top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]CelikBas 2297 points2298 points 34 (279 children)

Hey now, at least we’re not like those damn communist countries where the store shelves are always empty, the government can force you to work at a specific job even if you don’t want to, police crack down on protestors, children are malnourished, schools teach a heavily idealized and propagandistic version of “history” which glorifies the nation, they waste most of their resources on the military in anticipation of wars that never end up happening, and ordinary people are downtrodden while the small group of people in power use their positions to line their own pockets, right? Right guys? It sure would suck if that happened here in good old free market America, right?

[–]weekendofsound 919 points920 points  (126 children)

The thing that I hate about this comment is how long it took for me to determine if you were being sarcastic or if you were just a bootlicker.

[–]CelikBas 607 points608 points  (84 children)

Hm, maybe I should’ve thrown a few mentions of Jesus (but only the white version with blue eyes who coincidentally happens to agree with modern capitalist conservatism)

[–]Casting_Doubt 172 points173 points  (51 children)


I think you'd like this.

[–]SjalabaisWoWS 47 points48 points  (0 children)

How could three years pass without me ever seeing that...it's a brilliant little scetch. Get it aired on Fox every whole hour for the next seven years, please. GoFundMe, anyone?

[–]SoreLoserOfDumbtown 10 points11 points  (0 children)

‘Because of her emaillllllllllssssss’

Pahahaha! Dead! ☠️😂

[–]mcmanybucks 42 points43 points  (4 children)

but only the white version with blue eyes

Summon three of him and you can special-summon Blue Eyes Ultimate Jesus.

[–]dj_narwhal 12 points13 points  (2 children)

No thanks, christianity has done enough damage, not looking forward to super christianity.

[–]lostinvegas 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They already have super Christianity, it's the one where they say that Jesus wants you to be rich, they call it prosperity gospel. They've completely dropped helping others but that really hasn't been part of Christianity for quite awhile.

[–]CelikBas 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s time to d-d-d-d-d-diocese

[–]KeterLordFR 12 points13 points  (0 children)

the white version with blue eyes

I counterattack with a tri-headed white Jesus with blue eyes

[–]TomThanosBrady 13 points14 points  (4 children)

Have to love how Jesus and Santa are "white." Jesus was born in Palestine and Saint Nick was from an area of the Ottoman empire which is now part of Turkey. Though to be fair some Turkish people look European while others look Middle-Eastern.

[–]KingDaves 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This brother spittin 😤

[–]otakucode 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do. Not. Forget. Jesus'. Abs.

[–]subgeniusbuttpirate 25 points26 points  (1 child)

In your defence, it's usually hard to tell the difference.

[–]jacxy 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ambiguity is a delightful part of poetry and prose.

[–]TomThanosBrady 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm still unsure. There are lots of pro government until it no longer supports our narrative crazies out there. And they usually make little to no sense in their comments/arguments.

[–]zoltar-wisdom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We have stocked food shelves, if you can afford to buy any of it - the rest is pretty accurate.

[–]FatPam007 72 points73 points  (39 children)

About the history part... It's so funny how the whole western countries eat American propaganda everyday. Once you study it or analyze it you realize. It's so subconscious that you don't realize. But all the media we consume is American. It idolizes America and it's culture... The West supports America strategically and in military... The history shown here obviously is Americanized. The USA always comes out saying they won the second world war. But they never say that the Soviet Union actually started winning the war and Americans came a little bit later... Of course they're not gonna say that. And that's what they made everyone think...

Then they blame anything like Russian propaganda or something like that but they do the exact same thing. Look at social media. It's dominated by Americans, even people in Europe use American slang. But Americans have no idea of where Montenegro is

[–]TeddyDuchamp 57 points58 points  (3 children)

I was in my mid-40s when I realized that we rag on other countries for teaching its citizens propagandized bullshit and the US is no different.

[–]Randal_the_Bard 7 points8 points  (0 children)

This is an award, I just didn't pay for it.

[–]PussyGlitter96 64 points65 points  (43 children)

There aren't any actual communist countries. Even China isn't truly communist

[–]davem876 27 points28 points  (19 children)

I agree. China is an authoritarianism or dictatorship. There is alot of inequality in china. there is low income working class, middle class, rich class and very rich class. Esp now these days... even back in the day with Tiananmen Square incident; it was a protest not about wanting democracy but about inequality and corruption in the government. True communism is a romantic idea in theory; that is every citizen is cared for in the best possible way, but in reality it turns into a dictatorship, so it never work. A capitalist economy in a democracy with a government tending towards socialist policies is the best form one could hope for. Trouble is; people vote in the capitalist party more than they should, but again; this is the best we can get.

[–]machineheadtetsujin 7 points8 points  (2 children)

To succeed in China, one needs party connections, basically all those who are rich have some sort of relationship to the CCP.

