I don't think they really do memes compared to just talking about how they are going to suggest everyone else do their killing of white people for them.
Neoliberals are way more clever at making infuriating memes than anyone at r/physical_removal. They find new ways to irritate people every day while anything the far right puts out is just an eye roller.
you say we copy t_d but imo the fundamental difference is that are memes don't need to demonize an other to be amusing. a lot of it is general economics dogma
Well let me be perfectly straight with you then. This sub is literally about being as irritating as possible to an odd collection of truly disturbed people as well as everyday normies who don't fit in the centrist/right-wing preferred politics of the sub (especially on social issues), and then playing up any sign of negative response to the trolling as somehow an aberration of predictable human behavior, thus worthy of mockery in itself. Sometimes the incessant pinging of people (some genuinely funny, some who are the exact right-wing equivalents of Colby "Ghazi is all I have" Klaus) calling me 'retarded' is mildly annoying and I shitpost in response, giving into the natural human tendency to want to dish out a bit of annoyance in response to being annoyed. /u/John_Ketch is probably going into overdrive as I type this, and even though I'll never see it because I blocked the dude, the idea of it makes me laugh a bit.
Like I've seen pictures of some of the most irritating trolls here and heard a bit about their life stories. It's hard to avoid feeling bad for them because my life, which is nothing special (I have to deal with normie problems like paying bills, doing taxes, shitty commutes, compromises with the SO, etc like most other people, like most of the mod team here and like most of the popular users as well) is clearly incredibly more fulfilling, interesting and full of promise just by default. These people are fucking dead-enders and they and everyone else knows it. All they have left is mildly irritating people on the Internet to remind them in some small, sad way that they exist, that although life and hope has passed them by and their existence is nothing but pure bitterness, they can pass on some of that existential angst to others by calling them 'retard' or 'cuck'.
Now I'm not saying that describes you, but it absolutely describes an uncomfortably large numbers of people on this sub and elsewhere on the Reddit metasphere. So when I get those orangereds of people trying to troll me by saying stupid shit, the pictures and life stories of people I've seen from here come into my mind, and instead of getting mad I just spend five or six seconds hammering out something silly and irrelevant and click "save". Then I briefly consider that I have things pretty good compared to a lot of my interlocutors who are desperate for attention, forget whatever caused me to think that in the first place and go back to whatever I was reading or working on.
So am I mad? Nah, I'm really not. You don't have to believe me, but I don't much care either way to be honest. I just click save and forget within a few seconds.
(Now that I've typed all this up I can probably just copy and paste it here and save some time actually. So I suppose I should thank you for instigating its production.)
I also managed to provoke what I think was a really good discussion about reasons not to legalize prostitution. Cohabitation doesn't seem like a fight I want and I really don't see the fuss.
Are you talking about just living together or having sex as well? Because I don't think there's anything wrong with a man living platonically with his fiancee.
In Islam, we fight these things by murdering women who participate in it. It's actually a really effective antidote.
I'm curious though, since you also post on Debatefascism and Traditionalism, are you an actual neoliberal or trying to steer it into a more conservative direction?
Mostly I'm trying to get people to accept that free murder of fetuses isn't an integral part of neoliberalism.
we're a bunch of pro-gay pro-trans atheist sjw stemlord cosmopolitans who hate emotions and only semi-ironically pray for white genocide, why would you think neoliberal was fertile ground for "abortion is murder" reeeing
That's how they get you. But it does feel great to pay for that ninth abortion and know that the next one's on the house. Until you forget the fucking card again
No, Methodists are concentrated in the South and Great Plains. Here's a quick map I made, with states over 2% United Methodist in red and states over 5% United Methodist in blue. There are also smaller denominations (African Methodist Episcopal, African Methodist Episcopal Zion, Wesleyan, Free Methodist, Church of the Nazarene) in America, and a huge worldwide movement (Margaret Thatcher and Chiang Kai-Shek were both Methodists). I'm from Naples, Florida.
Makes sense. The ones I personally know are from Beaumont, but now I'm remembering I think the theology school of Boston university has a Methodist dean, now that I think about it. Are Methodists known to be progressive or no? I may be misremembering the BU sect
America is at full employment, and there have always been dying towns in America and there always will be as long as old people are stubborn and refuse to move to flourishing places where there are developments and work.
/u/paulatreides0 please go tell some 65 year old guy that he should move away from the village that he has always lived in and move to an unknown mega-city. Then when he naturally refuses this (since that's how people are, and old people in particular), make sure to call him stubborn to his face.
You seem like the type to dump your parents in a shoddy retirement home and then choose to cremate them, only because it's cheaper.
People aren't just rootless atoms. You can't expect people to leave everything they have behind on a whim and actually incorporate that rootlessness into your ideology.
50 isn't elderly. Lots of people move to take new jobs at that age. So no, I don't think that's a particularly unconscionable expectation to have of someone. The only reason why 65 seems like a sketchier age is because then people will ask "why is retirement not an option?"
Moving to a new job isn't that big of a deal. Having to re-learn a new job that you probably have no affinity with, and also having to move to the other side of the country, now that is a big deal. Good luck doing that at 50. People don't do that unless they're forced to do so, and even then, many people would rather go on welfare than leave everything behind.
I don't think former Borders employees will generally require extensive reskilling before finding new employment, unless they use their time as an opportunity to acquire new skills.
Maybe if it was only Borders, but if, for example, all industrial production jobs are being shipped overseas (which is definitely the trend), then these employees can't just look for another factory job nearby, because there'll barely be any production facilities left. The only jobs that remain are for jobs in a wholly different areas, for which reschooling IS required.
unless they use their time as an opportunity to acquire new skills.
That's nice in theory and all, but if you're in your 40's and then have to apply for jobs in a nearly saturated labor market for jobs that you have no experience with (and probably no motivation), then you're never going to get a job. You're too old at that point, and companies will higher young people instead.
Fine, live off of roots and food stamps while you wait for jobs that will never happen. Unskilled labor is not a booming industry and it isn't going to change.
So instead of forcing people to leave everything behind, why not stimulate local initiatives?
And the ugly truth is that a majority of people cannot do much more than unskilled labor. You cannot school them, and reschooling them when they're past middle-age is out of the question. So why blame the worker, then?
Of course. Anyone who does is either lying, a retarded AnCap, or too rich to care. Towns were generally founded around an industry or natural resource. If that's gone and it was unable to adapt to something new, artificially keeping it going with no real opportunity on the horizon is just wasteful and more harmful to the town population in the long run.
So instead of forcing people to leave everything behind, why not stimulate local initiatives?
That sounds great if it is viable but it is a very vague and simplistic response. If it was that easy it would be done.
Doubly hilarious though, that these rural folk that demand jobs be brought to them continue to vote for people that want to dismantle federal programs.
That sounds great if it is viable but it is a very vague and simplistic response. If it was that easy it would be done.
I'd rather see a return to local pseudo-autonomous city states, but that's just my personal preference.
Doubly hilarious though, these rural folk that demand jobs be brought to them continue to vote for people that want to dismantle federal programs.
It's either that or voting for Dems that openly despise them and tell them to go fuck themselves. They can't win. Trump won the "fuck you" vote from those folks.
I'm an idiot and accidentally deleted my comment when I tried to edit it:
And the ugly truth is that a majority of people cannot do much more than unskilled labor.
