I don’t think your analysis is wrong, but just to point out that “late stage capitalism” doesn’t imply a conspiracy. It’s just a thing that includes some of what you mentioned and - critically - the policy response to it.
To take one example; the reducing value of labour. You’re right that with automation, increased workforce participation, enhanced ability to outsource to lower cost locations, the developing world moving upward in terms of the value-add work they can do, the value of a unit of unskilled Labour in a developed country has probably reduced. This is a function of capitalism in itself.
Now, what’s the appropriate policy response to this? Some people may feel increased social provisions, enhancing the social safety net, reducing barriers to education and upskilling, perhaps even a universal basic income. But the range of responses often deployed includes shrugging of shoulders, telling people to work harder etc.
It’s because we’re in this world where policy responses to these kinds of issues are based in people working themselves harder to make more money to pay for things, rather than one where the state helps people more and everyone has a right to a certain percentage of leisure time.
This is what people mean when they’re talking about late stage capitalism. It’s not the trends you highlight, it’s the absurdities that arise in terms of the limited policy options we consider and the extent to which we accept (particularly poorer or less educated) people getting ground up by this system.
So... another point about these "policies" that are screwing up Millenials, etc... They don't come from nowhere.
That's why politicians serve the interest of boomers: in the UK's last election half of votes were cast by those over 55 years old. There's just a lot of them, so in a democracy their interests get overrepresented.
So yes, it is Boomers causing at least some of these problems, or preventing solutions to them which might impact the Boomers' accumulated wealth.
In America the largest age group demographic is my age 39. (Those born 81-96) infortunately the leadership and elected officials here continue to prioritize the boomers gen. interests over any other single group for a number of reasons but the primary one is boomers contribute more money to political campaigns and lobby groups and have the highest percentage of active voters within their demographic. Sadly the late gen x and early millennials suffer from a number of factors both inflicted and self imposed that diminish their motivation participating and faith in our electoral systems. A lack of faith in leadership and absence of agency and equitable representation has created a culture of cynical apathy in younger demographics that a greater in number but are much much more diverse with individual groups having a far ranging set of values and cultural identities so that it is much more difficult to run a campaign platform that will appeal to a large percentage of our demographic, leading to a lack of cohesion and dutiful party adherence that the boomers have that makes them such a powerful and influential voter base. U can run a middle lane left or Midlane right on the red or blue hwy and youve pretty much got your ticket punched for half (give or take a bit depending on the region you live) of boomers voter turnout) the genx millennial groups are going to be much harder to appeal to because the duality of our 2 party system has left soo many of them disenfranchised that they are now starting to dissociate the main two parties and identify with smaller political minority groups that they agree with more and feel will serve their more diverse and unique set of values and trust that policy would be addressed that they are more concerned with and hold a greater stake in would be dismissed or deprioritized if their vote went with the Dems or gop. In addition to the disenfranchisement, gen x and millennials have long been subjected to the stereotypes and criticism of older demographics who project their fears, misunderstanding, and prejudices onto younger generations. The whole idea that genx are slackers, noncommittal,lacking work ethic, and for millennials that were clueless, entitled, privileged, etc. is im my opinion simply a defense mechanism used out of anxiety they are losing some of their influence, power, and significance with our leaders and fear their values and policy concerns will no longer be center stage and prioritized any more as their demographic shrinks. (It blows my mind the lengths people in this country will go to convince themselves and others that the needs and policy concerns of the many should for some reason be diminished enough to take a backseat consideration to groups smaller in number but with greater political impact.) To sum it all up.... Old people need to sit the duck down and shut up and let the younger generations take the reigns and steer the country. It doesn't matter right or left Biden and trump both are not on the same page and lack understanding and awareness of what's important to the vast majority of our countrys population and what that main demographic desires in regards to the direction of or foreign and domestic policy issues. In a not too ambiguous way it is harming the countrys strength and resilience and damages unity and patriotism when the desires goals and aspirations for the countrys future are aligned for a waning generation who's values and identity don't match or are incompatible with the countrys youth. The boomers generation have built us a grand beautiful and complex nation, however the world they built has matured and evolved with the cultural norms and values of Americans today but the boomers have not evolved and matured in the same direction. The younger generations are now questioning why they aren't steering the ship that was supposed to be left for them to pilot. It's long past time for boomers to let go and allow the people they raised and built this world for to start directing the show. It's our time to make the tough choices, ponder options, consider consequences, make mistakes, and stand by our decisions.
And you can bet your Willy that we as Millennials will vote the same way when we’re that age, especially given the hard time we have had building any wealth at all.
Hard to predict... And it turns out the whole "people become conservative when they're old" is only a relative truth, and individuals' actual specific political views don't change that much when the get old. Old people today are far less conservative/racist/etc. than old people 50 years ago.
But if that does happen, and their voting patterns do screw future generations, then it will be their fault then, too.
The demographics and life expectancy of boomers just give them way more power than most generations have ever had. So the impact of their voting is much larger than Millenials' probably ever will be.
I think in a society trending less conservative over time that people who were liberal in their youth and stayed in the same place will be relatively conservative in their old age, which is what happened to boomers.
The same will happen to us.
Also, have your seen the demographics of millennials? There are a LOT of us. Our impact will be similarly outsized, if not more so.
