But the top 20% can still spend. That number is going to drop off a cliff when the stock market tumbles, and the spending with it.

If you look at the history of capitalism you could observe the stage where capitalism does put profits into R&D is temporary. Eventually capitalists reach enough power that lets them generate profts without significant reinvestment and instead spend them on luxury goods. Happened in the late 19th/early 20th century. It’s happening now as well. In-between that there was a massive state intervention that took significant economic power from capitalist class and put it into the state. The period when capitalism worked well for the majority was a deviation from the mean. Relevant.

So one of them can be always fucking blocked.

They knew they could be overlords and were that before The Great Depression too. We are just surpassing the level of wealth inequality that was reached prior to the system collapsing back then. What followed in the 40s and 50s was an abnormal period created by the implementation of a significant number of socialist policies that stemmed the desire for blood by the disposessed masses. These fuckers have been working to dismantle them ever since. If we find a formula that allows for such reforms to stick for longer than several decades, that would be nice. There’s good reasons for skepticism though.

Steve still doesn’t quite see that this is the capitalist system working as intended - serving the owner (capitalist) class, but he’s definitely getting radicalized by the current reality of it.

What the actual fuck.

It’s still informative. His other stuff is good too.

Good vid but he’s falling a bit for the corporate propaganda that costs determine prices and that consumers have real power over price setting. Most firms maximize prices while minimizing costs. Consumers have especially little market power in a consolidated market like home appliances.

Beautiful. Not becacause I’m a big fan of vets but because this adds more evidence that candidates with good leftist message can win despite not being squeaky clean. This is important because it lowers the bar and cost for such candidates. Cleanliness is costly.

Them having to adapt due to a job loss looks very different than what it is for the median American. If every American had an unlimited, worry-free safety net to support them while they navigate employment disruptions, you wouldn’t be hearing the guillotine noises you hear today. In fact you’d be able to realize some form of “creative destruction” and working conditions would drasticaly improve since people would actually afford to quit bad jobs.

I don’t think meaningful communication is a KPI they optinize for. More likely time spent in the Discover feed.

I doubt it.

Or Circles from Google+.

This is cool but for self-hosting you probably want a more robust monitoring system capable of alerting at all times. Prometheus is what I use. It also gathers data over time and can monitor many machines.

In Economics.

I think Machado already offered $1.7T in Venezuelan assets for sale, if she’s installed in power.

There’s the midterms. But yeah. :D

Also the last time I checked, his base isn’t quite hot on sending more money or getting involved militarily in Ukraine. He’d get popular with Democrats. But they won’t thank him for it at the voting booth. 😅

It must. Too many things are going badly at home, so they gotta put some darker-skinned people murder on the TV.

I think there’s research to that effect.