The ugly truth is beggars can't be choosers. The fact that they are bottom of the barrel is exactly why they don't really have the option to wait until jobs show up in their area.
So instead of forcing people to leave everything behind, why not stimulate local initiatives?
That sounds great if it is viable but it is a very vague and simplistic response. If it was that easy it would be done.
Doubly hilarious though, these rural folk that demand jobs be brought to them continue to vote for people that want to dismantle federal programs.
The ugly truth is beggars can't be choosers. The fact that they are bottom of the barrel is exactly why they don't really have the option to wait until jobs show up in their area.
I'm not saying they should have the right, but many laborers cannot do much more than that. Without sounding condescending, you're dealing with a population of which 50% has an IQ below 100. You can't expect them to reschool and apply for college level positions, especially not if they're already of a more advanced age. And given the encroachment of automatization, it's highly likely that any blue-collar jobs they'd choose are at high risk of being automated as well. The more secure jobs are all intellectually demanding, and those are not available to the vast majority, even if they wanted to.
I'd rather see a return to local pseudo-autonomous city states, but that's just my personal preference.
That makes no sense. They aren't autonomous. That's the problem. You just suggested that the federal government spend resources to develop dying areas.
Green energy can be applied to a lot of areas, but the issue remains that most of that can be automated as well.
I agree that life sucks and i don't think a utopia of any form is feasible, but 70% of Americans age 25+ do not have a college education. That's not just unemployment for 'some people', that's enough to completely disrupt the country.
"you've worked here for 40 years but we're shipping your job to China. You should reschool into a different area, even though you are in your late 50's and the combination of your age and inexperience in that area mean that you're never going to get employed anyway. If it doesn't work then that's your fault"
Go tell that to them. Go tell some 50 year old worker that he deserves to be unemployed because Chang can do it for a cent an hour. Make sure to have a condescending attitude about it as well.
Nah, i think a country should prioritize its own citizens. Especially if one country is cosmopolitan while the rest of the world is nationalist; that way you're just setting yourself up to get fucked by foreigners. Also, what makes you think that the right to a good life depends solely on how cheap you're willing to sell your labor?
And if you're forcing Americans to compete with sweatshop wages, then neither the American nor the Chinese will have a "good life", because they'll end up with a shitty wage either way. Neither will have a good life, especially not the Chink, since they don't care much for workfloor safety. So the American is out of a job, and the Chinaman is slaving away while sniffing mercury fumes.
More importantly, increases in automation mean that soon both will be out of a job, because there will be little work left for blue-collar workers that cannot be automated. Not even machine repair. And good luck teaching the average joe how to program machines.
If the factory in my town closes down and moves to China, I have to live with the fallout directly. Increased crime, lower income, knock on effects, falling population, drug use...
b-but cheaper goods
Literally never happens. Companies, understandably, just take the extra profit and move on. They did when Pacific Brands moved to Indonesia, that's for sure.
What do I care if some slave in China is now earning a few cents mo than he would be as a subsistence farmer? I don't know him. I don't care about him.
I expect those Chinese people to think the same about me, and I'd get that. However, China is a strongly nationalist country that puts her own people first, while the West is just bending over to get fucked by big companies.
Chinese people don't do it better, they do it cheaper because they live in squalor and there are no safety or environmental regulations. Which prompts two questions: first, why do you think that it's not OK to subject our workers to that, but fine with Chinese, second, if you care about charity towards the global poor, then why don't you call it charity and treat correspondingly: first, subsidize local labor until it's competitive against $1/hr (like grain or via UBI/NIT), and the donate $1/hr equivalent to China if you want?
Also, I gotta mention that you can think whatever you want about putting the wellbeing of your citizens above foreigners, but in a democracy it's a nonnegotiable requirement and you get Trump if you ignore it.
Chinese people don't do it better, they do it cheaper
Making the same thing for a lower cost is the definition of doing it better. Same with making a slightly worse thing for a much lower cost.
Which prompts two questions: first, why do you think that it's not OK to subject our workers to that,
because that's what people want in each country want and is probably around optimalish.
second, if you care about charity towards the global poor
wanting the people who do the job best get the job is not charity
Also, I gotta mention that you can think whatever you want about putting the wellbeing of your citizens above foreigners, but in a democracy it's a nonnegotiable requirement and you get Trump if you ignore it.
Free trade is in the general self interest of people in the country. Also human empathy for people outside your country should be a feature in everyone so I will push and argue for that. It's not nonnegotiable, people used to be okay with explicitly treating black people differently by law, opinions change.
Making the same thing for a lower cost is the definition of doing it better.
No, when the amount of labor is the same and the difference comes solely from one person doing it for a bowl of rice.
You should not confuse it with advantages from automation. If an unskilled worker digs two metres of ditch per day, while a digger operator digs 200m, subsidizing the dude with the shovel is a waste of resources, literally employing people to dig and fill holes.
If a Chinese dildosmith spends 8 hours to make 1000 dildos, and an American dildosmith spends 8 hours to make 1000 dildos, then the efficiency is the same and it's reasonable to ask which one should have the privilege.
I mean, consider two model situations:
US worker gets paid $10/hr in welfare, shoots heroin.
Chinese worker gets paid $1/hr, makes dildos.
US worker gets paid $9/hr in NIT, $1 for making dildos.
We also donate $1/hr per US worker to Chinese women so that they can buy locally produced dildos.
Which situation should we strive for? Note that I see the main benefit of the second situation in the US worker being gainfully employed, counter-intuitively it's much better for real people to labor than to do nothing.
because that's what people want in each country want and is probably around optimalish.
That's not neoliberalism, that comes straight from the more insane depths of libertarianism. Why do you like free markets, son: for their efficiency or for being ethical?
wanting the people who do the job best get the job is not charity
It becomes charity the moment your main remaining argument becomes "but think about the global poor". And it should be accounted for as such.
Free trade is in the general self interest of people in the country.
It's in the interest of the middle and upper class and against the interest of the lower classes. Why do you hate the local poor?
Also human empathy for people outside your country should be a feature in everyone so I will push and argue for that
Having empathy for foreigners and having the same if not more empathy for foreigners than for the local workers are two very different things. Telling local workers to rot because Chinese need these jobs more gives you Trump, even if you then realize that you live in a democracy and try to guilt-trip them into dying quietly. This won't work.
You don't care that Trump is president? I think you care a great deal about that.
Our political system doesn't allow you to construct majorities out of a few major urban centers. And Trump and Bernie figures will keep winning as long as your politics continue to be unpalatable to anyone not living in one of those centers. Good luck winning back the presidency without the midwest. Hillary had to reject the TPP just to remain competitive in the primary, and the 2020 Democratic candidate will probably even be more protectionist and anti-immigrant.
Even if it weren't bad politics, it still would be bad policy. How do your economic models quantify the value of roots in a community? Your entire subreddit reads like a bunch of teenagers and 20-somethings that grew up in an alienated suburb, moved out of state for college then moved to a big city for a job. You don't know what a community is because you've never lived in one. Even if it introduces some economic inefficiency to interfere with the market and maintain jobs in many parts of the country, how can you be so sure that the cost isn't worth it?