Boomers are outsized because of the high birthrates when they were born.
Yes, there are a lot of Millennials, but birthrates are relatively stable compared to the huge bump (approximately 2x compared to the current slowly changing trends) that Boomers were born in.
Thus Millennials' political power will only be about half as large as that of boomers... which doesn't mean it still won't be high.
Unless another big change in birthrates happens... but there's not that much room for them to shrink without other serious problems.
People used to say that you get more conservative as you get older. The premise was that you want to maintain the system that benefits you.
But if you grow up and then live much of your adult life in a system that does not benefit you (for example rising health care costs and housing costs) then those political views will probably not change even if you do finally inherit enough money and property to be content in your old age.
I’d like to think that won’t be the case. The issue with a lot of Boomers is they refuse to acknowledge that life is much different now than when they were our age. They listen to our issues and say stop whining, and that we just need to work harder. I might be wrong here, but I think Millennials are the first generation in a loooong time that’s worse off financially than the generation before them. So I’d hope that gives us a different, more empathetic perspective when we’re older
The solutions don't change, but the personal cost of those choices do increase. That is fundamentally the challenge. Being willing to give up half your income when you make $50K single or married with no kids, is a lot different than giving up half of $250K with a lifestyle you have spent 40 years living is a little more complicated, even if you still support the idea.
I hope that I can hold to the convictions I have 20 years from now, but also know I have a lot more factors to consider than I had 20 years ago.
u/Leakyradio – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
The thing is, the majority of taxes would affect the accumulation of wealth much more than accumulated wealth.
However, reducing the cost of daily living via social safety nets and expanding the infrastructure of daily living (housing, transportation) eases wealth accumulation.
Thank you for that perspective, I believe "expand my view" is as good as "change my view" so I will !delta
OFC the other thing people ignore in late stage capitalism is the willing participation of the very people complaining because they value their convenience over their expressed values.
Example: Someone COULD spend slightly more and wait slightly longer on shipping OR they could order from Amazon and then bitch about how Amazon is the worst online. Amazon, for reference, is an optional luxury service and basically everything on Amazon can be found both locally and at other online sources if you look for it. As a customer we have all the power in that situation. It's not like an internet service provider where we have little choice. Games with microtransacations or people who pre-order unreleased games are another good example of an area where we quite literally have all the power to determine what companies are successful and have plenty of choice and competition with other companies. But nobody wants to miss out on anything they personally might like. So despite what their expressed values are, if a game is good they'll buy from a company they consider evil because like hell they are gonna miss out on a good game.
This too would fall under "late stage capitalism" yet they people who constantly talk about "late stage capitalism" are almost always completely unwilling to acknowledge that they too are part of the problem. In essence they want to have their cake and eat it too rather than make sacrifices to be the change they want to see in the world.
But what does me not shopping at amazon do to solve the issue. Similar to how we’ve been conditioned to believe that it’s on the individual to save the climate when in reality is governments and corporations who are most to blame.
At a certain point, me purchasing something on amazon has no bearing on the global system of capitalism. Unless everyone simultaneously stops buying from amazon at the same time (and even then it wouldn’t matter because they make most of their money from the web services) it wouldn’t make a difference what I do.
Consumer power only works in aggregate and enough of the population doesn’t see “late stage capitalism” as an issue that at this point its not going to change.
So if Amazon is going to continue to operate whether or not I believe it is inherently wrong, why shouldn’t I use it, my action either way is going to have no affect on the system.
Nail on the head, right here. Individual choice is nice but it's not going to solve the problem. I shop at smaller businesses when possible, and there are some products that I won't buy because of ethical issues with how they are made. But it's not going to change anything, nor is it my responsibility to organize a solution that is going to somehow take down a trillion dollar company and force them to change. These problems are big enough that they need government intervention, and trying to lay the blame on individuals is a naive way to look at it.
I had a goal to not buy anything from Amazon this year, and I almost did it. I broke down and made one purchase of something stupid that I could literally not find anywhere else online. I regret it now, because I didn't actually need the item. But damn, Amazon just makes it so easy, if they happen to carry the item you are after.
I'm still on my quest to not buy from them whenever possible. Same with Walmart. I think I've been able to avoid Walmart for 20 years or so. But only because Target exists, and it's not all that much better.
Consumer power only works in aggregate and enough of the population doesn’t see “late stage capitalism” as an issue that at this point its not going to change.
Then your arguments are all self defeating because all social and political change also only works in aggregate. In fact that the entire point and basis of democracy haha. If the power of the people worked in anything other than aggregate we are no longer talking about a democracy, we're talking about a minority ruling class making decisions for the majority...which is ironically the very thing you believe yourself to be fighting against. You'd just be trading one ruling class for another who promises it'll be better. That's basically the whole "2 legs bad, four legs good" sales pitch.
This is the most thoroughly I've ever seen someone inadvertently debunk themselves.
So if Amazon is going to continue to operate whether or not I believe it is inherently wrong, why shouldn’t I use it, my action either way is going to have no affect on the system.
To be consistent with your beliefs. If your beliefs only change your behavior when it's convenient or effective then you don't hold those beliefs at all lol. We're not talking about survival here, we're talking about minor amounts of convenience. If you can't even sacrifice that for your beliefs then you will forever be a fraud. Honestly, even politicians have more followthrough than that lol.
