They’ll just raise your rent to pay for cleaning and new security cameras. The man is quite adept at the game of keeping you down.

In the US, conservative lawmakers have been waging a quiet war against our postal system for a while now.

Highlights: They forced it to be self-sustaining (cut federal funding), then when that didn’t kill it they forced it to, in a very short time frame, pre-fund retirement benefits ahead of time for all current and former employees.

The postal system is more or less dependent on the funds it gets from spam mailers.

Edit: To clarify, I’m not insinuating that the bulk/majority of its income is from junk mail, I’m just stating that its not nothing, so they don’t really have an incentive to kill that source if revenue.

Then stop funding them with tax payer money.

The big ISPs? I agree - they can’t be trusted. However, in most cases access wasn’t happening at all without grants. The big guys just came in, strutted around promising the sun and the moon, then took the money and sat on it.

I want to see small towns do community infrastructure as an alternative to the terrible single ISPs that are normally present.

In many communities, it isn’t possible to do that without the help of grants… running cable or fiber isn’t cheap.

…but we can agree on this. I’d love to see municipal broadband break up these ISP monopolies.

Unfortunately, many states and municipalities have stupid laws still on the books that explicitly prohibit municipal broadband or force them to jump through hoops like getting ISPs to bid to provide the services first or some other bullshit. Its irrational fear of government run programs and socialism or whatever. Those laws are starting to get repealed.

Edit: I have mixed feelings about StarLink. I don’t trust that they won’t act just as terribly as the rest if given the chance and they are throwing a lot into the atmosphere without considering or planning for the consequences.

It is crazy to try to force pricing or other free market values.

The US government has, on multiple occasions, spent many many billions of dollars subsidizing the expansion of broadband internet. Often the ISPs would take the funds and under deliver, drastically. Like “Sure, we’ll take $ to provide broadband in these areas” then provide it for like, a neighborhood within that area, mark that area as having access to broadband now, and cash their check.

…Or they’ll lie about covering areas or planning to cover areas to prevent rival/startup ISPs from getting similar funding to expand access to an area without access. Imagine you don’t have broadband and your ISP lied to the FCC so a rival ISP could not get grants/subsidies they’d use to fund their broadband expansion to your area.

They lie and cheat to steal government and customer money and maintain their anticompetitive monopolies. Its not a free market.

Market socialism can be distinguished from the concept of the mixed economy because most models of market socialism propose complete and self-regulating systems, unlike the mixed economy. While social democracy aims to achieve greater economic stability and equality through policy measures such as taxes, subsidies, and social welfare programs, market socialism aims to achieve similar goals through changing patterns of enterprise ownership and management.

I mind if you are simultaneously linking to a Wikipedia article defining it as being completely self regulated, lacking any form of social welfare.

Capitalism’s problem is that, ultimately, it’s “compete” or die because you need to work to afford to live. I’m not necessarily advocating for the nationalization of all industries or a command economy. There can be competition, but the playing field needs to be leveled first. Workers owning the enterprise as a collective is a step in the right direction but that still leaves the door open for “B2B” exploitation when an enterprise’s failure can mean its workers now cannot afford to live.

A theory to use as a standard for regulation assuming you are restrained to a capitalist system, maybe.

But it is a system that can be maintained with appropriate regulation.

The nature of Capitalism requires that some have while others have not. Many of those among the capitalist class will use the full force of their power to obstruct and corrupt regulation, find loopholes, and obtain more power. Regulatory capture, pivoting to the bleeding edge of industry where nobody knows how to regulate yet (financial derivatives, crypto, AI), or just leading a coup - they’ll find a way.

The only way is something that resembles socialism, but you can call it “appropriate regulation” if it makes you feel better. Sure, competition has its place… but it doesn’t belong anywhere near basic human needs.

I think perfect competition is impossible. The incentive is not to compete fairly, it’s to maximize profits and the most effective ways to maximize profits are anticompetitive, exploitative, or both. Anyone arguing for a society built around such a system is either naive or trying to buy more time with false hopes.

Virtually every condition in the ideal scenario is a barrier for profit, and I don’t think any civilization has managed even a single one of those conditions. There will always be actors looking to take advantage of any loopholes or create unregulated markets.

It’s just not a system that is sustainable. The incentives are simply wrong and the society built around those incentives can’t maintain a system of perfect conditions even if one were to exist.

Demonstrating the inherent contradiction of capitalism in practice.