Even if it introduces some economic inefficiency to interfere with the market and maintain jobs in many parts of the country, how can you be so sure that the cost isn't worth it?
it of course should also be noted that we're artificially encouraging urbanization for its own sake, through things like the local income tax deduction and government telecommuting clawbacks
most people recognize that cities are concrete termite mounds and do their level best to get out of them if they are given reasonable opportunity elsewhere, and increasing numbers of people are doing jobs that don't require them to be physically present at an office. if we truly "let the market decide" we'd be looking at an urban crisis rather than a rural one
You are retarded. Rural areas take in a higher share of government funding on top of producing less tax revenue. You don't have to live in a city to not live in bum fuck no where and wonder why making a living is difficult.
I'm not really blaming the poor, just pointing out a hopeless situation. Industries died and they were left behind and that sucks. I am all for intervention if it is something that works.
No real solution has been offered though, just people whining about how special their roots are and they deserve home job delivery.
Who the fuck was I ever attacking? I think people should live as they see fit. I have nothing against anyone that wants an honest living, but I just don't think what many of these people want can happen.
Oh fug... I didn't realize I was talking to a person who lacked real convictions. You sure outsmarted me there. I'm such an idiot, caring about stuff and all that.
Who said I don't care? I'm just telling it how it is. If you want to live in the fantasy world where we can wish jobs that no longer exist show back up in the country go for it.
I don't want people to suffer but I can't help people that don't get out of the way of a moving train.
If you have a real solution to stimulate the rural economy I'm more than eager to hear it.
No, we should spend billions to protect good corn shucking jobs in small town America instead of other problems. You want to kill grandpa if you don't agree.
I think that poor enough people would have trouble moving (subsidize relocation I guess), but outside of that I cannot imagine any alternative. Protecting jobs is terribly inefficient (my country has tried that for like, 60 years already) and sometimes places go to hell for no good reason (like Detroit).
Detroit went to shit because its main industry moved away, and because it has a lot of black people.
If inefficiency is the price to pay to prevent entire cities from turning into Rust Belt/Detroit hellscapes, then maybe a sacrifice of efficiency isn't that bad. And if you're then also preaching for opening borders with no regard, then job-seeking people are completely fucked.
This isn't oppression olympics (i don't live in Detroit), but the collapse and decay of cities or even states is disastrous, far more disastrous than many neoliberals are willing to admit. Not only that, but it seems politicians are willfully fucking them over (one of the reason Rust Belters voted Trump was their feelings of total neglect, almost gleeful neglect).
In case of Argentina, you also have to take into account what was caused by protectionism and what was caused by it being ruled by a millitary junta and being at war with the UK. Compared to the decay of blue-collar america, i'm not sure whether inefficiency is then such a bad idea. And keep in mind that unemployed and disgruntled blue-collar workers tend to vote for extreme parties. Far more extreme than Trump.
I'd personally like to see a return to smaller, mostly self-sufficient city states, like how Plato described his ideal State, but that's just me.
If I remember well, Detroit didn't have a diversified industry and when it collapsed they got fucked.
About Argentina, you are right, and I'd add neoliberals too (but it was less about freeing the markets and more about poor monetary policy like the Euro and Greece). But protectionism essentially caused a lag in quality of life compared to other countries.
Self sufficiency is bunk generally because it's impossible. I understand the desire for autarky (because it's part of my country DNA at this point) but the end results are just awful. Industries become oligopolies because they get shielded from external competition, technological lag and increased prices. Politics gets too injected in bussiness when you start to put tariffs and the like. And trying to move to a freer economy is extremely hard once it becomes too entrenched.
Having a funcional, mostly free market is a extemely hard problem but given the alternatives is the only way worth defending.
About Argentina, you are right, and I'd add neoliberals too (but it was less about freeing the markets and more about poor monetary policy like the Euro and Greece). But protectionism essentially caused a lag in quality of life compared to other countries.
But if you're not willing to give protectionism a chance, you're basically putting a huge portion of your labor force at risk of being unemployable. If that happens, you're not just going to have a lag in living quality, you'll get absolute squalor.
Self sufficiency is bunk generally because it's impossible. I understand the desire for autarky (because it's part of my country DNA at this point) but the end results are just awful.
It worked pretty well for most of human history up until recently, tbh. I'll concede that politics will get involved, but i do not see how that will not get involved in any other economic system, either. Increased prices is an issue, but people can at least afford products if they are employed, which will not be the case if the labor market is forced to compete with sweatshops overseas, or robotics at home.
If almost all production and a huge portion of white collar jobs can be done with robots/AI, then what is there left to do for people? And if these people cannot be employed, then how are you even going to sell any products when your consumer force crashes?
Mercantilism, fascism and recently nationalism in south america are good counterexamples. Protectionism has been tried too many times, and while there are economies that worked in spite of that (many opening up more recently, like in Asia), generally it just makes things worse.
What's the point of being employed if everything is too expensive? When everyone was a farmer unemployment was low but everyone was poor as fuck.
(The AI/automatization thing is another can of worms, but generally it's the lump of labor fallacy; humans are not horses, automatization works more like an aid than as a straight replacement)
Look, I'm not familiar about Norway, but protectionism won't exactly doom economies (I think Japan is a good example; wealthy but it has become stagnant and uncompetitive because it keeps zombie industries, controls immigration too much and the cost of raising a family is stupid there, so the population is getting old as fuck), it just doesn't really have that many positives.
It depends on if you're referring to the average neoliberal economist or the average /r/neoliberal commenter. With regards to the average /r/neoliberal commenter, the only thing they like about neoliberalism is that it generally opposes drug prohibition and favours free trade.
If you got the average /r/neoliberal commenter to sit down and have a discussion with a neoliberal economist to have a discussion on something like the minimum wage, a UBI, regulations on industries, the FDA, etc. I wouldn't expect the /r/neoliberal commenter to handle himself very well.
Once you're at that level of society you're there forever.
Most participants of the program never spend more than three years as recipients.
means everybody is getting poorer.
It just means we've expanded out eligibility. I've been on foodstamps a couple of times in college/currently as I get a job after I finished my masters. This wouldn't have been possible a couple years ago.
Or it means that services are penetrating to underserved communities. Or it means that the income level for receiving SNAP has risen, widening the pool of people who can sign up.
And to address your positive statement, SNAP is one of the easiest services to get. TANF is really for people who are in danger of not eating by virtue of having very low income and dependents.
I'm still waiting to find out it's a huge prank, because it's literally if someone took the ridiculously over-the-top globalist/shill/whatever boogeyman t_d claims people like Soros are and then said "you know what, that looks great!"
I love how the usual characters came to this thread to scream and call me mentally ill etc but even their salt wasn't enough to cover up the fact that /r/neoliberal is a sub for sociopaths who hate the poor.
241 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-05-29
Your condescending, contradictory bullshit isn't attractive to anyone except your frothing, basement-dwelling, virgin army.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a Kysbu 2017-05-29
Pk gets more triggered by shitty noelib memes than posts about throwing him from a helicopter.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
It's understandable, because those neolib memes are really, really shitty.
n/a Herbert-West 2017-05-29
They may be shitty at the humor part, but they have single handily caused /u/prince_kropotkin to throw many an autistic fit, so they served a purpose.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
you have a point there
n/a marsjazztrio 2017-05-29
He's so upset at the establishment that has given him his nice, cushy life.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
Ya, but honestly, they are pure shit. Somehow someone managed to top me_irl for shit.
n/a Herbert-West 2017-05-29
I don't know, have they achieved /r/LateStageCapitalism levels of retardation yet?