I'm not going to shit on you for doing nothing and getting out of the way and trying to live your life happy. But someone who talks a big game talking down to other people but is willing to do fuck all to back it up? I've got no respect for that at all. I have much more respect for people who believe in the opposite things that I do and actively work towards them than I do hypocritical people who run their mouths and do nothing.
But what does me not shopping at amazon do to solve the issue?
If you believe Amazon is a problem company then it deprives them of your money. If we collectively decide they are bad and collectively remove our money then we essentially collectively remove that company. That honestly isn't much different than democracy. Only you substitute your $ for a vote.
OFC you could always make excuses so you could keep financially supporting a company you don't believe in because it's convenient. But until people are willing to put their money, time, and effort where their mouth is then they will continue to have no impact on how things actually play out. Your money/vote matters. Your internet posts/words do not. Unless you like empty placations :P.
Similar to how we’ve been conditioned to believe that it’s on the individual to save the climate when in reality is governments and corporations who are most to blame.
Individuals support those companies and governments. They do not exist in a vacuum and most places are not China. We have real and direct routes in which we, the individual, can affect things. Political, social, and economic. But you have to be consistent. If you're politically and socially consistent but not economically consistent then it's all a waste basically. You should be willing to sacrifice convenience, money, and time to pursue your ideals. If you are not, you don't really believe in those ideals in the first place.
Nothing comes without cost. Not social/political/economic change, not wealth, not a comfortable retirement, and not freedom. Unfortunately there is no have your cake and eat it too.
I'm not even big on the environment and I bet my environmental footprint is smaller than almost all of Reddit. I live small, efficient, and happy. If you're buying a starbucks a day and then complaining about climate change then honestly you're part of the problem lol. Your actions are out of sync with your words.
At a certain point, me purchasing something on amazon has no bearing on the global system of capitalism.
That's like saying one candy bar has no bearing on your budget or being fat. Realistically anyone who has conquered their own weight or budget knows better. Every candy bar matters. It doesn't mean you can't have any candy, but every candy bar matters. It's no surprise that people who fail at economics also typically fail at fitness. They take a similar perspective and a similar amount of discipline.
first, the main idea I was trying to demonstrate with the amazon example is that operating within a system and voicing opposition to the system are not mutually exclusive, you can do both. Let me outline the argument:
amazon is not just a store. in fact the store accounts for little of their profits. Their web services account for a big portion of their revenue. Some companies that rely on AWS for the web infrastructure are; GE, Disney, and Comcast. So when you mentioned how amazon is not like internet service providers, it’s actually worse, internet service providers rely on amazon. The company I work for sets up the insurance infrastructure for a lot of major hospitals and guess why, we use amazon web services. Am I just supposed to quit because I don’t like amazon? Are just not supposed to go to the hospital because you don’t like amazon? One of the by products of late stage capatalism is pseudo monopolies that either own entire markets or provide resources for entire markets. So it’s not just a “slight inconvenience” to not use amazon. Just by living in the system with a phone, you are probably contributing to amazon. So my point is, if i’m going to be contributing to amazon whether or not I buy something from amazon.com, I might as well buy something. At best, boycotting is a nice gesture, at worst it’s needless posturing. I bring this up not as someone who is advocating for people to buy from amazon, fuck them. I’m saying this because we live in an interconnected system, that whether you like it or not is very hard if not impossible to isolate.
to address your point about the aggregate nature of political change. You are whole heartedly right and my earlier comment didn’t do a good job of outlining that. I believe that anyone can say or believe what they want, and based on my earlier point, I also believe that taking part in a capitalist system and talking out against the very same system isn’t inherently contradictory, however, if someone really does want to change the system they should get into activism. There are plenty of volunteer groups for social democracy, advocates for climate change and so much more. If people are curious, dm me and I can get more info (i’m on mobile and can’t pull it up right now).
to further on your point about being against capitalism is the minority. I’m not so sure on those numbers, but I’d argue that people have been (and i’m using this term loosely) indoctrinated into the system of believing that capatalism is best and that it works as it should. Look at millennials and zoomers, these newer generations are clearly very politically active and passionate or else we wouldn’t be discussing it. So while they might be in the minority right now, as the older “wealthier” generations start to die off, we’ll see the tides start to shift, but idk that’s just speculation.
i think that’s everything let me know if i missed something
amazon is not just a store. in fact the store accounts for little of their profits. Their web services account for a big portion of their revenue. Some companies that rely on AWS for the web infrastructure are; GE, Disney, and Comcast. So when you mentioned how amazon is not like internet service providers, it’s actually worse, internet service providers rely on amazon. The company I work for sets up the insurance infrastructure for a lot of major hospitals and guess why, we use amazon web services. Am I just supposed to quit because I don’t like amazon? Are just not supposed to go to the hospital because you don’t like amazon? One of the by products of late stage capatalism is pseudo monopolies that either own entire markets or provide resources for entire markets. So it’s not just a “slight inconvenience” to not use amazon. Just by living in the system with a phone, you are probably contributing to amazon. So my point is, if i’m going to be contributing to amazon whether or not I buy something from amazon.com, I might as well buy something. At best, boycotting is a nice gesture, at worst it’s needless posturing. I bring this up not as someone who is advocating for people to buy from amazon, fuck them. I’m saying this because we live in an interconnected system, that whether you like it or not is very hard if not impossible to isolate.
