Topic: Capitalism and the exploitation of labor (Read 16437 times)

what are you talking about?

Humanity is on a growth spurt for sure - en route to 9 000 000 000 in the not-to-distant future, and beyond after that. A Capitalist gleefully looks at the numbers and greedily rubs his fat fingers together, with an ominous grin shaping his fixated unbalanced and skewed look (purpose). If realized, earth will at some point, maybe not at the nine billion figure but non the less later on, actually need those narrated Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-class unites - WALL-E s, after all, to clean up the heaps and heaps of polluted piles of garbage. The only difference from the story to our reality, is there is no space ship to float us out in space to fatten up some more, while WALL-E does his dirty little job of cubing up the compressed blocks of total left over capitalist-created waste.

Thanks Easy-E.

 [/quote]

[/quote]

I was directly referring to the social sciences part, so naturally you assume the environmental sciences part so you at least have a leg to stand on. Also what the fuck are you talking about persuasion techniques?

Gender Studies is not science. Social sciences are BARELY science as a whole. My point stands. Interesting graphics choice... strait out of The Frankfurt School of Marxist bullshit made to look scientific.


[/quote]


Actually it's N.W.A. Straight Outta Compton
with a design based on the parental advisory warning

I was directly referring to the social sciences part, so naturally you assume the environmental sciences part so you at least have a leg to stand on. Also what the fuck are you talking about persuasion techniques?

Gender Studies is not science. Social sciences are BARELY science as a whole. My point stands. Interesting graphics choice... strait out of The Frankfurt School of Marxist bullshit made to look scientific.

that would be a jedi knight, only they are using psychological tricks, like banking cartels that pretend to look for you or corrupt cryptocurrency indexes, that tell whole world is shitcoiners except them.

sith lords and the dark side prefers force

When you state facts, you shouldn't try to use persuasaion techniques.  Facts are facts.  No one should have to convince you to believe them.  Thats how facts get mixed up with opinions.  Just because you guys don't know about something, doesn't mean it was made up randomly.  I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything and was just stating the way things are being taught in modernized education systems.  

You really can't figure out what environmental science is?  Sure, the same topics can be put into courses with various names.  In the IB, the "ES" program is called Environmental systems and society

Which, when you look into it, is basically the same thing I was referencing from the American "Next generation science standards" which are part of common core.  

Also, even though it was off-topic, I just want to post the UCLA gender studies description so that anyone who reads tecshares premodernist mind-mush can recognize its a legitimate field of study.

Without staff personnel, executives would not be able to do their job and will never have their job. Minimum wages were made to at least give/provide salaries that is acceptable/considered as enough to live in the country but yes, it wasn't enough. Maybe because of the reputation of the country as well. The U.S is more established than Mexico and that is the reason why the wages of the U.S is ten times bigger than Mexico. I think for the world to solve this is to have a global minimum wage but that's near impossible to be executed as well.

Thanks for that! 

You said "through environmental and social lenses" you didn't say to learn through. Sure integration is great, but substituting it for the classic educational model is just more deconstructivist Postmodernist Critical Theorist garbage specifically designed to erode the institutional foundations of... well everything.

This is why no one seems to be educated in school any more. They don't teach skills we need, they teach the world through the lens of social "sciences", and we have been over how scientific social sciences are. On a scale of 1-10 of maximum scientific method applied, social sciences rank in at about a 0.2.

Of course if your goal is endless deconstructivist subjectivity now that ambiguity is desirable now isn't it? I don't need to add "gender studies" because academia is one giant hybrid with Critical Theory already, which is what gender studies programs are based upon. AKA Marxism with a vinyl wrap of Bill Nye looking at some beakers over it so it looks extra sciencey.

Oh shit this random sentence in quote really convinced everyone I'm sure!

And I guess it's bad to learn economics through engineering and social science because... Sciences are bad I guess?
And I have no idea what environmental science is. I've never seen this class anywhere. Didn't you want to also add something like "gender studies" as you seem to chose things completely randomly?

"21st century education is currently teaching economics through environmental and social lenses in multi-disciplinary classes such as engineering, environmental science, as well as social studies.  "

And that is the crux of the issue. They are working Marxist Postmodernist theory into EVERY FUCKING SUBJECT destroying the very foundation of education itself. You are a walking example of the destructive effects of this leftist infiltration of the educational system from K-post graduate school.