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
I don't think they really do memes compared to just talking about how they are going to suggest everyone else do their killing of white people for them.
n/a CaptainMemer 2017-05-29
Fortunately, white people are killing themselves with heroin. 😊
n/a Sarge_Ward 2017-05-29
me_irl is the best sub you shut your mouth.
Its the only sub I've ever seen that somehow managed to pass /r/jontron in pure shitposting capabilities.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
If you like that sub, first read this, then go here.
n/a Sarge_Ward 2017-05-29
Haha good one!
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
wait why would you try to prevent it lol
n/a Ultimatex 2017-05-29
Their memes cause u/Prince_kropotkin to have a stroke on a daily basis, so by definition their memes are gold.
n/a Unicorn_Abattoir 2017-05-29
Pretending that gold has any value to the proletariat is a bourgeois affectation.
n/a NecessaryPiglet 2017-05-29
This triggers the neoliberal
n/a Will0saurus 2017-05-29
GOLD IS NOT MONEY
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
creator of the meme in question here:
yea lol
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
It's ok bro
The meme is always the dankest before the dawn
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
ARE WE DANK OR ARE WE STALE
n/a Thhueros 2017-05-29
♪ My sign is vital ♪
n/a ieatpussy69 2017-05-29
Neoliberals are way more clever at making infuriating memes than anyone at r/physical_removal. They find new ways to irritate people every day while anything the far right puts out is just an eye roller.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
i wouldn't call copying the_donald clever. The memes are infuriating, but they already were when T_D did it.
And you can't really compare it to PR, because that sub is incredibly small.
n/a a_rory 2017-05-29
PR was bigger than NL just a few weeks ago, the meme machine is why NL is now twice the size of PR.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Pr is at a disadvantage because all of its memes have to be extremely violent.
n/a JoeFalchetto 2017-05-29
Didn't really stop FC though.
n/a sombresobriquet 2017-05-29
can we stop with the acronyms ffs
n/a JoeFalchetto 2017-05-29
You are right, I do not like them either, sometimes they slip.
Fixed.
n/a sombresobriquet 2017-05-29
understandable have a nice day thanks
n/a Assy-McGee 2017-05-29
thnx u2
n/a hexane360 2017-05-29
MODS BAN THEM
#NOTMYDRAMA
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
you say we copy t_d but imo the fundamental difference is that are memes don't need to demonize an other to be amusing. a lot of it is general economics dogma
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
That triggers Germans.
n/a JoeFalchetto 2017-05-29
I like the Germans as people but as an Italian goddamn didn't their monetary policy wreck us.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
As a people, they decide those policies and put those people in charge that enact those policies.
n/a JoeFalchetto 2017-05-29
I don't think Central Bank governors are elected...
I am sure the Germans' general fear of inflation played a role, on that I agree.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
At the end of the day someone is always elected by someone however indirectly. Inflation and debt is evil to them also even if it works better.
n/a JasonJewnova 2017-05-29
Why
n/a hexane360 2017-05-29
Wait isn't this fiscal policy that's being discussed?
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-05-29
Do you not follow European politics?
n/a hexane360 2017-05-29
No, but I'm pretty sure austerity policies are a fiscal policy thing
n/a Mexagon 2017-05-29
Nah all you kids do is copy right memes, we're only flattered by it. But "le drumpf" is uh ok I guess.
n/a ieatpussy69 2017-05-29
🙄
n/a Virgin_Butthole 2017-05-29
What about butthole, /u/ieatpussy69?
n/a ieatpussy69 2017-05-29
A gentleman doesn't kiss and tell
n/a LefthandedLunatic 2017-05-29
Mainstream economics is his greatest weakness
n/a John_Ketch 2017-05-29
Well let me be perfectly straight with you then. This sub is literally about being as irritating as possible to an odd collection of truly disturbed people as well as everyday normies who don't fit in the centrist/right-wing preferred politics of the sub (especially on social issues), and then playing up any sign of negative response to the trolling as somehow an aberration of predictable human behavior, thus worthy of mockery in itself. Sometimes the incessant pinging of people (some genuinely funny, some who are the exact right-wing equivalents of Colby "Ghazi is all I have" Klaus) calling me 'retarded' is mildly annoying and I shitpost in response, giving into the natural human tendency to want to dish out a bit of annoyance in response to being annoyed. /u/John_Ketch is probably going into overdrive as I type this, and even though I'll never see it because I blocked the dude, the idea of it makes me laugh a bit. Like I've seen pictures of some of the most irritating trolls here and heard a bit about their life stories. It's hard to avoid feeling bad for them because my life, which is nothing special (I have to deal with normie problems like paying bills, doing taxes, shitty commutes, compromises with the SO, etc like most other people, like most of the mod team here and like most of the popular users as well) is clearly incredibly more fulfilling, interesting and full of promise just by default. These people are fucking dead-enders and they and everyone else knows it. All they have left is mildly irritating people on the Internet to remind them in some small, sad way that they exist, that although life and hope has passed them by and their existence is nothing but pure bitterness, they can pass on some of that existential angst to others by calling them 'retard' or 'cuck'. Now I'm not saying that describes you, but it absolutely describes an uncomfortably large numbers of people on this sub and elsewhere on the Reddit metasphere. So when I get those orangereds of people trying to troll me by saying stupid shit, the pictures and life stories of people I've seen from here come into my mind, and instead of getting mad I just spend five or six seconds hammering out something silly and irrelevant and click "save". Then I briefly consider that I have things pretty good compared to a lot of my interlocutors who are desperate for attention, forget whatever caused me to think that in the first place and go back to whatever I was reading or working on. So am I mad? Nah, I'm really not. You don't have to believe me, but I don't much care either way to be honest. I just click save and forget within a few seconds. (Now that I've typed all this up I can probably just copy and paste it here and save some time actually. So I suppose I should thank you for instigating its production.)
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
Do you really expect anyone will read that?
n/a John_Ketch 2017-05-29
Ask /u/Prince_Kropotkin, he's the one who created this delightful copypasta when he blocked me
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Hey SlavophilesAnonymous, i thought you were an orthodox Christian. The hell are you doing on such a godless sub?
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
No, I'm a Methodist.
Mostly I'm trying to get people to accept that free murder of fetuses isn't an integral part of neoliberalism.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
But sacrificing marriage, families, communities and other aspects of Christianity on Baal's altar is?
Cause most share the feminist view that cohabituation is good because it benefits the economy.
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
I also managed to provoke what I think was a really good discussion about reasons not to legalize prostitution. Cohabitation doesn't seem like a fight I want and I really don't see the fuss.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Jesus explicitly condemned it, and Paul followed it up as well.
Do you consider yourself a neolib at this point, or are you trying to steer it into a certain direction?
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
Are you talking about just living together or having sex as well? Because I don't think there's anything wrong with a man living platonically with his fiancee.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
I was referring to living together and having sex, basically being married without the required rituals and therefore without the required commitment.
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
I'm against that, but it's probably too entrenched in culture to fight right now.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
In Islam, we fight these things by murdering women who participate in it. It's actually a really effective antidote.
I'm curious though, since you also post on Debatefascism and Traditionalism, are you an actual neoliberal or trying to steer it into a more conservative direction?
