TFYS

8 ms·

1.
by TFYS 7d ago
They are a little bit, because collective action is very hard. If everyone chooses to participate and pay the cost of organizing it is worth the cost and a union will happen. But if a number of people choose not to then everything falls apa
2.
by TFYS 1mo ago
How does one become hardworking? I doubt it's completely up to genetics. People who grow up around hardworking people are more likely to see hard work and its rewards, and are therefore more likely to become hardworking themselves.
3.
by TFYS 1mo ago
It's the promise of a reward that makes people work better. I don't think it necessarily needs to be a share of the proceeds. Athletes push themselves hard for recognition and some monetary reward. A planned economy could have so
4.
by TFYS 2mo ago
A transition away from competition could also be implemented by capping the standard of living to what it currently is in the richest countries and then waiting for others to catch up. After that production would slow down yes, and that&#x2
5.
by TFYS 2mo ago
This is how it will be until we figure out how to organize human life without competition. Too many of our systems are based on us competing against each other (markets, nation states), so we always have to maximize production or risk falli
6.
by TFYS 2mo ago
For capitalism to exist we must have a system in place to protect private property, e.g. a government. That government must be the most powerful entity to be able to protect property. The capitalist system is competitive, and controlling th
7.
by TFYS 2mo ago
> Being wealthy and having to live among really wealthy people sounds better than being poor and living among equals. Why? Once you pass a level of wealth where basic needs like, food, housing and healthcare are met your happiness probab
8.
by TFYS 2mo ago
The issue is concentration of power. Wealth inequality is just one way destructive levels of power concentration can happen. We need low wealth inequality along with truly democratic government.
9.
by TFYS 3mo ago
But the preferences might be changing not because people like the new way more, but because the economic system forces people to choose the most efficient way of doing things. Someone who plays games at home can do it cheaper or in less tim
10.
by TFYS 4mo ago
Maybe they aren't and never will be capable enough to do this, but if there's even a 1% chance that they are, then it's very important to consider the consequences and take the necessary precautions before it's too late.
11.
by TFYS 4mo ago
> In other words, the economic surplus did not go exclusively or primarily to the richest. That was in large part due of strong leftist movements and states that forced the capitalists to share the increasing wealth. WW2 and the resultin
12.
by TFYS 4mo ago
The new people voted in are likely to be corporate stooges as well, as they have good and well funded infrastructure behind them for getting elected.
13.
by TFYS 5mo ago
> You may hate it but you don't matter. We all do it no matter what. I've seen you say "you don't matter" in many of your comments. Why do you think like this? Sure, we don't matter much most of the time, bu
14.
by TFYS 5mo ago
Bezos didn't create that wealth alone. He had help from thousands upon thousands of people. It's impossible to calculate how much of the value of Amazon was actually created by the work Bezos did, how much by other people in the c
15.
by TFYS 6mo ago
This will be the reality until we come up with a way to make good decisions using direct democracy, and make that decision-making process so fast and easy that it can be used for any kind of group decision. Concentration of power stems from
16.
by TFYS 6mo ago
There's value in that only if assessments made by people using the prediction for something aren't better than crowd wisdom. I would guess that a large part of prediction market participants are simple gamblers whose assessment is
17.
by TFYS 6mo ago
There will be no point, and the stuff that normal people use will become more expensive as resources are more and more directed to megaprojects that the capital class is interested in. More modern equivalents of pyramids and extravagant cas
18.
by TFYS 6mo ago
Why couldn't China be better? It can't get much worse than what the US is currently doing. It's getting dangerously close to 30s Germany levels of madness. China at least at the moment seems like a better run country, and muc
19.
by TFYS 6mo ago
Yes. The bigger the gap becomes, the more the economy will be geared towards serving the needs of the wealthy instead of regular people. If a trillionaire wants a mansion on Pluto or an AI to serve him, a large workforce and a lot of resour
20.
by TFYS 7mo ago
Those meals would most likely help a lot of kids become healthy productive members of society. That money would be saved by the families of those kids and used in other parts of the economy. A lot of the cost would therefore be returned. Th
21.
by TFYS 7mo ago
> The diversity of perspective and opinion I don't think this is what social media provides. With social media people are able to choose one perspective and seem to just immerse themselves in a bubble so that they only get exposed t
22.
by TFYS 7mo ago
What they do there is not enough. All decisions should be made using some form of direct democracy, otherwise you leave an opening for power concentration again, which will lead to the same problems we're now facing. We can't make
23.
by TFYS 7mo ago
Could be, if we can come up with efficient ways to govern using direct democracy that lead to better decisions than what we now have. I don't see much work being done to come up with such a system, though.
24.
by TFYS 7mo ago
I wish it was just psychos with power that are causing these issues. It's worse than that I think. It's the competition based systems of human organization that will result in what you're describing. Even if people in one cou
25.
by TFYS 7mo ago
> Europe faced a worse Russian threat during the Cold War without giving up national sovereignty. That's because Europe could rely on the power of the US back then. If the US was just a patchwork of small independent states, Europe
26.
by TFYS 7mo ago
I don't think so, because it's not only the truly weak that get exploited and abused in an "every man for himself" system. It'll also destroy the lives of many who could become strong in an environment that protects
27.
by TFYS 7mo ago
> allow natural selection to take its course while improving treatment of symptoms. I have a feeling natural selection will take its course at the level of nations, with nations that do protect their weak surviving and the ones that let
28.
by TFYS 7mo ago
It's not enough to only look at elections. The topics that the media discusses, and therefore the options that people are aware of and the issues people base their vote on are decided by mostly privately owned and increasingly consolid
29.
by TFYS 7mo ago
> (who does not pay me) You're answering a comment saying money is power by saying that it isn't if it's not used? Even if the billionaire doesn't pay you, they can pay someone else to force you to do what they want.
30.
by TFYS 7mo ago
Why does management turn efficiency gains into higher output quotas? Because competition forced them to. This is a feature of free market capitalism. A single participant can't decide to keep output as is when efficiency improves, beca

More ›