Capitalism is allegedly the only fair way to price things, via the “Price Mechanism”. However, capitalists have simultaneously been creaming their pants at the idea of charging specific people or people in specific situations more, because they can get more profit, in service of Profit Maximization.

I’m sure I’ll get a lecture on how they are not at all mutually exclusive but I don’t care, honestly. It’s either going to price gouge when the customer is perceived to be in more need (low battery pricing for taxi apps) or have a price based on the customer’s ability to pay… at which point why not socialism?

Essentially, the capitalist will support what is best for themselves and make up reasons why it theoretically might benefit consumers (but not really).

My point is that people like Trump aren’t looking to help the weak. Trump is looking to exploit them. The only “problems” be wants to fix are barriers to more easily exploit them.

By blaming the minorities, he creates a scapegoat for his base and others to blame for their problems. This distracts them from the fact that him and people like him are the cause of their problems.

Sure, some of them are racist but I honestly think most of them are just hurt, angry, scared, ignorant, and desperate. If they had more exposure to minorities most of them would change their beliefs.

I think the problem is that the powerful are endlessly fucking over the weak for profit. It’s been getting worse and we’re feeling more squeezed every year.

Racism is just a tried and true, old reliable, when it comes finding a scapegoat to get people to blame someone else.

nowhere am I finding any indication that anyone is earnestly making the argument that Israel has the right to rape prisoners.

It literally happened a little over a week ago.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-idf-palestinian-prisoner-alleged-rape-sde-teinman-abuse-protest/

Paragraphs 5-7. I recall there being a video of the moment but I don’t know if it is included in the linked article.

A member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, speaking Monday at a meeting of lawmakers, justified the rape and abuse of Palestinian prisoners, shouting angrily at colleagues questioning the alleged behavior that anything was legitimate to do to “terrorists” in custody.

Lawmaker Hanoch Milwidsky was asked as he defended the alleged abuse whether it was legitimate, “to insert a stick into a person’s rectum?”

“Yes!” he shouted in reply to his fellow parliamentarian. “If he is a Nukhba [Hamas militant], everything is legitimate to do! Everything!”

…

nowhere am I finding any indication that anyone is earnestly making the argument that Israel has the right to rape prisoners.

An Israeli lawmaker was asked if anal rape with a stick was legitimate and the Israeli lawmaker replied “Yes” and clarified that “Everything is legitimate to do” so long as the recipient is Hamas. Is he in the majority? No, but someone is earnestly making the argument.

Here’s the thing. The fact that I’m making the effort to demonstrate this utterly fucked up reality is, I guarantee, going to convince someone here that I’m antisemitic. I don’t think it will matter to them that I have family that is Jewish or that I’m 50% Ashkenazi by blood.

The fact that this is happening, and that any Israeli lawmaker would defend it, literally makes Jews worldwide less safe. It gives real, actual antisemitism more perceived legitimacy.

Edit: Video Link. Couldn’t find anything outside twitter/insta/tiktok, none of which I ever visit directly. Kind if telling that American news outlets don’t have it posted anywhere I could easily find but whatever. While I’ve had folks attest to the accuracy of the translation, I don’t speak Hebrew so feel free to continue to pretend it isn’t happening.

https://x.com/ireallyhateyou/status/1817904053462196523

Oh man. While I was never a huge fan, I had the Tonka Hulk Hogan and Ultimate Warrior Plush/Pillow things. Is that what you mean?

Yeah, Hogan is another guy who is just nuts. I think he’s always been a piece of shit. I heard he notified management of Ventura’s talk of a wrestler’s union which killed it before it could gain any traction.

As a nerdy kid with longish hair and few male role models, I really, really looked up to this guy. Hercules, Xena, Kull, and then Andromeda.

He fell off my radar for a while but I was pleasantly entertained when I found him in the Mythica series. I’d always thought well of him.

Eventually I heard about God Is Not Dead and looked into the rest of his more right wing work… Its really heartbreaking when people you respected or even idolized as a kid turn out to be so… gross and just… weird.

Now he again pops up on my radar with stupid shit like this. So sad.

I think what people are feeling is what has been often described as enshitification. The definition of that term as given by its creator doesn’t match the context in which I see it increasingly used. However, I think that the phenomenon that people often use it to describe is what is killing consumer confidence.

If the economy is actually serving consumers, then those at the top are making less profits. This is unacceptable. They have to keep making money. They have to keep increasing how much money they make. They have to keep increasing the rate at which they increase the money they make. If they’re not, then they are stagnating according to investors. This is incompatible with the survival of normal people. Growth cannot be infinite.