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
I'm a conservative neoliberal. DebateFascism is just my favorite debate sub.
n/a serialflamingo 2017-05-29
You sound obese.
n/a LedinToke 2017-05-29
rude af tbqhfam
n/a Tostilover 2017-05-29
How do you feel about the Fire Nation?
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
I don't have much of an opinion, but I'm very strongly against the walls of Ba Sing Se.
n/a purpleslug 2017-05-29
So just a conservative? An actual conservative?
n/a Nomadlads 2017-05-29
What does your average schizophrenic do about it?
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
we also murder them
n/a Nomadlads 2017-05-29
Oh OK good to know.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
I haven't murdered anyone in like 5 years or so, though
n/a Nomadlads 2017-05-29
Me neither. Mom took away the knives. 🙁
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
So i took away mom 😊
n/a Nomadlads 2017-05-29
😆
n/a Ultimatex 2017-05-29
Literally kill yourself.
n/a _beekay 2017-05-29
we're a bunch of pro-gay pro-trans atheist sjw stemlord cosmopolitans who hate emotions and only semi-ironically pray for white genocide, why would you think neoliberal was fertile ground for "abortion is murder" reeeing
n/a Holdin_McGroin 2017-05-29
And like most T_D imitators, you have some very shitty memes.
n/a _beekay 2017-05-29
oh
n/a Holdin_McGroin 2017-05-29
Sorry to break it to ya
n/a ur_mom_IoI 2017-05-29
post good memes
n/a Assy-McGee 2017-05-29
Meme?
n/a HuckleberryFN2187 2017-05-29
Are you fucking retarded?
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
Seriously. I only got the tenth one free when I filled up the punch card. That's really just a 10% discount when you think about it.
n/a hexane360 2017-05-29
That's how they get you. But it does feel great to pay for that ninth abortion and know that the next one's on the house. Until you forget the fucking card again
n/a -Princeps- 2017-05-29
damn hillbillies, let me kill my baby
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
If you don't want to kill it you can always leave it at an ihop as god intended
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
I'll be fine with outlawing abortion once we legalized forced organ donations.
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
You mean of dead people, right?
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
No
n/a ExtreemWeenie 2017-05-29
god isnt real lol
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
Marx was an idiot lol
n/a ExtreemWeenie 2017-05-29
and so are you lol
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
No u
n/a ExtreemWeenie 2017-05-29
that's impossible. god is perfect and all powerful. nothing could possibly be flawed
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
Theological ignorance isn't an argument
n/a ExtreemWeenie 2017-05-29
are you calling god dumb? he is perfect and i am his creation. i could never be wrong
n/a heavenlytoaster 2017-05-29
Yes, and yes.
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
Why do you hate God?
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
John Wesley is God.
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
Are you from Texas? All the Methodists I know are from Texas, so I thought it was their thing. Like Utah and mormons
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
No, Methodists are concentrated in the South and Great Plains. Here's a quick map I made, with states over 2% United Methodist in red and states over 5% United Methodist in blue. There are also smaller denominations (African Methodist Episcopal, African Methodist Episcopal Zion, Wesleyan, Free Methodist, Church of the Nazarene) in America, and a huge worldwide movement (Margaret Thatcher and Chiang Kai-Shek were both Methodists). I'm from Naples, Florida.
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
Makes sense. The ones I personally know are from Beaumont, but now I'm remembering I think the theology school of Boston university has a Methodist dean, now that I think about it. Are Methodists known to be progressive or no? I may be misremembering the BU sect
n/a 80BAIT08 2017-05-29
If we understood what made neolibs mentally ill we could move past electroshock therapy to cure them.
n/a newcomer_ts 2017-05-29
He had few solid zingers there but one would have to have a functioning nervous system to be affected by them.
When you play Don Quixote, you don't get to choose windmills.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
/u/paulatreides0 please go tell some 65 year old guy that he should move away from the village that he has always lived in and move to an unknown mega-city. Then when he naturally refuses this (since that's how people are, and old people in particular), make sure to call him stubborn to his face.
You seem like the type to dump your parents in a shoddy retirement home and then choose to cremate them, only because it's cheaper.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-05-29
Choose to cremate? Refusing to claim the bodies is a far cheaper way to get a cremation done.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
It just struck me that he'd probably sell it to a butcher as pork.
n/a ANUSBLASTER_MKII 2017-05-29
Long pig.
n/a hexane360 2017-05-29
Never did care for it
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
Too salty compared to natural pork. It's good if you soak it in water for a few hours
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Who cares what retired people do?
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
65 aint gonna be retirement age for long, famalam.
For the sake of the argument, you can replace 65 with 50.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Then you are young enough to move to get work and stop being a stubborn bastard.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
People aren't just rootless atoms. You can't expect people to leave everything they have behind on a whim and actually incorporate that rootlessness into your ideology.
n/a mtg_liebestod 2017-05-29
You most certainly can.
This is up there with "you can't expect middle class people to save for retirement."
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
You really think that setting apart some money monthly is comparable to a total overhaul of your life at an eldery or near elderly age?
n/a mtg_liebestod 2017-05-29
50 isn't elderly. Lots of people move to take new jobs at that age. So no, I don't think that's a particularly unconscionable expectation to have of someone. The only reason why 65 seems like a sketchier age is because then people will ask "why is retirement not an option?"
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Moving to a new job isn't that big of a deal. Having to re-learn a new job that you probably have no affinity with, and also having to move to the other side of the country, now that is a big deal. Good luck doing that at 50. People don't do that unless they're forced to do so, and even then, many people would rather go on welfare than leave everything behind.
n/a mtg_liebestod 2017-05-29
I don't think former Borders employees will generally require extensive reskilling before finding new employment, unless they use their time as an opportunity to acquire new skills.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Maybe if it was only Borders, but if, for example, all industrial production jobs are being shipped overseas (which is definitely the trend), then these employees can't just look for another factory job nearby, because there'll barely be any production facilities left. The only jobs that remain are for jobs in a wholly different areas, for which reschooling IS required.
That's nice in theory and all, but if you're in your 40's and then have to apply for jobs in a nearly saturated labor market for jobs that you have no experience with (and probably no motivation), then you're never going to get a job. You're too old at that point, and companies will higher young people instead.
n/a JohnBlind 2017-05-29
It's a fucked age if you did unskilled or manual labour up until that age tbh
n/a mtg_liebestod 2017-05-29
Pretty sure if you were employable at 50 doing unskilled work at Borders you'll be employable somewhere else at 50 doing unskilled work.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Fine, live off of roots and food stamps while you wait for jobs that will never happen. Unskilled labor is not a booming industry and it isn't going to change.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
So instead of forcing people to leave everything behind, why not stimulate local initiatives?
And the ugly truth is that a majority of people cannot do much more than unskilled labor. You cannot school them, and reschooling them when they're past middle-age is out of the question. So why blame the worker, then?
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
Sounds a lot like a state-planned economy there, comrade.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
It's almost as if i don't believe the free market is perfect.
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
Of course. Anyone who does is either lying, a retarded AnCap, or too rich to care. Towns were generally founded around an industry or natural resource. If that's gone and it was unable to adapt to something new, artificially keeping it going with no real opportunity on the horizon is just wasteful and more harmful to the town population in the long run.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
That sounds great if it is viable but it is a very vague and simplistic response. If it was that easy it would be done.
Doubly hilarious though, that these rural folk that demand jobs be brought to them continue to vote for people that want to dismantle federal programs.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
I'd rather see a return to local pseudo-autonomous city states, but that's just my personal preference.