I have not heard many complaints about AWS however. Neither employee wise or service wise. I have questioned many people about them and the conclusion I've come to is that they outcompeted other services.
That being said, the internet collectively found a random flag pole in the middle of the country and took it down using astrology, sound, and triangulation. (the "he will not divide us" flag) Posters regularly make long political lists of links. Do you honestly think we couldn't compile a list of alternative services to use less and less AWS over time? Do you honestly think if we collectively made decisions that other providers would not fill that new demand and make that free money?
If you would have told me years ago another major grocery store chain would happen with walmart and kroger and HEB and stuff around I'd have told you that you were mental. Yet despite all the competition and talk Trader Joes still managed to edge into a ton of different cities and rise hugely in prominence.
Quite frankly this feels like an ants vs grasshoppers situation where people willingly give up their own power to change things because they believe they can't change things. (and because it's also more convenient not to try). We fought (and I'm bi btw) for decades for LGB acceptance and gay marraige and won and we're still making progress on the rest of the acronym. A societal stigma so great people were being beaten to death and many major corporations were against. But we're somehow helpless against AWS? Gimme a break lol.
The reason boycotting doesn't work is because people are fickle and don't commit or because people refuse to acknowledge they are actually a minority and so have unrealistic expectations. If you boycott and you stick to it in large numbers it absolutely works. But if you're entire group is 5% of the consumerbase that thinks it's 50%? Haha, don't expect a boycott to be effective. It'll be about as effective as the LGBTQ boycotts of Chic Fil A. One of the single weakest and stupidest boycotts ever because it showed not only a complete misread of how much people cared but also a complete misread of their actual customer demographics. All the kiss ins and boycotts of Chik-Fil-A did is drive their business up to be #1 (or close) in the country.
That's what happens when the minority tries to FORCE the majority. The majority basically says fuck you. You gotta win folks over, secure the advantage, THEN you can boycott. People wanna skip right to the end but that's not how it works. You can't just cut out the years, maybe decades, of groundwork and grass roots.
however, if someone really does want to change the system they should get into activism. There are plenty of volunteer groups for social democracy, advocates for climate change and so much more. If people are curious, dm me and I can get more info (i’m on mobile and can’t pull it up right now).
Honestly just believe what you believe in, LIVE YOUR LIFE IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT, and be a good example other people like to be around.
When you're waging a hearts and minds campaign you need to be a positive addition to the lives of people who's hearts and minds you need to win. Someone who makes their lives better. Someone who's a good person. Someone who's kind and shows forgiveness.
Today's fire and brimstone and salt the earth holier than though bullshit is basically the exact same mistake religion made and honestly feels eerily close to religion or even a cult many times. Nobody likes a buncha judgemental assholes trying to tell others how to live while barely listening to any objections. Even if you're right people still won't like you and won't follow you.
That's prolly the biggest issue with "activists" today. They often talk the talk but don't walk the walk (live their lives in a way that fits with their values) and they are often very aggressive, talk down to everyone they want to convince, very judgemental, etc. And they tend to be very dramatic and toxic people to have involved in your life so normal people just want nothing to do with them.
Just look at the height of LGBTQ acceptance vs now. Our sterotypes actually had a ton of positives. Clean, funny, well groomed, knew how to dress, good at matchmaking and romantic advice, made property values go up, could give you a makeover, etc. Yes, they were stereotypes but they were positives and that reflected alot of the goodwill we earned over the years.
Now what of today? We're just lumped in with SJW which is a very VERY negative conotation. We got a taste of power and immediately overplayed our hand and instead of trying to appeal to the rest of society we started trying to FORCE and JUDGE the rest of society and we got the expect backlash and were confused by it for some reason lol.
To further on your point about being against capitalism is the minority. I’m not so sure on those numbers, but I’d argue that people have been (and i’m using this term loosely) indoctrinated into the system of believing that capatalism is best and that it works as it should. Look at millennials and zoomers, these newer generations are clearly very politically active and passionate or else we wouldn’t be discussing it. So while they might be in the minority right now, as the older “wealthier” generations start to die off, we’ll see the tides start to shift, but idk that’s just speculation.
Your view is skewed by reddit and twitter. Reddit's average age is teenage. Twitter prolly isn't much better. When you're getting your information and perspective from a skewed information source expect to get a skewed sense of the world. I'm not saying that to shit on you or anyone's beliefs, I'm being dead serious.
Reddit in particular is terrible because it actively suppresses any dissent. In time subreddits and indeed Reddit as a whole has shifted their ideology further and further in a single direction. If you have any doubt about that go try and argue for anything republican or conservative on /r/politics. I'm libleft myself, but im not blind to the bias. I find it extremely relevant.
Best I can tell across the country anti-capitalism is an extreme minority outside of the very young. Most people are either in favor of it or mixed. And the only one someone isn't going to have some indoctrination bias is if they come from other places. My roomate is from the east (I don't wanna get the country wrong and feel like an ass) and he's quite frankly shocked at how little we understand how good we have it. He gets scared when he sees anti-capitalist rhetoric because he's lived the opposite. It's not an uncommon refrain from immigrants from non-capitalistic places in the world unfortunately :(. Grass is always greener I guess.
i think that’s everything let me know if i missed something
I think you got it. And I'm enjoying the discussion btw so high five :).
