In the last 5 to 10 years everything seems to suck: product’s and services quality plummeted, everything from homes to cars to food became really expensive, technology stopped to help us to be something designed to f@ck with us and our money, nobody seems to be able to hold a job anymore, everyone is broke. Life seems worse in general.

Why? Did COVID made this happen? How?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      811 months ago

      The scale and proportions of this are all fucked, the rich take substantially more from the state than the non-rich. Is this a sarcastic meme or is this like shaming ‘welfare queens’?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -111 months ago

        “The scale and proportions of this are all fucked, the rich take substantially more from the state than the non-rich.” - Yes, absolutely! The parasitical rich benefit most of all! All the more reason to abolish the host - abolish the state! When the poor have more opportunity to enter the market, due to the abolishion of the state and it crony class, then the free market can raise the tide for all leaving the need for charity far less. There will be no constructed dependent class. There will be a rising again of mutual societies, unities etc that benefited the poor before gov coopted those services.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          I agree we should abolish the state but you imply markets to help the poor, do you envision a capitalist structure without a state? What would stop the current hoarders of wealth from continuing their dominance and creating an even more unequal corporate feudal state?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      611 months ago

      nice meme, bold of you to assume however that all rich people don’t take all the money from the state they can get their hands on

      • @Blue_Morpho
        link
        911 months ago

        It’s is on the graph. But it neglects the soft benefits of government that disproportionately help the rich: like the expensive police state that keeps them from the guillotine.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          511 months ago

          Ah but if you ask this guy that’s because of big gubmint meddling in an imaginary, utopian free and fair market

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            011 months ago

            If you ask me there is no utopia - but there is the attempt to minimize away coercion & manipulation. It is completely Utopian to think you can create an all powerful political class and not expect exploitation by psychopaths and sociopaths.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -311 months ago

        ALL rich people? That would be quite the assumption! Many rich are parasites that use regulatory capture, artificial cartels, lobbying, bribery, threats etc because the state exists. Other rich have attained great value by giving the world much value. Don’t let envy eat you away!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          Do you think they would be unable to form their cartels if the state was abolished? Pray tell, what’s to stop them from doing so?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -211 months ago

            The question should be who will enable their cartel without the state law enforcing it? What is to stop them get a large share of the market - cartel status? Well, their competition providing better goods and services!

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              But what is there to stop them from simply hiring a private militia to kill their competition? The NAP?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -111 months ago

                NAP, aka respect for private property rights. If a society does not respect the NAP then it is a society based foremost on the threat of violence. What is government - the threat of violence - the threat of force. So, if a society allowed private militia to kill competitors you would end up with a gang ruling over others - you know - like government. So, yes you need a society with respect for private property rights/NAP. Would all people be peaceful? Heck no! Does this mean there will also not be private institutions that uphold the law - uphold respect for private property rights? Of course! People will still need security, decision making and justice! A peaceful society with respect for the NAP would NOT allow a private militia to violate others rights! Business (in the absence of government favouritism) survives on good products, services and reputation. Sending a militia against you opponents does not do well for your reputation! So ultimately you have a choice - government, which is an involuntary institution with a monopoly on force and rule making that serves the elite to the detriment of others OR A free society with respect for private property rights that is more decentralised and snuffs out any trouble makers.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  111 months ago

                  So who decides the law and how does justice get upheld in this system? It seems to me that if any corporation becomes powerful enough, it essentially becomes the de-facto government in any areas it has control over.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    011 months ago

                    A corporation is a beast of the state. A corporation gets special gov privileges like limited liability and uses regulatory capture to lock out newer incumbents competing against it. There are no corporations in a free society - only business who have to fairly compete! Please also note the law preceded government. Government coopted it! This is true of common law and maritine law. Cut the conflation in your mind. Even today more disputes are handled privately out of courts. Ebay, the world biggest merchant has in-house arbitration. You do not need an institution to monopolise decision making, arbitration, and justice. Justice should be about restitution to the victim. Currently it is about fining the victim or putting them in a cage rather than compensation and restitution. Did you know Pananarchist Ireland for 200 years had many arbitration services called tuaths. There was no government - only various tuaths that would represent you. You could join or change tuath as you pleased. For the most likely solution: https://youtu.be/fZ0Qkhnt6bQ?si=cjPT5E03eHAkiJwL