It's either that or voting for Dems that openly despise them and tell them to go fuck themselves. They can't win. Trump won the "fuck you" vote from those folks.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
I'm an idiot and accidentally deleted my comment when I tried to edit it:
The ugly truth is beggars can't be choosers. The fact that they are bottom of the barrel is exactly why they don't really have the option to wait until jobs show up in their area.
That sounds great if it is viable but it is a very vague and simplistic response. If it was that easy it would be done.
Doubly hilarious though, these rural folk that demand jobs be brought to them continue to vote for people that want to dismantle federal programs.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
I'm not saying they should have the right, but many laborers cannot do much more than that. Without sounding condescending, you're dealing with a population of which 50% has an IQ below 100. You can't expect them to reschool and apply for college level positions, especially not if they're already of a more advanced age. And given the encroachment of automatization, it's highly likely that any blue-collar jobs they'd choose are at high risk of being automated as well. The more secure jobs are all intellectually demanding, and those are not available to the vast majority, even if they wanted to.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
That makes no sense. They aren't autonomous. That's the problem. You just suggested that the federal government spend resources to develop dying areas.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Then what do you suggest? We've seen what happens when industry collapses and dying towns are left to themselves: you get wastelands like Detroit.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
I honestly don't think there is a solution that will save everyone. Life sucks that way some times.
Green energy development works, but only if the area is suitable for it.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Green energy can be applied to a lot of areas, but the issue remains that most of that can be automated as well.
I agree that life sucks and i don't think a utopia of any form is feasible, but 70% of Americans age 25+ do not have a college education. That's not just unemployment for 'some people', that's enough to completely disrupt the country.
n/a eekkkee 2017-05-29
if there are jobs they can work at and choose not to it's their choice, but it's not a choice that needs to be supported by tax money.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
"you've worked here for 40 years but we're shipping your job to China. You should reschool into a different area, even though you are in your late 50's and the combination of your age and inexperience in that area mean that you're never going to get employed anyway. If it doesn't work then that's your fault"
n/a eekkkee 2017-05-29
he doesn't deserve the job if Chinese people could do it better. Poor Chinese people should be unemployed instead of someone quite a bit richer?
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Go tell that to them. Go tell some 50 year old worker that he deserves to be unemployed because Chang can do it for a cent an hour. Make sure to have a condescending attitude about it as well.
n/a eekkkee 2017-05-29
If you think an American deserves a good life more than a Chinese person you have shitty morals.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Nah, i think a country should prioritize its own citizens. Especially if one country is cosmopolitan while the rest of the world is nationalist; that way you're just setting yourself up to get fucked by foreigners. Also, what makes you think that the right to a good life depends solely on how cheap you're willing to sell your labor?
And if you're forcing Americans to compete with sweatshop wages, then neither the American nor the Chinese will have a "good life", because they'll end up with a shitty wage either way. Neither will have a good life, especially not the Chink, since they don't care much for workfloor safety. So the American is out of a job, and the Chinaman is slaving away while sniffing mercury fumes.
More importantly, increases in automation mean that soon both will be out of a job, because there will be little work left for blue-collar workers that cannot be automated. Not even machine repair. And good luck teaching the average joe how to program machines.
n/a JohnBlind 2017-05-29
Creating opportunities for a Chinese breh to get enslaved and savagely assfucked for a cent an hour is good morals though?
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
If the factory in my town closes down and moves to China, I have to live with the fallout directly. Increased crime, lower income, knock on effects, falling population, drug use...
Literally never happens. Companies, understandably, just take the extra profit and move on. They did when Pacific Brands moved to Indonesia, that's for sure.
What do I care if some slave in China is now earning a few cents mo than he would be as a subsistence farmer? I don't know him. I don't care about him.
I expect those Chinese people to think the same about me, and I'd get that. However, China is a strongly nationalist country that puts her own people first, while the West is just bending over to get fucked by big companies.
How is this so hard to get?
n/a Mort_DeRire 2017-05-29
I'll be glad to tell that to them, do you have their contact info?
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-05-29
Chinese people don't do it better, they do it cheaper because they live in squalor and there are no safety or environmental regulations. Which prompts two questions: first, why do you think that it's not OK to subject our workers to that, but fine with Chinese, second, if you care about charity towards the global poor, then why don't you call it charity and treat correspondingly: first, subsidize local labor until it's competitive against $1/hr (like grain or via UBI/NIT), and the donate $1/hr equivalent to China if you want?
Also, I gotta mention that you can think whatever you want about putting the wellbeing of your citizens above foreigners, but in a democracy it's a nonnegotiable requirement and you get Trump if you ignore it.
n/a eekkkee 2017-05-29
Making the same thing for a lower cost is the definition of doing it better. Same with making a slightly worse thing for a much lower cost.
because that's what people want in each country want and is probably around optimalish.
wanting the people who do the job best get the job is not charity
Free trade is in the general self interest of people in the country. Also human empathy for people outside your country should be a feature in everyone so I will push and argue for that. It's not nonnegotiable, people used to be okay with explicitly treating black people differently by law, opinions change.
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-05-29
No, when the amount of labor is the same and the difference comes solely from one person doing it for a bowl of rice.
You should not confuse it with advantages from automation. If an unskilled worker digs two metres of ditch per day, while a digger operator digs 200m, subsidizing the dude with the shovel is a waste of resources, literally employing people to dig and fill holes.
If a Chinese dildosmith spends 8 hours to make 1000 dildos, and an American dildosmith spends 8 hours to make 1000 dildos, then the efficiency is the same and it's reasonable to ask which one should have the privilege.
I mean, consider two model situations:
US worker gets paid $10/hr in welfare, shoots heroin.
Chinese worker gets paid $1/hr, makes dildos.
US worker gets paid $9/hr in NIT, $1 for making dildos.
We also donate $1/hr per US worker to Chinese women so that they can buy locally produced dildos.
Which situation should we strive for? Note that I see the main benefit of the second situation in the US worker being gainfully employed, counter-intuitively it's much better for real people to labor than to do nothing.
That's not neoliberalism, that comes straight from the more insane depths of libertarianism. Why do you like free markets, son: for their efficiency or for being ethical?
It becomes charity the moment your main remaining argument becomes "but think about the global poor". And it should be accounted for as such.
It's in the interest of the middle and upper class and against the interest of the lower classes. Why do you hate the local poor?
Having empathy for foreigners and having the same if not more empathy for foreigners than for the local workers are two very different things. Telling local workers to rot because Chinese need these jobs more gives you Trump, even if you then realize that you live in a democracy and try to guilt-trip them into dying quietly. This won't work.
n/a pervent-account 2017-05-29
Okay, as much as "rootless cosmopolitan" just means Jew, this is literally rootless cosmopolitanism.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Fine. Live off food stamps. I don't care.
n/a pervent-account 2017-05-29
You don't care that Trump is president? I think you care a great deal about that.
Our political system doesn't allow you to construct majorities out of a few major urban centers. And Trump and Bernie figures will keep winning as long as your politics continue to be unpalatable to anyone not living in one of those centers. Good luck winning back the presidency without the midwest. Hillary had to reject the TPP just to remain competitive in the primary, and the 2020 Democratic candidate will probably even be more protectionist and anti-immigrant.
