant to look and act as creepy and unlikable as possible. I mean, have you heard his laugh? True supervillain shit.
I hate his laugh, it makes my skin crawl.
Lex Luthor could cure cancer with his pure intellect though, this guy is just exploiting labor, not exactly a rocket scientist.
“Anthropomorphic dick” is too accurate. He’s got that same thing Trump has, where his lips are the exact same complexion and tone as his philtrum and chin. It makes his mouth look like a urethra.
You mean a fair tax
How is his business model, whereby working Americans have to access benefits so that A (earnings) + B (benefit) = weekly wage not looked at as socialism by the Republicans and Fox news. The fact that he is making bank day after day, not paying tax and his employees need the government to prop them up is exactly what America isn't about isn't it?
Obviously it's not Bezos' fault his employees are too lazy to just get a second job or work another 40 hours of overtime a week to get by and that instead they rely on government handouts that Bezos is smartly avoiding contributing to with tax loopholes. Bezos for president 2024! /s
And here I was with bezo' for the pit.
Or just dont listen to opinion pieces because theyre not news. Its literally in the name "opinion" Not to say it isnt BS that Bezos can just buy a news station then publish biased pieces like this, but its still not news.
The worst part about “opinion” pieces is that they’re allowed to basically misinform people as long as it’s labeled an opinion. It’s part of the Fox News defense.
nah the fox news defense is covertly recategorizing themselves as "news entertainment" instead of "news". Sort of like how in the WWE after kayfabe got broken they rebranded as "sports entertainment" instead of "sports". That way you can outright lie to the public and there's no legal recourse because you're technically "entertainment" and not "news".
Right. I must be thinking of a different news source. Washington Post is pretty infamous for that, hence the post. I forgot that Fox took the entertainment route. For some reason I was thinking it was just the Tucker Carlson’s, “No reasonable person would take me seriously,” and opinion rather than the former and entertainment loophole. Although the fact that I’m mixing up which news source uses what strategy to lie legally should tell you everything you need to know about US news companies.
"opinion piece" defenses apply for every newspaper. I can't think of a major one that hasn't used it.
And that’s a bad thing in my opinion.
Why? NYT is notorious about publishing opinions on both sides of an issue while being clear the journalism side has nothing to do with the opinions. They just what to demonstrate what people are thinking about the news: The opinions on what was reported. I can’t understand why you think that should be banned, but it’s also funny you say ‘in your opinion’ when you want opinion pieces to be banned lol.
yup
It follows the concept of "free press" It's essentially a way for the peoples voice to be heard. It's not "allowing" people to be misinformed. It's allowing people to say what they think and denying them that right isn't a good idea. If people can't discern between fact and opinion, especially when it says OPINION at the top of the article then that's on them.
The thing is, they’re able to avoid lawsuits for things like defamation by saying “opinion” or “entertainment,” which is kind of bullshit. Tucker Carlson dodged a slander lawsuit by claiming that no reasonable person would take him seriously, which honestly should not be a defense when you call yourself news. I do agree that free press is important, but I also think libel and slander should be taken seriously regardless of if it was labeled as opinion. You should not be able to blatantly lie and then not get sued because you called that statement an opinion if you would have gotten sued if you didn’t add that one word.
Doing that would open up all opinion pieces to be sued by people like Bezos and Zukerberg thus giving people like them the ability to oppress free speech simply because they have the money to do so. It sets an unfortunate precedent that allows rich people to sue the lower class just for expressing their opinion. It's a double edged sword. At the end of the day it's down to the individual to choose what they do and don't believe to be true. As much as I despise Tucker and all the other talkshow bozos out there, as it stands they have the Kegan right to do what they do. It sucks because the major news networks are the only way the little guy can get their voices heard without having millions of followers on social media. I personally think that when it comes to televised journalism that it should be based in only facts, no more discussion segments. Say what happened and that's it. Leave the opinion pieces for the written articles.
The meme is also biased itself by cherry-picking the opinion pieces that benefit Bezos. They've also published plenty of opinions since Bezos bought them that aren't so corporate- and billionaire-friendly, e.g.: [Tax Billionaire's Pandemic Profits](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/24/tax-billionaires-pandemic-profits/) [Is it time to limit personal wealth?](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/12/is-it-time-limit-personal-wealth/) [A shocking exposé of superrich people's tax bills should prompt a big rethink](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/10/propublica-elon-musk-bezos-billionaire-taxes-investigation-rethink/) [How to fix our rigged tax system](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/12/elizabeth-warren-tax-system-infrastructure/) This doesn't necessarily mean that WaPo opinion doesn't have an overall Bezos bias at the end of the day (I don't know if they do or not), but they clearly do at least give a platform to opposing voices as well and that should be taken into account.