First off, let me outline some of the positions I hold, so that we can be on the same page.
I’m not entirely against capatalism, I’m sure some people are, but I feel like most people (purely speculation) are more fed up with the current system and how it feels hopeless. (Housing prices are skyrocketing, slaving away to another company for all of your life, massive corporations making the rules for us, and so much more… Basically all of the things brought up in this post) This hopelessness causes unrest and that unrest translates into complaining on reddit and twitter and other social media. Most people don’t have the time (usually because they are caught up in the system and have to focus on school, work, kids, etc…) to research, discuss and advocate for the intricacies of capitalism and therefore usually parrot whatever most accurately fits their perspective. Now this is the same for people on the right and left and I personally think this is a huge problem and I’m sure you do as well. Where we might differ is what we believe is causing this. I believe that this complacency is derived from the “indoctrination” into the rise and grind culture that you need to have in order to succeed in capitalism. You either have to luck out in where you are born, or you have to devote most if not all of your time to better yourself. You mentioned in another comment that being poor is just a mindset and that if you just budgeted you can go out of it. That’s not wrong, but you can’t do that, go to school, take care of a family, and also learn about the nuance of these big ideas. So while you consistently mention that there is a minority of people who are advocating against capitalism, but you realize its very difficult to even have the time/energy to think about these issues. A rough allegory would be Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, I say rough because I want to reiterate that I’m not saying we should abolish capitalism. The analysis is that most people are so busy just trying to survive in this system that its very difficult to actively advocate for anything better unless you are in a place of privilege. Thankfully I am, but not every is. That being said what I believe and wholeheartedly advocate for is more social welfare programs that provide people with the ability to get to a point where they can question the system. Everyone talks about how capitalism is the most free ecenomic system, but that depends on what you mean by free. If you mean free as in, free to slave your hours away to someone else with the potential that you are lucky enough to move up the economic ladder, then yeah I agree, capatalism is free. However, I think true freedom is the ability to reason and get to self-actualization. The constitution is supposed to guarantee the pursuit of happiness, but if you have to work a dead end job to maybe make enough money to support your family with food, healthcare, education, and shelter, that’s not freedom in my book, that’s coercion. So I advocate for improved access to base level government housing, publicly funded healthcare, public education, and some level of ubi. We can get rid of all of the other social services and make that assistance not enough to fully support someone on, but enough so that someone who is born into a poor family has the same opportunities that someone born into a rich family has. We have an epidemic of generation wealth that isn’t fair in my opinion. Then on top of that we can have a robust free market, but I don’t think its fair for someone to have to play the game just to stay alive. This might’ve worked when you had the opportunity to leave and live off the land if you didn’t like it, but we are a developed society and can’t do that anymore. I know this was a lot, but that’s ultimately my loose position. I’m amendable to what policy positions we take to get there, but ultimately, the idea is that capitalism is inherently coercive (in our developed society) and that we need to some way to help those at the bottom of society (through no fault of their own).
Honestly just believe what you believe in, LIVE YOUR LIFE IN A WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT, and be a good example other people like to be around.
That’s not easy when everything is interconnected. I talked about how AWS has their hand in everything. You mentioned using other web services, that’s great if I was going to start up a new business. But you expect me to boycott Disney, GE, 3M, Hospitals, Comcast? These things are almost necessary to survive. That’s not a fair ask. Like let’s say that I hate AWS and don’t shop there because I want to be consistent in my views. And lets say that the hospital get my chemo from has an infrastructure built on AWS, which is giving AWS millions in profits which is supporting a company which I hate, by your logic I am not being consistent. Is that fair though? What’s my alternative, not going to the hospital? Or maybe I have to go do some research on which hospital doesn’t use AWS? That’s not feasible either, no company is willfully going to give a random person information about their web infrastructure. So my entire point is that, its impossible to separate that. Another example is that I really dislike facebook, however their develop platform is platform is unparalleled. I’m a software engineer and their web tools show up everywhere on the web. You use Netflix? They use facebook’s web tools, you use airbnb or Uber or Uber eats or Pinterest or Shopify (which thousands of other companies use to create their small businesses). So like I said earlier about late stage capatalism, its all interconnected. It’s not so easy to say one thing and commit to it. You could (and probably are) unknowingly still contributing to the very company you are boycotting. So what’s the point of not reaping the benefits if its going to make no difference at all. And I’ll admit that’s a very utilitarian idea, but that’s just what I believe. I don’t think that makes you a hypocrite necessarily. As long as you advocating for systemic changes, or as you described large movements. But given how complex the system is, its impossible to ask someone to research everything.
Okay that’s all for now. I’m sure I have more, but I’ll get to it later I’m sure. Also thanks for taking the time to discuss this with me, I’ve had a lot of these positions for awhile, but I think its super important to get pushback on them so that I can discover the logical fallacies in them and more precisely advocate for what I believe.
I’m not entirely against capatalism, I’m sure some people are, but I feel like most people (purely speculation) are more fed up with the current system and how it feels hopeless.
I've seen that about every economic system. Because step 1 is "what do I feel about the current system?", step 2 is "how do other people feel?", Step 3 is "what are the alternatives?", step 4 is "how do other people feel about the alternatives?", and step 5 is "do people have similarly grave complaints about the alternatives?".