Even if it weren't bad politics, it still would be bad policy. How do your economic models quantify the value of roots in a community? Your entire subreddit reads like a bunch of teenagers and 20-somethings that grew up in an alienated suburb, moved out of state for college then moved to a big city for a job. You don't know what a community is because you've never lived in one. Even if it introduces some economic inefficiency to interfere with the market and maintain jobs in many parts of the country, how can you be so sure that the cost isn't worth it?
n/a dragonbornrises 2017-05-29
Is this kino?
n/a Fucking_That_Chicken 2017-05-29
it of course should also be noted that we're artificially encouraging urbanization for its own sake, through things like the local income tax deduction and government telecommuting clawbacks
most people recognize that cities are concrete termite mounds and do their level best to get out of them if they are given reasonable opportunity elsewhere, and increasing numbers of people are doing jobs that don't require them to be physically present at an office. if we truly "let the market decide" we'd be looking at an urban crisis rather than a rural one
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
You are retarded. Rural areas take in a higher share of government funding on top of producing less tax revenue. You don't have to live in a city to not live in bum fuck no where and wonder why making a living is difficult.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
I can kinda see why people came up with horseshoe theory now
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
I'm not really blaming the poor, just pointing out a hopeless situation. Industries died and they were left behind and that sucks. I am all for intervention if it is something that works.
No real solution has been offered though, just people whining about how special their roots are and they deserve home job delivery.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Maybe one day you'll care about something more than money and you'll understand where these people are coming from
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
I do get it but the reality is what they are asking for is not feasible. I'm not the one who is bitching about money, they are.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Oh well feasibility is another discussion
It's the continuous liberal attack on people who are genuinely fucking desperately suffering that I can't stand
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Who the fuck was I ever attacking? I think people should live as they see fit. I have nothing against anyone that wants an honest living, but I just don't think what many of these people want can happen.
I think that is sad.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Well, that's how it comes off. In case you don't believe this happens, check the /r/truereddit posts about rural folks. Sorry m80
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
No, I am not a fan of Trump, but if they want to keep electing people that go against their own interest, fine. I am not the one hurting.
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about otherwise. I have a sub? You also don't know shit about me.
n/a pervent-account 2017-05-29
Oh fug... I didn't realize I was talking to a person who lacked real convictions. You sure outsmarted me there. I'm such an idiot, caring about stuff and all that.
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Who said I don't care? I'm just telling it how it is. If you want to live in the fantasy world where we can wish jobs that no longer exist show back up in the country go for it.
I don't want people to suffer but I can't help people that don't get out of the way of a moving train.
If you have a real solution to stimulate the rural economy I'm more than eager to hear it.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
DING DING DING! These people have nothing to identify with so they assume that such a thing is irrational!
n/a froibo 2017-05-29
Hahaha you guys are hilarious. You honestly think I was raised in some human factory or something.
n/a ucstruct 2017-05-29
No, we should spend billions to protect good corn shucking jobs in small town America instead of other problems. You want to kill grandpa if you don't agree.
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
What's the alternative?
I think that poor enough people would have trouble moving (subsidize relocation I guess), but outside of that I cannot imagine any alternative. Protecting jobs is terribly inefficient (my country has tried that for like, 60 years already) and sometimes places go to hell for no good reason (like Detroit).
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
Detroit went to shit because its main industry moved away, and because it has a lot of black people.
If inefficiency is the price to pay to prevent entire cities from turning into Rust Belt/Detroit hellscapes, then maybe a sacrifice of efficiency isn't that bad. And if you're then also preaching for opening borders with no regard, then job-seeking people are completely fucked.
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
You haven't lived in a place with protectionism, else you'd understand that alternative is worse.
(by the way, I'm not that hardcore about open borders, I think it'll take centuries to get at that point)
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
And i take it you haven't been to detroit, either. Parts of it are like a miniature Somalia on American soil.
Are you from a former commie nation?
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
Argentina. We had a great depression dude. Detroit is shit but my country is shit too. Don't try to win the opression olympics.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
This isn't oppression olympics (i don't live in Detroit), but the collapse and decay of cities or even states is disastrous, far more disastrous than many neoliberals are willing to admit. Not only that, but it seems politicians are willfully fucking them over (one of the reason Rust Belters voted Trump was their feelings of total neglect, almost gleeful neglect).
In case of Argentina, you also have to take into account what was caused by protectionism and what was caused by it being ruled by a millitary junta and being at war with the UK. Compared to the decay of blue-collar america, i'm not sure whether inefficiency is then such a bad idea. And keep in mind that unemployed and disgruntled blue-collar workers tend to vote for extreme parties. Far more extreme than Trump.
I'd personally like to see a return to smaller, mostly self-sufficient city states, like how Plato described his ideal State, but that's just me.
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
If I remember well, Detroit didn't have a diversified industry and when it collapsed they got fucked.
About Argentina, you are right, and I'd add neoliberals too (but it was less about freeing the markets and more about poor monetary policy like the Euro and Greece). But protectionism essentially caused a lag in quality of life compared to other countries.
Self sufficiency is bunk generally because it's impossible. I understand the desire for autarky (because it's part of my country DNA at this point) but the end results are just awful. Industries become oligopolies because they get shielded from external competition, technological lag and increased prices. Politics gets too injected in bussiness when you start to put tariffs and the like. And trying to move to a freer economy is extremely hard once it becomes too entrenched.
Having a funcional, mostly free market is a extemely hard problem but given the alternatives is the only way worth defending.
n/a Ultrashitpost 2017-05-29
But if you're not willing to give protectionism a chance, you're basically putting a huge portion of your labor force at risk of being unemployable. If that happens, you're not just going to have a lag in living quality, you'll get absolute squalor.
It worked pretty well for most of human history up until recently, tbh. I'll concede that politics will get involved, but i do not see how that will not get involved in any other economic system, either. Increased prices is an issue, but people can at least afford products if they are employed, which will not be the case if the labor market is forced to compete with sweatshops overseas, or robotics at home.
If almost all production and a huge portion of white collar jobs can be done with robots/AI, then what is there left to do for people? And if these people cannot be employed, then how are you even going to sell any products when your consumer force crashes?
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
Mercantilism, fascism and recently nationalism in south america are good counterexamples. Protectionism has been tried too many times, and while there are economies that worked in spite of that (many opening up more recently, like in Asia), generally it just makes things worse.
What's the point of being employed if everything is too expensive? When everyone was a farmer unemployment was low but everyone was poor as fuck.
(The AI/automatization thing is another can of worms, but generally it's the lump of labor fallacy; humans are not horses, automatization works more like an aid than as a straight replacement)
n/a Raven0520 2017-05-29
Norway is extremely protectionist...
n/a Neronoah 2017-05-29
Look, I'm not familiar about Norway, but protectionism won't exactly doom economies (I think Japan is a good example; wealthy but it has become stagnant and uncompetitive because it keeps zombie industries, controls immigration too much and the cost of raising a family is stupid there, so the population is getting old as fuck), it just doesn't really have that many positives.
There is always many factors to consider.
n/a SlavophilesAnonymous 2017-05-29
u/Prince_Kropotkin why do you hate Mexicans?
n/a Holdin_McGroin 2017-05-29
Why don't you?
n/a trj820 2017-05-29
Dude, Mayocide, lmao.
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
Most Mexicans are Spaniards larping as Aztecs.
n/a trj820 2017-05-29
Am half (white) Mexican, can confirm. Will proceed to gas chamber.