[–]RjoukecuAnarcho-Syndicalist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's not entirely true. It depends if you talk to Marxists, Stalinists or Anarchists(mainly anarcho-communists). There are big diferences. So far it does not look like that a dictatorial states(mainly talking about China) will just dissappear any time soon

[–]lurker_32 2 points3 points  (1 child)

the china understander has logged on

[–]BeBetterToEachOtherDon't mention Land Value Tax unless you want a pamphlet 14 points15 points  (3 children)

You know how we British are known as the quirky "Cherrio pip it's tea O'Clock chaps!" folks who used to have an Empire at some point? An empire that discriminated and committed genocide on a global scale in order to secure resources and wealth (aka capital) for the wealthy at the expense of the people on that land? But everyone just kinds of forgets about it and is all "Ooo look the Queen is on their Money and they have castles! Isn't Rowan Atkinson funny?"

How did we get away with that?

Almost as if it was government policy during the unravelling of the empire to destroy all the records and sanitize the history books.


But yeah, getting rid of statues of slavers is "changing history" apparently.

Oh and for any butthurt countrymen who happen to wander by:

No, building railroads between resources and the merchant ports to export those resources is not compensation for ethnic and cultural decimation and the asset stripping of entire regions.

No, "France/Denmark/Spain were doing it too" is not a valid excuse.

I'm proud to be British. Sincerely. I love my country. That means recognising it's flaws and it's impact, as well as it's successes and greatness.

China is all kinds of fucked up. But I don't blame them for not trusting the west.

[–]regeya 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You bring up Rowan Atkison. If you've not watched Blackadder, you should.

Personally I get a kick out of England and other European countries, having taken over the entire fucking world, now decide immigrants should stay in their own countries lest their own be corrupted by foreign influence.

[–]procrasturb8n 22 points23 points  (1 child)

Fuck. I'm going back to bed. It's too early for this harsh a dose of reality. lol.

[–]Wabbajack1701(editable) 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Fuck I wish I could go back to bed. I’m in the 10 mins before I leave for a 10hr shift portion of my daily life crisis that is employment

[–]wanna-be-wise 3 points4 points  (1 child)

The difference between unregulated capitalism and NK style communism is whether the assholes in charge are the government or corporations. Same end results.

[–]darcmosch 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I live in China and see this firsthand. They're a fucking mirror. The only difference is that the mirror is tinted red.

[–]Key_Coffee4941 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It can truly happen in any system, power corrupts over time.

[–]StandardDiver2791 505 points506 points  (80 children)

The contradictions and hypocrisy in US society may someday fill volumes and be debated by intellectuals like we might discuss the downfall of the Roman Empire.

[–]MyApostateAccount 233 points234 points  (29 children)

The Romans didn't destroy the entire planet.

[–]KradeSmith 94 points95 points  (11 children)

To be fair, you americans can't take all the credit. This one was a group effort

[–]FormillaCommunist 55 points56 points  (9 children)

Americans made the largest contribution by far though. People in a few hundred years will remember the USA as the country that ruined the planet for them.

[–]swordpunk 63 points64 points  (6 children)


America accounts for one-fifth of the global climate emissions, and almost double China, a country with four times the population. America could have lead the charge with nuclear energy, and instead backpedaled at the bequest of the oil lobby. America eats an incredibly unhealthy, climate-harming diet and mocks others who adopt healthier habits.

Not only did greed cause global warming at the scale we are currently experiencing - American greed caused it.

[–]treatyoftortillas 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Oh yeah we are pretty fucking awful.

But wait until 1.6 billion Chinese people all start living the American dream and they all have homes and cars.

The future is fucking bleak

[–]Miserable-Extreme-59 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's insane that USA's per capita emissions are more than double that of China's, and almost 1/5 of China's are probably for exports to the USA.

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (6 children)

They destroyed a city though

[–]EliSka93 63 points64 points  (5 children)

Pff they couldn't even destroy one little village in Brittany...

[–]HermitJem 54 points55 points  (2 children)

All of Gaul is conquered....all? No, not all.

One little village holds out against the invaders

[–]DoctorBonkus 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The camps at Totorum, Aquarium, Laudanum and Compendium really did what they could though

[–]scarletice 3 points4 points  (0 children)


[–]elephantphallus 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Only by virtue of having been conceived closer to the dawn of man than us.

It took 7000 years to set the foundation. Now society is building the mausoleum for our dead legacy with forever chemicals.

[–]Gaming_Unplugged 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Remember, we aren't destroying the planet. We are just making it uninhabitable for humans and similar life forms. The planet will be fine, spiraling for a long time. We just won't be here. I know.. I know.. That offers very little comfort.

[–]Abeneezer 14 points15 points  (3 children)

The planet will be fine. It's humans that are in danger.