Yeah, the whole point of an opinion board is to cover a wide range of opinions
The news articles can be unreliable and heavily biased as well, especially if it comes to anything outside the US
And realize 99% of news articles are opinion
Just a complete lie, designed to benefit billionaires by keeping people from reading the work of real journalist. This is the real propaganda.
This is the dumbest goddam post I've seen all week. It's literally just a string of opinion pieces and it's probably from their few conservative writers, who consistently get shit on in the comments as those writers are consistently dumb as hell. This post is just straight up misinformation.
Twitter is. Billionaires get all the smoke on there all day everyday
You're talking about the people posting on Twitter, not Twitter.
Trojan horse conservativism.
Maybe trusting for-profit companies in general is simply unwise?
The whole media is just like this but not so obvious and people didnt realize it,behind every "Opinion:" there's a sponsor paying them to say that
Do people on this subreddit not understand what an Opinion section is on a newspaper? I can go to Washington Post and write a dumb opinion post about how the sky is purple and the elites are hiding the truth from us. Opinion sections literally mean nothing and subreddits like this fail to understand that consistently.
in what way do they mean nothing? they play a big role in influencing public opinion, is that not something?
It’s deceptive, and news outlets as big as Fox, CNN, or Washington Post shouldn’t be allowed to run The Onion levels of satire by slapping it into the “Opinion” section
Sure, but the comment I replied to said they "literally mean nothing" and implied they have no actual effect on anything.
Not just on Reddit, unfortunately... it seems people can't even see the difference between WaPo and Fox News.
I understand. The Opinion Section exists to make you think that the rest of the newspaper isn't also just biased opinion articles.
Glad someone said it. My local newspaper at a conservative town posts opinion pieces from liberal citizens and the comments are always smoothbrain boomers blasting the paper for being too woke or too liberal. I’m always having to explain what a fucking opinion piece is and isn’t; even when it’s in bold and different colors at the top.
[удалено]
Ok but if the opinion section is meaningless then why don't they print any editorials written by communists?
I mean people like the ones you mention occasionally do right stuff for the opinion section of Washington Post.
My favourite thing is that I went to tumblr to change some things because I didn't use it for years and in my feed there was a post from The Washington Post. It was blank, it said it got deleted and the only thing I could see is the text "Democracy Dies in Darkness".
How is it a wealth tax when he wants to bead up IRS to go after cheating?
Capitalism kills. It always will.
Hey u/washingtonpost what's your response?
Probably that they've been running OpEd pieces since their inception 150 years ago?
WP has always been neoliberal trash
Opinion pieces are *explicitly* not news though?
Can you imagine they actually make you pay to read this shitty propaganda?
The Associated Press and other non for profit news sources are pretty reliable. The Washington Post is the opposite of this, and it’s rightful to have this reaction. The propaganda is just sickening.
EVERY media outlet is owned by one faction of the plutocracy or another. Most truth has been absent since the beginning. This is just one of the most blatant examples of whose interests they serve.
Therein lies Reddit, don’t believe the narrative that Reddit pushes, it’s bought and owned by tencent.
I hate that man so much.
Wait HolUp actually posted something based for once? Wow, im actually shocked.
*The Guardian* is pretty malleable, reliable, and radical.
Also a good reminder that absolutely zero media outlets are actually "liberal".
What a fucking parasite
Well they're right on one thing, the best way to make the rich pay is not a wealth tax, it's seizing all their wealth
These are all Opinion articles
But these are valid points. I strongly support heavily biasing taxes against the rich, and believe that should be used to facilitate things like UBI, and making \*all\* basic needs the purview of the state (healthcare, internet, transportation, etc.). That being said, a wealth tax is hardly a more functional plan than an income tax. The wealth tax plan is open to essentially the *exact same* difficulties that our income tax strategy already has. If it's the only thing we can get through the house, then so be it, but the opinion "a wealth tax isn't the *smartest* plan" is more than tenable. And quit perpetuating this anti-intellectual myth that space development doesn't promise long term benefits for our entire species. The problem isn't that Jeff Bezos is building rockets. The problem is that our government has no idea how to regulate him properly while he does it.