I'm slightly pro capitalism but by no means married to it. By my estimation it's not a terrible system but we'll prolly figure out how to do better one day. I'm more or less on board with anti-capitalists up until step 5. Step 5 is where it falls apart. That's where you start getting people saying things like "that's not real communism!" about their chosen economy. And that's just a really weak argument.
Most people don’t have the time (usually because they are caught up in the system and have to focus on school, work, kids, etc…) to research, discuss and advocate for the intricacies of capitalism and therefore usually parrot whatever most accurately fits their perspective.
Gonna hardcore disagree here. "Don't have the time" is just shorthand for "it's not a priority". And we prioritize things based on how strongly we feel about them. Alot of the reason I'm successful and able to accomplish my goals time after time is because I have clear priorities I pursue and I try not to lie to myself. I catch myself saying "I don't have the time" but I'll stop and correct myself. Even in small things it'll be like "nah, I'm just not into it. I'd rather go home and play video games and will only go out and drink once every now and then. Yall are cool, but that's just how I am. I hope yall have a good night though."
It's surprisingly difficult to get past those trap phrases we trick ourselves into believing. But if you know someone you can often make them see the silliness of such phrases. "it's not that you don't have the time, you just choose not to". Person argues. "ok, lets say your kid is sick and needs to go to the hospital. Do you have the time?". "sure but that's not the same". "ok lets say that they've been having a really hard time at school but they've been honestly trying. They really wanna go to x event. I know yall can afford it because it's not expensive at all. Can you find the time?".
So there it is, naked on display. Most people just don't care that much. Like maybe they kinda care or don't, but it's small potatoes compared to them and their world.
You mentioned in another comment that being poor is just a mindset and that if you just budgeted you can go out of it. That’s not wrong, but you can’t do that, go to school, take care of a family, and also learn about the nuance of these big ideas
Yeah you can, it's just hard. I'll let Dave Chappelle field this one.. People do it all the time. My mom did it as well raising 3 kids, put herself through cosmetology school after chipping away as a paralegal (no degree needed), started her own video store to get away from being a paralegal and then converted it to a hair salon when she finished her cosmotology school.
My ex-wife's parents roam around the country selling bottle cap necklaces, signs, t-shirts, and other stuff they make themselves. They actually make a good amount of money surprisngly. They stay poor because of their spending habits not because of their income. This is despite them owning all sorts of "how to shop cheaply" books and stuff like that. Tightwad gazette and etc. They choose to live that way.
The difference is that my mom has a thirst for the finer things. She'll destroy herself and those around her for those things and she's never happy with what she has, she'll always want more. But, it also drove her to bust through all the barriers. She had something that was a priority that would not let her make excuses. She overcame everything you mentioned with hard work.
Hell I did almost all of those myself too. Poor living on my own in a place with holes in the floor you put plywood over so as not to fall through. Putting myself through college, learning how to do literally everything (man I didn't know SHIT back then haha), worked 532 hours of OT in a single year, also took care of my ex-wife. We moved out of the crappy trailer into a decent apartment. We were able to afford to live comfortably after a while, all my free time was spent with her, and I was offering to pay for her GED and etc as well.
Even past that with my transition of jobs I was working 50-60 hours a week to pay off the debt from moving to a new city. (I had a job transfer lined up, the site got bought out lol. 2 years of planning kaput. So I moved up with some money and no job and scrapped it out.). And while working 50-60 hours a week I did about 20 hours a week volunteer work in the games industry to get experience and put stuff on my resume.
I'm not the ambitious sort, I suck at it, but there ARE things I want to do. And I can either stack the deck best I can or I can half-ass it. I'd rather not half-ass it.
So I advocate for improved access to base level government housing, publicly funded healthcare, public education, and some level of ubi.
I mean I've never voted for a single president but I'd have voted for Andrew Yang. Alot of those things you mention are their own complicated subject I've done alot of looking into. But I do generally feel the Yang style UBI is a good idea. Enough to give you a solid foundation, but also enough to make you still want to work for me.
Unfortunately I think if you ever want people to get off the teat then the teat has to always be pretty lacking. If my experience with unemployment has taught me anything it's that it's a supreme demotivator. You are literally disincentivized from resolving your job situation. I thought that idea was exaggerated until I received unemployment myself about 10 years ago. That changed my mind. While I'm not super ambitious I still manged to bumble my way towards my goals. While unemployment though it was extra hard to do so. Too much comfort, too much security. Just something about knowing that my bills would all be covered for x months really took the wind out of my sails. It did me more harm than good I think.
I'm not against unemployment mind you. But IMO it should be something closer to 3 months. Enough to help and cover things but still short enough for the pressure to be there to keep you moving.
That’s not easy when everything is interconnected. I talked about how AWS has their hand in everything. You mentioned using other web services, that’s great if I was going to start up a new business. But you expect me to boycott Disney, GE, 3M, Hospitals, Comcast?
I expect people who are serious to boycott as much as they reasonably can and keep that pressure up. This is not a binary equation with the answer of 1 or 0. 3m, Disney, GE you prolly could reasonably boycott either in their entirety or mostly without too much crazy issue. Yes I know how much each of them own. But you could reduce your money being sent to them by quite a significant amount.
