Topic: The Rural United States
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc started this discussion 3 weeks ago #136,431
How come in the United States when you go out into the country it’s only white people? I took it as a given until I noticed a bunch of Indians out in the middle of nowhere in Canada and now I’m wondering. Why do white Americans like living in the middle of nowhere?I feel like the endless corn fields are a form of purgatory.
It’s one thing when you realize the corn never ends, it’s another when you realize nobody is even eating most of it. It’s just subsidized by the federal government.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #1,448,289
It’s also ironic because most of them lean conservative, but when you think about it, the corn thing, when you think about how that works, they’re taking our money through our taxes and they’re redistributing it which is a form of… can I say the word?
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,290
There’s actually an argument to be made that American farmers could make more money if they grew less food. It’s crazy how supply and demand works. Economics, fascinating subject.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 6 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,291
Because it’s like, we have heavily industrialized farming. And people would say that oh the free market is efficient blah blah blah. But what you have to understand is we respond to incentives as humans. And each individual farmer can make more money than other farmers by growing more food. So they all reasonably assume as individuals that they should grow more food in order to outcompete the other farmers. So whenever there was some new farming innovation, tractors, whatever, they bought it and utilized it. So now, the whole continental US basically is coated in farm land, horrible for the environment, and we produce lots of food. The issue is, if you have more supply than demand, that lowers the price of food to the point where, if there was more scarcity in food, we would be willing to pay more and farmers would make more money. Which is a funny problem, because we’re destroying the environment and farmers are making less money than they could be making because of free market economics and individuals making rational decisions instead of collective decisions. And does anybody give a crap about what I just said? Nope.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,294
Of course developed countries urbanize over time and lower prices benefit urban consumers of rural produce so if most of the population isn’t rural then there won’t be an incentive to fix this.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) sextuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,295
Although, Americans can be kinda obese so maybe less food would be a good thing…
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) septuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,297
You can also increase tax revenue by lowering taxes… sometimes.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,302
@1,448,289 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
No, you can't, because redistributive policies are not the same as the workers controlling the means of production.
No, you can't, because redistributive policies are not the same as the workers controlling the means of production.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,303
@previous (B)
The United States is considered to be a mixed market economy rather than a purely capitalist economy.
The United States is considered to be a mixed market economy rather than a purely capitalist economy.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,305
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 20 seconds later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,306
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 39 seconds later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,307
Has any industry really ever been seized by the workers? It’s an open question.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,308
You know, supposedly in the US labor unions are supposed to be protected by the first amendment, because you have a right to peaceful assembly and a freedom of association. It’s just interesting how the words we use have like nothing to do with the reality of anything.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 25 seconds later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,309
Because I’m just saying if you want to join a labor union in that other place…
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 9 minutes later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,310
It’s also interesting that, if you read the American constitution, there’s a particular word that isn’t anywhere in it. So if you think about it, this can really mean basically whatever we want it to mean. Which is brilliant.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) sextuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,311
You know, because ideology doesn’t work, and sometimes you actually need an economist to crunch some damn numbers.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,313
@1,448,306 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
China has a lot of state owned companies, and the state runs them in the name of the workers.
At least in theory they are a mixed system.
The US is almsot entirely private.
China has a lot of state owned companies, and the state runs them in the name of the workers.
At least in theory they are a mixed system.
The US is almsot entirely private.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,316
@previous (B)
The US government doesn’t have partial ownership in all US corporations, but they do have ownership in particular corporations. For example, Intel.
The US government doesn’t have partial ownership in all US corporations, but they do have ownership in particular corporations. For example, Intel.
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,317
Apparently there was some talk of doing the same with OpenAI for whatever reason.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,318
Trump is an interesting guy.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,319
Anyway, I don’t really believe in anything. I’m just going with the flow, and that seems to be do the exact opposite of whatever you say publicly. In that case, we’re all doing that.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,320
Why is it what we’re doing? I guess we’re all just in too deep.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,321
@1,448,316 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
They bought shares from capital on the market.
And they routinely subsidize capital.
And they don't even pretend they are doing it for the working class, it's entirely framed as national security.
They bought shares from capital on the market.
And they routinely subsidize capital.
And they don't even pretend they are doing it for the working class, it's entirely framed as national security.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,322
@previous (B)
What national security is can mean very different things depending on what type of government you have. Is the nation the government or the people? You could argue almost everything is about national security rather than ideology it just depends on your frame of reference. Ideology is probably secondary in most cases I would guess, but I can’t read minds.
What national security is can mean very different things depending on what type of government you have. Is the nation the government or the people? You could argue almost everything is about national security rather than ideology it just depends on your frame of reference. Ideology is probably secondary in most cases I would guess, but I can’t read minds.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 39 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,323
Like the internet for example. Is that ideology or is that national security? Is there even any distinction there? Maybe there’s not.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,324
Is the ideology the core or is it just dress up or does it even matter? The entire thing could really just be based on personal interests and nothing more.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,325
And that’s not to act like anybody’s perfect. It’s more like, maybe you shouldn’t take people at their word.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,326
Maybe they don’t believe anything either, how should I know?
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 12 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,328
@1,448,322 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
Either way, there's a difference between owning a stake in a businesa for national security as opposed to owning it so that the economy is run by the working class for an eventual classless society.
The US bought shares in spite of the fact that it's public ownership, the government still officially supports a market economy.