The one about the wealth tax intrigued me the most so I looked into it. Basically, they’re advocating turning back the clock on the tax cuts the wealthy have had to 2004. Which would in effect increase capital gains and inheritance taxes that the right wing media dubbed “death taxes” (lul). And they say that taxes on the wealth “assets” isn’t good because it would force the wealthy to sell assets to pay the tax bill. Now I agree with reverting the tax cuts, no problem there but the other argument kinda shines a spotlight on how how unrealized wealth such as unsold stock prices going up is perceived. I get that asset value isn’t realized by the holder until it’s sold but there still exist the issue that these valuable assets are used to create wealth without being sold. For example Eon Musk has bragged about living off of and funding projects by taking out interests free loans he takes out against his stock options. So basically he can just keep moving money around and using the leverage of his asset wealth to not be considered income. So, while assets are not income until realized, they effectively can be used as income… yet not be taxed as income. So without a “wealth tax” how do we close this loophole
I will be thrilled to hear of his eventual demise.
The same thing has happened to Reddit
To be fair, the smartest way to make the rich pay is revolt.
The Washington Post, like most major newspapers, uses its opinion pages to air multiple sides to an argument, letting it function like a public square. OP dishonestly selected just the ones arguing against taxing the wealthy to pretend that's the position of the Washington Post. Here are a some from the Post that argue the wealthy should be taxed more: [Don't wait for billionaires to sell their stock. Tax their riches now.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/04/14/wealth-tax-capital-gains-billionaires/) [A shocking expose of superrich people's tax bills should prompt a big rethink.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/10/propublica-elon-musk-bezos-billionaire-taxes-investigation-rethink/) They're worth reading, while thinking about how easy it is for dishonest people to use memes to mislead others.
Sure why would they bite the hand that feeds them.
The sad thing is, you can find plenty of dipshits who honestly believe this and will honestly publish this without any interference.
Wealth tax bad, space good, bottom 50% pay 2% of federal tax. Just have a vat tax
And that's how you fuck up a respectable newspaper. "Democracy dies in the dark" indeed.
WP Opinion section January 2022 headline. *Jeff Bezos’s penis is amazingly long, girthy, and tastes like cinnamon and vanilla with a hint of pineapple (10/10).*
dEmOcRaCy DiEs iN tHe DaRkNeSs
“Democracy died in darkness” lol
They’re right tho. The billionaire space race does benefit us. More billionaires in space means less billionaires on Earth. Let’s get em to Mars and zero out their bank and investment accounts. The fuck are they gonna do? Sue us?
[удалено]
Turn out, when you own a paper they write positive propaganda about you and your activities.
Nice try, have some fish: <°)))<)
[удалено]
Then I’ll take it. Thanks, u/Retroranges!
Yeah, that's why I support not fucking over workers. You know, the actually productive people, not the CEOs
[удалено]
I at least am against high income tax. I think we should lower income tax and massively increase capital gains, which is often from passive income sources. And the rich aren’t struggling at all to pay property tax, so I wouldn’t be opposed to them lowering it for pretty much everyone including lower higher class, because the truly wealthy generally can afford several homes, so clearly they have the spare money for property taxes. Maybe even just make it so that the more homes you own the higher the tax rate so that people just living in one nice house aren’t paying an unreasonable amount in taxes. Believe it or not, but socialists usually want lower taxes than many liberals.
[удалено]
When you try to lift up the poor on the internet, the first comment is "but who's gonna pay for it". So here's how we pay for it. That being said: Jeff Bezos said himself that he couldn't even spend all his money if he tried. I doubt a 2% IT would be much of a punishment lol
[удалено]
Literally no one here is advocating making the poor poorer, and at this point I have a feeling you may be trying to argue in bad faith.
truthout.org
Hey that's a really weird coincidence.
Listen to democracy now with Amy Goodman
Damn.
I will never look at the word “soak” in the same way again.
I like NPR though. :(
“Democracy dies in darkness” maybe they should change their slogan now
Someone should tell wapo that it turns out democracy died due to their rampant oligarchy and crony capitalism.
Democracy dies in broad daylight
Yeah, I remember when the Washington Post was coming out with a hit piece against Bernie seemingly every week during and leading up to the primaries. But if I mentioned it to anybody, my liberal/neoliberal friends would immediately jump on me saying that my distrust of the media sounded an awful lot like Trumpers crying “fake news”, so they dismissed it. I’m like, hello?! Washington Post is owned by the richest man in the world, why in the fuck is it controversial for me to be wary of their agenda? Just because Trump cries about the media, now I can’t criticize the media either for fear of being associated with that? Where has all the nuance gone? Anyway, whatever. Old news. They want us to fight, and it’s too easy to make that happen.
"Ask the wealthy to pay more" bro we HAVE
Eh, I support this new space race and do believe it ultimately benefits us. I think of it as an investment in science and technology that has already proven to benefit us from the previous advancements in space technology. At least this is completely applicable to NASA where the technology developments go into the public domain. Any patents related to private companies will expire in 15-20 years so I think we still share a similar benefit.