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
Vaya con dios
n/a drunkai 2017-05-29
Tacos
n/a o_l0_0l_o 2017-05-29
Anarchism and other progressive ideologies always have an undercurrent of racism. The result of their white middle-class membership.
n/a JouleS88 2017-05-29
See also: The "Low-Information Voters" peddled by the Bernie crowd
n/a JohnBlind 2017-05-29
Implying any American is a high information voter
n/a JasonJewnova 2017-05-29
Damn, never thought I'd agree with the Prince.
Neo-libs are fucking aids.
n/a relevant_econ_meme 2017-05-29
Prosperity: the gift that keeps on giving.
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
I question your commitment to (((globalism)))
n/a JasonJewnova 2017-05-29
(((Shhh don't let the goy know)))
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
mate, its neolibs. no hyphen
n/a barbedvelvet 2017-05-29
Wtf is neoliberalism? Did liberalism become unfashionable at some point and now there's a resurgence? Or are they extreme liberals? I don't get it.
n/a sombresobriquet 2017-05-29
classical liberal economics + some extra faith in government + some identity politics
n/a Holdin_McGroin 2017-05-29
stale memes
n/a sombresobriquet 2017-05-29
true tbh, it used to be better
n/a DoctorMort 2017-05-29
It depends on if you're referring to the average neoliberal economist or the average /r/neoliberal commenter. With regards to the average /r/neoliberal commenter, the only thing they like about neoliberalism is that it generally opposes drug prohibition and favours free trade.
If you got the average /r/neoliberal commenter to sit down and have a discussion with a neoliberal economist to have a discussion on something like the minimum wage, a UBI, regulations on industries, the FDA, etc. I wouldn't expect the /r/neoliberal commenter to handle himself very well.
n/a strathmeyer 2017-05-29
If you haven't been accused of being one, you aren't trying hard enough.
n/a JouleS88 2017-05-29
Free market capitalism with strong social safety nets.
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
Free market capitalism with a pretense of desire for strong social safety nets while gutting existing social safety nets.
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
neoliberalism when?
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
You mean other than the last 30 years?
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
in the last thirty years transfer payments have increased substantially
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
Hmmmm, your informative links have certainly convinced me, wait, no
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
well ty. :D
Though here's a graph.
n/a Virgin_Butthole 2017-05-29
Why couldn't you've just played along and pretended /u/prince_kropotkin was an econ grad student and TA like everyone else? :'(
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Are you sure that's not because more and more people are on food stamps?
n/a Unicorn_Abattoir 2017-05-29
Isn't more people on food stamps the proof that we have a strong social safety net?
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Food stamps are for people that can't afford to eat. Once you're at that level of society you're there forever.
More and more people, given the economic contexts, put on food stamps means everybody is getting poorer.
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
Most participants of the program never spend more than three years as recipients.
It just means we've expanded out eligibility. I've been on foodstamps a couple of times in college/currently as I get a job after I finished my masters. This wouldn't have been possible a couple years ago.
n/a Unicorn_Abattoir 2017-05-29
Or it means that services are penetrating to underserved communities. Or it means that the income level for receiving SNAP has risen, widening the pool of people who can sign up.
And to address your positive statement, SNAP is one of the easiest services to get. TANF is really for people who are in danger of not eating by virtue of having very low income and dependents.
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
The gray areas are recessions.
n/a KULAKS_DESERVED_IT 2017-05-29
Sure seems to me that once people get on food stamps they stay on
n/a BadEThrowaway 2017-05-29
Food stamps are a tiny part of transfer payments.
n/a Mexagon 2017-05-29
More like hating everything else and being too much of a pussy to give your own opinion on anything.
n/a Fucking_That_Chicken 2017-05-29
that's literally what this sub is for, though, and we seem to hate them
is it just like a turf war or something
n/a Will0saurus 2017-05-29
Alternatively, not jumping to stupid utopian solutions and actually seeing what works.
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
The linked thread is promoting open borders
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
So the only opinions they have on their own are pants on head retarded. That's a good sign.
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
Brown ppl are good and thats OK
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
Open borders is full blown stupidity and naivety, I'm honestly surprised there are still people that unironically support it.
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
Brown ppl are good and thats OK
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
No they aren't, not when they bring bombs and a backwards ideology with them.
n/a Kelsig 2017-05-29
Brown ppl are good and thats OK
n/a Dial_A_Dragon 2017-05-29
I'm going to stop responding to you.
n/a Uplift_Yourself 2017-05-29
I'm glad you you think I'm good :)
n/a carthoris26 2017-05-29
I'm still waiting to find out it's a huge prank, because it's literally if someone took the ridiculously over-the-top globalist/shill/whatever boogeyman t_d claims people like Soros are and then said "you know what, that looks great!"
n/a Finagles_Law 2017-05-29
This, but unironically.
n/a serialflamingo 2017-05-29
The only thing neoliberal memes are useful for is growing back a lost virginity.
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
You don't like breaking in virgin bussy?
n/a serialflamingo 2017-05-29
Where did I say I didn't like that?
n/a lokichilde 2017-05-29
Oh good point. I glossed over "useful"
n/a OldOrder 2017-05-29
Dude can't help himself. Ever since that sub was created he has been on a mission to make himself look like as much of an asshole as possible.
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
And yet he still hasn't made himself look like as much of an asshole as the average r/neoliberal poster
n/a OldOrder 2017-05-29
Retards can't be assholes fam
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
racist
n/a a_rory 2017-05-29
Lmao now you're getting mad.
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/6dzu74/prince_manarchist_refuses_to_understand/di6y84l/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=Drama
n/a Wraith_GraveSpell 2017-05-29
Oooh we struck more salt!
n/a nmx179 2017-05-29
You're right bro I really blew my stack there, next time I point out that r/neoliberal is full of assholes I'll try to be more dispassionate about it.
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
They ain't got shit on us
n/a LemonScore 2017-05-29
Prince_Kropotkin is literally the only person in that comment chain that isn't a moron.
n/a Herbert-West 2017-05-29
k
n/a TheButtholeOfBravery 2017-05-29
That mee-mee triggers me.
I miss Border's Bookstores. :'(
n/a LadyVetinari 2017-05-29
They didn't have horror sections. They were shit
n/a Chicup 2017-05-29
I miss Borders, last good bookstore around here.
n/a Wraith_GraveSpell 2017-05-29
Damn /r/neoliberal is straight up P_Ks kryptonite. Edgy anarchists have nothing on getting this guy to freak out.
n/a GhostofRFS 2017-05-29
This guy really has no self-awareness whatsoever. It's amazing.
n/a LuigiVargasLlosa 2017-05-29
that about sums up /r/neoliberal
n/a glmox 2017-05-29
/r/neoliberal in a fucking nutshell lmao
n/a ExtreemWeenie 2017-05-29
/u/Prince_Kropotkin how can we exploit your labor if you're unemployed?
n/a bleasehalb 2017-05-29
Lot of mad rads in this thread.
n/a purpleslug 2017-05-29
If /u/Prince_Kropotkin spent as much time working as he did being offended on reddit he might actually be doing postgraduate economics.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-05-29
I love how the usual characters came to this thread to scream and call me mentally ill etc but even their salt wasn't enough to cover up the fact that /r/neoliberal is a sub for sociopaths who hate the poor.