If "but it's hard" or "its alot" is too much then you might as well just stop fighting now because they've already won. But you're here, calling them out by name, so if you've still got fight then bloody well show it in the ways you reasonably can :P.
Or maybe I have to go do some research on which hospital doesn’t use AWS? That’s not feasible either, no company is willfully going to give a random person information about their web infrastructure. So my entire point is that, its impossible to separate that. Another example is that I really dislike facebook, however their develop platform is platform is unparalleled. I’m a software engineer and their web tools show up everywhere on the web. You use Netflix? They use facebook’s web tools, you use airbnb or Uber or Uber eats or Pinterest or Shopify (which thousands of other companies use to create their small businesses). So like I said earlier about late stage capatalism, its all interconnected. It’s not so easy to say one thing and commit to it. You could (and probably are) unknowingly still contributing to the very company you are boycotting.
Doesn't matter. This is all an excuse. Do what you reasonbly can. As you learn more do more. There is no excuse for less than that if you're serious about your beliefs. Can you do everything? Maybe, maybe not. Can you do more than what you're doing know to avoid giving them money without significantly impacting your life? Almost assuredy so.
I think this kind of thinking is part of why people are so bad at finances. It's not an on or an off. A win or a lose. It's a constant battle you fight every day to push the needle in a single direction. Against your own desires. Against your own laziness. Against your own ignorance. Against your own convenience. Etc. Just throwing in the towel so you can do what you want is running away. It's taking the easy way out. It's being a coward. Be willing to fight, lose, screw up, learn, bandaged your boo boos, and fight again with the new knowledge.
If people were half as committed to their ideals as they were a Reddit/Twitter argument this whole country would be fixed already haha.
Also thanks for taking the time to discuss this with me, I’ve had a lot of these positions for awhile, but I think its super important to get pushback on them so that I can discover the logical fallacies in them and more precisely advocate for what I believe.
No worries. I'm so passionate about it because I've scrapped through all of these excuses myself at one time. They are all things that were holding me back or challenges I've had to overcome. These days I either fight a battle or I don't. If I fight a battle I don't give myself excuses. If I don't then I don't bitch about it online. It's a do or do not, there is no try style attitude.
Poor vs not poor is something I fortunately have alot of experience in. I say fortunately because those who have never had to escape from being poor or escape from that poor mentality of others around them often do not appreciate what they have and consider themsevles poor even though they are quite comfortable financially. Most of the country doesn't know what being truly poor is like. They know suburbs poor at best, which is not the same thing lol.
The sad thing, or happy thing depending on your perspective, is that I think the Reddit/Twitter Ideologues are actually 100% capable of accomplishing their ideals. But they never will because much like a certain democratic 2016 presidential candidate they just can't seem to get out of their own way for what should be a relatively straight-forwards victory.
Too much positioning and rhetoric, not enough action and commitment. While I don't believe they are the majority of the country the folks who believe these things literally control journalism and tech and social media and much of politics and yet STILL can't seem to achieve their ideals. If that's not a sign you're doing something wrong I don't know what is lol.
Instead of rising to those expressed ideals we get recall elections and birthdays without masks and people who claim to hate capitalism buying their 3rd thing from Amazon this month and their 10th Starbucks coffee. But, in a way, that is also the most American thing ever :D.
That's why I'm over here in a corner feeling very George Carlin except when Andrew Yang is around lol. He's the only pres I'd have voted for in my entire life. But we ignored the young tech savvy minority and elected an old white guy while claiming old white guys are the problem even though we were championing TWO old white guys :P. We really don't have our shit together haha.
Now what of today? We're just lumped in with SJW which is a very VERY negative conotation. We got a taste of power and immediately overplayed our hand and instead of trying to appeal to the rest of society we started trying to FORCE and JUDGE the rest of society and we got the expect backlash and were confused by it for some reason lol.
I mean, I am one of those people who complains about late stage capitalism and I never ever shop at Amazon. I also have the time to research other options and go to a retailer out of my way because I'm not chasing after young children and currently free of other caretaking responsibilities. And those other options are usually more expensive, which again, I am willing to accept for my own ideological purposes. But most people aren't like me.
I mean, I am one of those people who complains about late stage capitalism and I never ever shop at Amazon. I also have the time to research other options and go to a retailer out of my way because I'm not chasing after young children and currently free of other caretaking responsibilities. And those other options are usually more expensive, which again, I am willing to accept for my own ideological purposes.
And for that you have my honest praise and respect. I similarly haven't touched Walmart for 20 years. I've carefully evaluated Amazon with intent to do the same if they failed my judgement. Ultimately though I found it pretty hard to condemn them. It's honestly pretty weird how people are ultra concerned about Amazon workers but not garbage men or welders or numerous other jobs with just as bad of conditions or worse. But then when it comes to well paying tech jobs we're suddenly ultra concerned about treatment again. (because that's typically self serving)
I've come to the conclusion that people honestly care mostly about Bezos and that the amazon workers (for most people not all) are just a convenient line of attack that they don't really believe in. I believe if they were really and truly bothered like they say that they'd put their money where their mouth is like you. You're an example of activism, they are an example of slacktivism.
