You have no idea how relieved I'm feeling right now. Thought there's something wrong with me bc I couldn't articulate my thoughts about this
-
-
-
What's hard I think is that "graphs up and to the right!" people are not wrong, but they're missing what they're missing not because of bad faith, privilege or authoritarian high modernism as people (reasonably) assume. They're more like drunks looking for keys under streetlight.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Super subtle and complex topic fraught with the risks of simplification and condescension. I'll make one note that is relevant, but also tangential: on a lot of things like this, people really are wrong as a result of availability bias, even in day to day life experience.
-
2/ As an example - Americans (of all races) perception of police brutality. Even as it was objectively falling, it was perceived to be rising for a variety of reasons, one of which being increased media coverage as well as the rise of bystander videos.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Take the middle 50% of full time workers now and in 1950. Take their median wage. Take the average price to buy a single family home where they currently live. Compare.
-
If you think the numbers are bad in American cities, try it for Indian and Chinese big cities.. It's horrendous Hong kong is the king kong of this, like 70%+ to rent of income
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Are you both familiar with “the true and only heaven”? The argument Lasch makes there is more about the ideology of progress than the market per se. That has always seemed to me a better explanation than the pure economic one.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
At a high level, the idea that market societies curtail certain natural wants in the human animal (meaning the society, not the individuals) is appealing and intuive, and dispels the contradictions with the economic growth we often argue about.
-
But what gives me pause is: we really have very little information about pre-capitalist societies to draw contrasts. Do we /know/ people in societies with less constraints imposed by capitalist structures were less disaffected, less angry, happier?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Productivity goes up, but who owns the products? Typically the capital owners appropriate them, as stipulated by the employment contract. This state-enforced contractual arrangement is the essence of capitalism. But it's not a necessary feature of property or markets.
-
David Ellerman explains that a labor theory of property is more forceful than labor theories of value which have anyway been superseded by marginal productivity theory. Workers don't deserve higher wages; they deserve ownership of the whole product.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.