So the companies consolidate and find corners to cut and we absolutely feel it even if it doesn’t show in the numbers. They find new and creative ways to create “shrinkflation”. They don’t have to literally shrink the product - that’s too obvious. They can instead alter the formula, find cheaper low quality components, squeeze their workers harder or outsource labor, stand behind their products just a little less by updating wording to sound the same but technically promise less, add a little friction to their warranty process, hedge against inevitable future failure with no class action clauses or forced arbitration in their terms…

It feels like every company is doing something like that these days… and if they aren’t, they are being abused or bought by a company that is.

How can confidence then not be down?

In maybe third grade I brought my collection of x-men trading cards as part of a sort of show and tell activity. It was in a sizable three-ring binder with those 3x3 slot cars sheets. I had a number of highly valued “foil/hologram” cards. The binder was gone when I got back from lunch. I was devastated and learned to never leave anything of value not locked up if I’m not watching it.

At work we have a kitchen/break room. I’ve had shit stolen from there a lot. Utensils, cups, bowls. Wash it after lunch, put it in the drying rack, come back in an hour to get it and it’s gone. Once my department had a leftover pizza from an event donated to us. I brought in a baking sheet to reheat it in the oven for a lunch morale boost for the team because we had to work that weekend. The sheet, left in a drawer and not visible to any casual observers, was gone by Monday. That was actually the first item I’d had stolen there but I thought I was just s fluke.

I’ve literally bought upgrades and utensil sets for the kitchen (maybe people “stealing” my utensils just forgot to bring a fork, borrowed mine, and brought it home by accident?). Stuff like drying towels, soap dispensers + large refill bottles, a microwave food cover… all stolen. I’d keep getting frustrated with, for example, people leaving the sponge wet in the sink. I’d think “its been a year since I last donated something, maybe it’ll be different this time…” and I’d buy an OXO sponge holder or something and within a week it would be gone. Everyone in my office, including secretaries and cleaning staff, gets paid at least a living wage with great health benefits. Some make well over 100k. I just imagine someone making twice my salary seeing a nice soap dispenser and taking it home… lost a good bit of faith in humanity and affected me way more than it should have.

I found a solution though. Whoever was stealing this shit couldn’t deal with the shame of being reminded that they stole it. I started labeling the donated items using my organization’s acronym with a permanent marker in big visible letters. None of that’s been stolen. I was going to engrave my utensils/dishes but decided instead to look like an asshole and bring my own towel when washing my dishes, drying them immediately, and taking them back to my desk immediately.

If Democrats follow that playbook it only legitimizes it, giving a future Republican administration the green light to do it as well.

I 100% agree in spirit. However…

giving a future Republican administration the green light to do it

One of the many problems with American politics is that the Republicans do not need legitimacy or a green light. They’ll fucking do it anyway. They’ll also cry foul if they catch a whiff of a democrat thinking about doing it. Or they’ll just accuse a democrat of doing it and they’ll just use that as justification for doing it first.

They know their policies are wildly unpopular and that they won’t even be able to maintain power by illegitimate minority rule, which they have been doing for decades now.

It’s grab power now or regroup and accept that they’ve lost the culture war. They are not going to go quietly, as recent events and Project 2025 has made crystal clear.

[How] do you think Trump, with the powers newly granted to the office he’s again running for, will act in his second term?

There could have been better worlds

So… because Trump didn’t get unhinged to the point where he started a nuclear war, you aren’t worried.

• How did you feel about refusing to concede in the 2020 election and creating uncertainty and doubt about the electoral process among a not insignificant minority of voters?

• How about inciting an angry mob to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power on January 6th?

• How did you feel about hoarding and hiding classified documents so that he could show them off to impress his friends and guests? Maybe even sell them if times are tough?

• How about strong-arming the Republican party and installing his family to run it?

• How do you feel about how his SCOTUS has changed the fundamentals of the US government?

• The Chevron deference?

• Bribery?

• Presidential “immunity” for official acts?

• How do you feel about the loss of the right to have an abortion?

Do you think Trump, with the powers newly granted to the office he’s again running for, will act in his second term? Where is your line?

I see. So what has happened over the last 8 years as a direct result of his election isn’t concerning to you?

now that Trump has been president once, I know what it’s like when that happens and don’t worry that much about it anymore).

That sounds disturbingly like you aren’t all that concerned about what a second Trump presidency would be like. It sounds like you think the first one wasn’t as bad as people thought it would be and the second one will similarly be better than people think. Am I misreading your words?