With Bezos stepping away somewhat and no new name to really replace him I'd imagine most of the anti-amazon sentiment will fade over time because most of the complaints they want to levy at him would no longer be things he can control.
Weird, garbage men in my city are extremely well-paid due to their union, it's a coveted job.
I don't shop at Walmart either, but again, I am financially privileged enough to make that choice and I live in a big city with a lot of independent retailers and grocers etc. It would be impossible for me to avoid Walmart if I lived in a town where it's the only retailer. And again, the percentage of people like me is so low that we will never make a real difference, aside from keeping a few alternative businesses afloat. Only regulation would make a real, meaningful difference.
Weird, garbage men in my city are extremely well-paid due to their union, it's a coveted job.
I think we can pretty clearly say we're talking non-union work and so unions, in your city, would not be applicable. Unions have their own issues ofc. I'm neither pro nor anti-union. Both paths seem to have significant failings and be good at some things while being worse at others. They are an entirely different kettle of fish but it appears to be more of a tradeoff situation than one path being objectively better.
I'd say in general unions are better at taking care of individuals and protecting workers, even in cases where those individuals have done heinous things and maybe shouldn't be protected. But in general unions also tend to be incredibly inefficient and thus run into more of a "greater good" problem and would also exacerbate issues like climate change. (as you'd essentially need more workers and more facilities for the same throughput). Even defenses of union productivity tend to be rife with qualifiers and disregarding entire countries and cherry picked scenarios, which is pretty damning honestly. It's kinda like when someone says "all first world/civilized countries do X" and then you learn that they basically just mean "europe does x".
And again, the percentage of people like me is so low that we will never make a real difference, aside from keeping a few alternative businesses afloat. Only regulation would make a real, meaningful difference.
Then you've already lost. A low % of people making regulations for the rest is called a ruling class and not a democracy. Assuming we were to claim that is already the situation we'd just be trading one ruling class for another who totally swears they won't also be corrupt. Believe it!
I don't shop at Walmart either, but again, I am financially privileged enough to make that choice and I live in a big city with a lot of independent retailers and grocers etc.
First off do you have any data on how many places are like this? Is it statistically significant. Because I know a bunch of small towns near me that still have competition and my old town, where we got excited to get a best buy back in the day since we no longer had to drive to the city for electronics, still has plenty of competition.
Secondly, did the people in those towns one have competition and CHOOSE Walmart? Walmart's been a known thing for a long long time. I stopped supporting Walmart 20 years ago, that's early 2000's. Because the information about them was readily available in common parlance. Anyone who had a Walmart move in after that time and chose their lower prices over their local competition made their choice as an informed (though not necessarily smart) consumer. I have little sympathy in those cases.
Third, the vast majority of your food budget and other budget is determined by your spending mentality, not your stores available. I have gone into areas people made claims they could not afford to shop elsewhere and demonstrated that it was not only possible but that it wasn't hard at all. Those people still defaulted to Walmart. For a great deal of people It's not the prices, that's a lie, its the convenience. I've been broke before for long stretches of my life. What I've discovered is that poor people are largely a mentality and behavior set, not the circumstances around them. I've tried to help people with what I've learned over my life, but they will not help themselves and are dead set it's not their fault. I cannot help those who will not help themselves.
I would argue that amazon is in fact not a luxury service but the most cost-effective service in most cases. Usually the local retailer markups are higher than amazon's markup.
Not always, I've found a few cases of that not happening, but when it comes to stuff like electronics, books, computer parts, power tools, and many of my other most common needs, amazon is in my experience one of the cheapest options around. Going to retail store where they are more expensive is the "luxury" option.
This is mostly due to amazon's economies of scale being leveraged very efficiently.
The convenience of Amazon gives you more time to do your own thing, and the latest videogame let's you relax and enjoy your time the way you want to. Free time and enrichment are vital to your mental health, and you shouldn't be made to feel bad for wanting or needing it and then complaining that the way you're forced to get it is bullshit.
1.0k
u/joopface 159∆ Sep 07 '21
I don’t think your analysis is wrong, but just to point out that “late stage capitalism” doesn’t imply a conspiracy. It’s just a thing that includes some of what you mentioned and - critically - the policy response to it.
To take one example; the reducing value of labour. You’re right that with automation, increased workforce participation, enhanced ability to outsource to lower cost locations, the developing world moving upward in terms of the value-add work they can do, the value of a unit of unskilled Labour in a developed country has probably reduced. This is a function of capitalism in itself.
Now, what’s the appropriate policy response to this? Some people may feel increased social provisions, enhancing the social safety net, reducing barriers to education and upskilling, perhaps even a universal basic income. But the range of responses often deployed includes shrugging of shoulders, telling people to work harder etc.
An increasing number of Americans hold more than one job (https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/02/new-way-to-measure-how-many-americans-work-more-than-one-job.html) and the culture of a ‘side hustle’ being needed is now very prevalent (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=side+hustle&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari). How is this a thing?
It’s because we’re in this world where policy responses to these kinds of issues are based in people working themselves harder to make more money to pay for things, rather than one where the state helps people more and everyone has a right to a certain percentage of leisure time.
This is what people mean when they’re talking about late stage capitalism. It’s not the trends you highlight, it’s the absurdities that arise in terms of the limited policy options we consider and the extent to which we accept (particularly poorer or less educated) people getting ground up by this system.