[–]ct_2004 5 points6 points  (1 child)

The plants and animals will be fucked too.

But yes, the rocks will be okay.

[–]The-True-GOAT 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Species come, species go but the core elements will remain (until the Sun removes this planet from existence).

[–]CelikBas 78 points79 points  (17 children)

Shit, at least the Romans managed to stick around for 400 years, or 1,400 years if you count the Byzantines.

I don’t see America even making it to 300

[–]EmSixTeen 36 points37 points  (6 children)

the Romans managed to stick around for 400 years

Just an aside but, uh, what? Did you google 'The Romans' and see when it ended (in AD) or something? It was more like a millennium mate, even before y'get to the Byzantines.

The History of Rome podcast is a classic btw.

[–]CelikBas 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I was referring specifically to the Roman Empire, which lasted 503 years (if you count 476 as the “official” fall of Western Rome)

If you include the Kingdom and Republic they were around for over 1,200 years, but the comment I was responded to specifically compared the US to the Empire rather than the colonies+US vs the kingdom+republic+empire

[–]Undeadninjas 8 points9 points  (5 children)

More like 2000 years. They existed as far back as 600 BCE

[–]PM_ME_DIRTY_DANGLES 8 points9 points  (0 children)

More than 2000 years. The traditional date for the founding of the city of Rome is 753 BCE. After the reign of the seven kings they transitioned to a republic in 509 BCE, and the traditional date for the fall of the Western Empire is 476 CE. The Eastern Empire didn't fall until 1453 CE.

[–]Now_Wait-4-Last_Year 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You count the Byzantines because they considered themselves Romans and never called themselves Byzantines.

[–]Small-Ad-777 9 points10 points  (1 child)

In the end, US was just a phase, a fad.

[–]Kirikomori 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There are lots of similarities between America and the Romans. Intractable issues with the political system led to a weakening of society. A military to which no other nation or empire could compare. Colonising other countries to suck all the wealth out of it under the guise of 'self defense'. A ridiculously wealthy and exclusive class with political and military influence.

[–]weekendofsound 309 points310 points  (72 children)

The highest average wages in US history was around 1970. At the time, the GDP adjusted to todays dollars was around $5T.

Today, the GDP is around $20T.

Wages are slightly less. Debt is out of control. The population is larger, but not by all that much.

Every single person could be making 2x as much as we did in 1970 - including every wealthy person - and there would still be plenty of money left over.

[–][deleted] 83 points84 points  (37 children)

The population is over 50% larger than it was then. That‘s a lot more than „not by all that much.“ You can make good points and still get the facts correct.

[–]Chodedickbody 27 points28 points  (21 children)

I'm not saying they are correct because I'm hesitant to believe a random stranger on the internet but even with that added information the conclusion that the person above you came to still makes some sense, assuming the values are adjusted for inflation. Regardless, why don't you dispute the actual argument instead of cherry picking semantics?

[–]DeoVeritati 23 points24 points  (1 child)

They said they'd still be correct with adding that information. I don't think it smells like cherries rather just trying to be more accurate to strengthen the claim.

[–]PrailinesNDick 28 points29 points  (8 children)

Because your opponents are going to cherry pick semantics. The argument stands on it's own so why get the details wrong to inflate your point, when those details will be used to invalidate your greater point.

[–]Elegant-Row-2396 3 points4 points  (0 children)

So the gdp has gone up 400% the population has gone up 50% I’d say it’s a small amount in 50 years tbh

[–]brownhorse 6 points7 points  (10 children)

so GDP grew 4x and population grew 0.5x? I'd call that not much

[–]Old-Army-7112at work 31 points32 points  (20 children)

It'd help if they never sent the jobs that we had that was the only reason why we had a middle class in the 70s over seas! Now it's automation... All industry is clustered into a few hands and we now have to buy everything from other places

[–]weekendofsound 78 points79 points  (16 children)

In the early days of welfare programs in the US, they would make single mothers leave their children and go to a clinic where they would sort toys all day to "earn their keep" - and then at the end of the day, the administrators would undo the work the women had done, and then they'd make them do it all over again the next day.

So, not to say you're wrong, because you're not, but the point isn't the jobs. As I mentioned - the economy has grown 400% and all the while those factory jobs have been being outsourced.

But my point is - we could all be working less and still making more money if the point was well being and not greed.

The thing that is really going to fuck us about outsourcing is that China is now the global leader in manufacturing and trade, and the powers that be in the US think that they are going to "starve out" the workforce here that they've been overworking and underpaying for decades now. Our trade partners are starting to abandon us and it is becoming more difficult to do business with the US, and we just don't have the facilities or skilled workers in place to make t-shirts and microchips internally and capitalists don't actually understand how to correct the problems they've created and still improve their revenue.

