Imho, as painful as it is, avoiding an economic civil war at this point does more harm than good over time. It kicks the can down the road until their side exclusively can use humanoid robots to fight their battles for them, and that just means get in line and die until collapse.
The alternative is even darker, our non-wealthy children being judged by AI as to whether the potential profit/loss of healing them is greater or less than their remaining projected exploitation value to the owners.
And that's just in Healthcare. Our entire economy has become this sociopathic.
This is silent slaughter. No one should confuse quiet with peace. We haven't had peace for a long time.
They don't care if only the top 5% is free on the backs of the 95%, they don't see the bottom 95% as human at all. I don't think society should continue under that bargain. It isn't worth it. No one is free until everyone is.
His family proved in court that the government killed him, but every judge in criminal courts refused to let the case go to trial, so it was only a civil court case. But the judge was convinced by the evidence and found the government guilty and dues were awarded.
I don't think that it has recently become sociopathic. It was certainly much worse in the past with the genocide of the Americas and slavery of Africans. I would argue that the ethics of the economy have improved, but the general public has become increasingly aware of how unjust it is.
Our economy was most fair when Unions had some power. From the 50s to the 70s, there was a corrupt equilibrium when Conservatives were bribed by business and liberals were bribed by unions, until they were convinced to take the larger corporate bribe checks and joined the owner movement to undermine unions. Today's neoliberals. That is when, at least on economic policy, we effectively lost our vote. Then we lost our protest with designated protest zones out of the eyelines and profit operations of those being protested, which is effectively masturbation.
I think it's inevitable when you don't inflict close to 100% enforced taxation above ludicrous levels of wealth accumulation. Because wealth at a certain level beyond material desires becomes power. Society warping levels of power, power to warp public opinion through media and captured education, power to neuter your own regulators through bribed politicians passing legislation written by the owners themselves(see ALEC), and no one should have such unelected power.
No one.
Part of the reason we know it's gotten this bad, closer to a return to the 1920s with child labor on the rise, is because there were some less unfair decades, and it's no surprise those decades came in the wake of the owner class created great depression.
Now people watch wealthy people like the Kardashians as role models, when they should spit onto the street in disgust when such people walk by. Greed hurts people. Greed is a blight, a personal failing we've been propagandized to nurture.
If you can't be happy only making enough for 2 big houses and 1 regular yacht and to indulge your hobbies for the century give or take you'll be alive, you're broken inside, and need mental healthcare, not enablers for your God complex.
. I would argue that the ethics of the economy have improved,
The Reagan era was a glorification of greed. Before then, CEOs were expected to care about all the stakeholders of a company. Not just stockholders but also customers and employees and the general community. A large amount of enshitification resulted from the glorification of greed era. For example, tuition at public universities went from very reasonable to absurdly expensive. Health care deductibles went from $250 to $6000. Anti-trust law stopped being enforced etc.
There's nothing inherently wrong with some level of selfish individuality but coupled with a capitalist organizations goal of ever increasing profit at the direct expense and exploitation of others and the environment, that's practically textbook sociopathy.
Yeah, I have a sneaking suspicion that hes going to commit suicide via 2 gunshots to the back of the head, with every security camera in the facility malfunctioning during it and that every other inmate in the vicinity was coincidentally unconscious.
You left off, got the bars off his 4th story cell and fell to his death. Or I guess it could be 12th story with the new prison they wanna build in NY China Town.
My dream scenario is a mob marches on the capital cities ready to kill the 1% and Trump pardons Luigi and throws the rest of the wealthy to the mob to save his own ass. I believe Trump would do just about anything to save himself.
Edit: Updated my silly hypothetical to better explain the idea. I obviously don't think it's realistic, but it would be amusing. Esp if it failed to sate the publics rage!
He no longer owns any casinos. Those went bust. Most hotels aren't even his, he just leased his name out. Killing a CEO doesn't put the competing company out of business, either.
Trump can already pardon himself. Even if he couldn't, making enemies of the rich wouldn't help himself, in fact it'd just do the opposite. The ultrawealthy have class solidarity, so Trump was never in actual trouble. They only face consequences if not doing so would majorly harm the collective image of the rich (e.g. this is why Jeffrey Epstein had to die).
Yup. Epstein getting killed was inevitable, but it’s not like he had many fans; child molesters don’t tend to win popularity contests (unless it’s running for the highest seat in the country…) His death had people upset, but only because it meant he wouldn’t be able to testify against all the billionaires. He was only working against the billionaires because the prosecutors were forcing him to do so.
But Luigi is a symbol of someone actively working against the billionaires, and killing him will turn him into a martyr.
the thing is, I think they can afford for him to be acquitted on the murder charges. the way the evidence was presented, he had a ghost gun and an illegal suppressor as well. whether they were planted or not is still up for debate, but that's a slam dunk case that they can just give the maximum sentence for and move on. I don't think the murder charges actually matter. I imagine if they can't get him on murder we'll quickly find out he was manufacturing drugs or some of bs charge they can give hime another 20 year sentence for and if the judge rules they can't be served concurrently then bam, still a life sentence