China owns many industries because they believe the state should run the economy in the name of the workers, and market industries are a temporary concession until they can achieve a classless society.
Whether you believe their intentions or not, there's a big difference in motivation.
Either way, there's a difference between owning a stake in a businesa for national security as opposed to owning it so that the economy is run by the working class for an eventual classless society.
The US bought shares in spite of the fact that it's public ownership, the government still officially supports a market economy.
China owns many industries because they believe the state should run the economy in the name of the workers, and market industries are a temporary concession until they can achieve a classless society.
Whether you believe their intentions or not, there's a big difference in motivation.
Anonymous B double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 44 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,329
@1,448,323 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
The US has privately owned ISPs. They are subsidized at times, but that money goes to capital who still runs the industry.
The US has privately owned ISPs. They are subsidized at times, but that money goes to capital who still runs the industry.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,330
@1,448,328 (B)
> Whether you believe their intentions or not, there's a big difference in motivation.
We both want the same thing. There wouldn’t be any conflict if we each wanted different things, it just wouldn’t matter. Like, I don’t think Americans worry too much about Kenya for example.
> Whether you believe their intentions or not, there's a big difference in motivation.
We both want the same thing. There wouldn’t be any conflict if we each wanted different things, it just wouldn’t matter. Like, I don’t think Americans worry too much about Kenya for example.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,331
Although, there’s something incredibly ironic about the fact that the status quo was actually mutually beneficial for the economies of both countries.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc (OP) triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,332
Or like EVs for example, they don’t care about climate change, but they recognized a strategic advantage. You would hope that if people are smart enough they end up doing things that are less harmful in general. But ideology is dangerous because it can create an us vs them thing and humanity can’t afford that anymore.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 12 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,333
@1,448,330 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
We're talking about how they run their economy, not whether the governments are aligned or opposed.
We're talking about how they run their economy, not whether the governments are aligned or opposed.
(Edited 6 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,334
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 22 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,335
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,338
@previous (B)
I don't think that the economic decisions of countries are primarily motivated by ideology. The United States and China both have two very different governmental structures and everything else is just a consequence of that.
I don't think that the economic decisions of countries are primarily motivated by ideology. The United States and China both have two very different governmental structures and everything else is just a consequence of that.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,340
China has an official ideology, the United States doesn’t have one. In practice the United States leans a certain way economically but our system isn’t actually based around economic ideology.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,341
Technically the word "capitalism" is newer than the United States is. It wasn’t a thing the founding fathers were thinking about when they wrote the constitution and it doesn’t appear anywhere in the constitution.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,342
Of course during the Cold War, people started just saying it in a matter of fact way, but it’s actually not really that straight forward.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,343
Mr. Bloody Lemonade replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,345
@previous (B)
Well, the Chinese civil war and the American Revolutionary War. In China Mao won, in America, George Washington won. Mao was an authoritarian and George Washington owned 300 slaves.
Well, the Chinese civil war and the American Revolutionary War. In China Mao won, in America, George Washington won. Mao was an authoritarian and George Washington owned 300 slaves.
Anonymous C double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,346
I’m just saying, it wouldn’t be that surprising if we’re yapping about the ideas of psychopaths. So it’s like, idk.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,347
They both thought they were doing good, but they were both kinda fucked up people. Like owning 300 slaves, that’s not really forgivable. Killing millions of people, that’s not really forgivable. I don’t know, maybe we shouldn’t worry about ideology.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 17 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,349
That’s something that’s kind of crazy though. Slavery does happen, but it’s always hidden in the modern world. It’s illegal in every country in the world and any country that has any modern practice of slavery will deny it. That’s something people don’t think about, that’s an incredible level of evil to just be open with owning 300 people as property. Nobody in the modern world has done something like that but in that society in that time that was normal. It’s difficult to reconcile that.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,350
Recently actually, a majority of countries in the world voted that it was a crime against humanity, but we’re supposed to act like those guys were geniuses and we can just look past that other thing.
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,351
123 countries voted that it was a crime against humanity and only 3 voted no: the United States, Israel, and Argentina.
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4106660
https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/4106660
Anonymous B replied with this 3 weeks ago, 30 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,354
@1,448,345 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade)
Yes, the war determines the ideology, and the ideology determines the structure of the nation.
If people care about getting ideology right and then fighting for it in one place, and in another place they are reactionary and just chance into whatever ideological beliefs, then the former will fare better.
Yes, the war determines the ideology, and the ideology determines the structure of the nation.
If people care about getting ideology right and then fighting for it in one place, and in another place they are reactionary and just chance into whatever ideological beliefs, then the former will fare better.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,375
@previous (B)
That doesn’t make any sense, war doesn’t determine who’s right, it only determines who’s left.
That doesn’t make any sense, war doesn’t determine who’s right, it only determines who’s left.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 10 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,378
@1,448,347 (D)
browns literally only exist to be slaves tho, its just incredibly cruel to force them to pretend to be humans because only the top five percent of blacks have the potential and the will to even try to mimic humanity.
browns literally only exist to be slaves tho, its just incredibly cruel to force them to pretend to be humans because only the top five percent of blacks have the potential and the will to even try to mimic humanity.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 3 weeks ago, 54 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,380
Anonymous I replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,383
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,387
Anonymous I replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,391
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,393
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,395
Does your dad know you do this shit?Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 5 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,448,456
Because they can marry their sisters without people knowing, and they can avoid fancy book learnin'.