Everything is through the lens of Postmodernism & Critical Theory, which of course is very conveniently designed to deconstruct every thought to the point that everything becomes meaningless, and our society no longer has any common reality to operate from. You are the walking cancer of the intellectual world and our society as a whole. You don't have to be... but you are as long as you keep spreading your stupidity.

What do you think an economy is?
It's food, houses, the clothes you are wearing, money, everything surrounding you right now was once an idea that has been materialized by capitalization.

When there is no more scarcity with logistics tied up neatly, there will exist an entirely different form of society that we have not yet invented and built the construct for
but we are far from there.

Milton Friedman and his wife Rose give one of the easiest explanations on whether we should let markets work: Yes
Free to Choose on PBS/Amazon or the book----or endless YouTube videos
Free market capitalism
*with little central interference the market will create its own products and pricing
*the individual can best create the greater good by the 'mechanism' of serving their own self interest



I don't subscribe to laissez faire but I do want less government interference on the flow of enterprise and more accountability for egregious actions towards the good of its citizenry/humanity ----> like Monsanto creating GMO seeds that don't naturally reproduce.
Government should provide the most opportunity for prosperity and citizens should look to themselves/each other for solutions and then...
"by the people for the people" needs to get to work for us.

There is a direction my country is heading to: Democratic Socialism it began during the depression and hasn't ended, so plenty of people (some of my favorite humans) agree with the socialist ideals and NO I don't think they understand what that really means.
Between Trump and Bernie things don't look hopeful for prosperity...which is the foundation for the largest group of humane humans.
And as for workers? Let's see how many jobs are left in the next couple decades.


AND LOL no BADecker don't add that to the list

Unlike many of you on this forum, I have experienced both ends of the stick.

Sooner rather than later you will revert to your natural predisposition.

Sure they could teach even more capitalist propaganda in high school but that would not change the fact that people eventually go out into the world and experience the perils of this oppressive system.

Supply and demand explains how markets work but it does not explain the wisdom of if we should let markets work. 

Capitalist economics teaches us that things are made to be sold.

but should things only be made to be sold?
Should everything that can be sold be made?
Should things that cannot be sold be made?

Those are ethical questions that are not often taught. Economics should be taught through all three dimensions economic, social, and environmental. Capitalists only focus on economic and ignore the other two. 

We end up with a society where policies and solutions to problems are only catered towards one of those three dimensions which should never happen. An ideal solution should cater to all three and solutions that cater to two of 3 could still be considered.  21st century education is currently teaching economics through environmental and social lenses in multi-disciplinary classes such as engineering, environmental science, as well as social studies. 

Or the basic law that banks don't lend money, but when you loan them your loan app money, they repay the loan you made to them with cash money or bank check money.

If ISIS had done it, the sith lord would use the force to make you think that you had volunteered.

I seriously think high school should teach more economy, the only reason some people fall for socialism, is that nobody ever told them about how prices and wages in a free market find its best point at any given time and place than any bureaucrat could ever do and what the results of attempting to do so have been in 40 centuries of human history:


Forty Centuries of Wage and Price Controls: How Not to Fight Inflation

Things like "the law of supply and demand", lack of understanding it, or naively thinking "that law is unfair" (Oh, like Newton's "law of gravity")... Learn it and use it to your advantage, instead of pretending you can dismiss it, as socialists preach.

Speaking of which:

🤝 Supply and demand | How does The Law of Supply and Demand work?

Also this:

👨‍💼 Where do jobs come from? | Employment vs self-employment

Actually, we are all born bloody and naked, with a high pitched little voice.

Also, some try to equalize outcomes, those being placed in powerful positions, for instance, who have more means to try and do so. I agree it should rather not be done, but in stead, trying to contribute towards equalizing opportunities amongst all, and this is by no stretch of the imagination an easy task, if you asked me; but we have to try and keep on trying, those that are able, and those willing. Watching a fair game, being played on a level playing field is satisfying, no matter which side wins, but what is even more satisfying, is being a player yourself, knowing your efforts are worthwhile on a level field, whether you win or lose the game.

Well your humble opinion is deep deeeeeeeeeeeep shit according to every biologist and every sociologist!

There is no such thing as a gene of leadership for god's sake!