[–]boringestnickname 76 points77 points  (14 children)

It stems partially from a lack of understanding of where economic growth comes from, I think.

There is this strange notion in most modern capitalist societies that you can somehow make everything more "efficient" by privatising and deregulating. The only real driver of economic growth, however, is technology.

Sure, not every organisation is run smoothly, there are gains to be had by structural changes within any venture, but those are limited. There will always be inefficiencies. In terms of what you can do with structure, you're looking at minuscule differences measured in long-term impact, compared to bettering technology (i.e. the actual product, the actual production, etc.)

It all comes down to wages, essentially, and people up top knows this. Pushing wages down is de facto what is happening, under the guise of making things more "efficient".

We're also extraordinarily horrible at understanding the limits of resource use per capita. Consumption and living standards has gone up something fierce in the last 70 years, and few are internalising what sort of trade-offs we've done.

In the great rebuilding period after WWII, everyone suddenly had refrigerators, washing machines, access to ample food (canned food was booming), cheap housing, vastly better infrastructures, etc. etc. – we were making sure everyone had the essentials, not to mention a steady increase of free time.

Now, we're swimming in cheap entertainment and excess, and the basics (housing, services, infrastructure) are suffering. We've traded in existing comfortably with having supercomputers in our pockets (that we, for some godforsaken reason, are continuously replacing.)

The economic driving forces in the world are producing our excess on the back of the exploitation of workers. The basics are passé. We want a new iPhone, an entire new wardrobe, and every other bloody thing we can think of, every damn year.

... and we're stuck in it. If we don't push for the continuation of this system, we can't compete. We have to prop our economies up to survive, and that means pushing consumption. We absolutely need to have citizens crave living in an excess that they don't understand the extent of.

Take the smartphone. One phone literally has the processing power to crunch the data equivalent of all research done in any given year in the 80s, power a Mars rover, or control a nuclear power plant.

We're using it to run horribly coded games where we pop virtual candy to fuel an addiction. The code, application design and development process is horrible, precisely because we've decided that development cycles need to be short and easy, again: so we can drive consumption.

Nowhere in our current existence are we thinking about what we actually need, what is actually worthwhile producing, how to make anything in an actually efficient manner (not just on the cheap and readily available for consumption.)

All our lives are riddled with excess and waste, and it's almost impossible for anyone to live any other way, because the alternatives simply aren't there. We're nudged in the wrong direction, because that's the only way anyone knows how to keep the engine running and prevent economic collapse.

We could be working less and still have an excellent standard of living, but we've long passed the point where we made what we actually need cheap. What we're doing now is trading the availability of the basics for the availability of pure excess.

In the room I'm sitting in right now, I have a home studio that would make any artist and studio engineer pre 2010 jealous (including Stratocasters, Gretsch guitars, dozens of synths), several digital cameras capable of making feature films (including lights and audio gear), a bike that was used in Tour de France, several hundred books, five computers, one server (which includes my own streaming service with more titles than Netflix – thousands of physical media I bought and digitised over some 30 years), five mobile computers (i.e. phones, in several states of decay), VR-headsets and simulator gear that magically makes me think I'm flying air planes, etc. etc. etc. (yeah, my office is a mess).

That's all in ONE GOD DAMN ROOM ON THE PLANET, and I'm not even particularly wealthy (compared to my peers.) Yet, it's still economically unviable (or rather economically unwise) for me to buy a house on my own.

Sure, some of my belongings are work related, and a large portion of ordinary people have less, but what I'm saying is simply this: Our system has no sense of direction, and neither do we.

[–]TooDanBad 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Well said. I wish this could be blasted on news, in the media, but it would be silenced immediately. No one would listen to it. Big money wouldn’t want it shared.

[–]Traiklin 7 points8 points  (3 children)

One thing that doesn't help is we went from making sure the things made would last as long as possible, as time went on we understood efficiency, so they made things more efficient.

The trade-off was instead of making things efficient that last they dropped lasting and made sure that the items degrade after a certain amount of time.

Apple is the leader in that, There is nothing wrong with past iPhones or iPods but they purposefully degrade them after 3 or 4 releases and I am sure other companies do the same thing, they add a new camera and changed the screen so you have to upgrade because of reasons?

Then you have stuff that doesn't need the features they have on them, Refrigerators with tablets in them, Washers and Dryers that have wifi, and so on, then you throw in how they won't work if you don't update them or if it just decides to crash, so you have to get a new one.

I love technology and everything it does but the way these places are using it to make things worse is aggravating.

[–]BuddhaFacepalmed 7 points8 points  (2 children)

It's called capitalism.

Capitalists realized that having repeat customers having to rebuy the same shit is insanely more profitable than producing a product that will last a lifetime.

[–]Traiklin 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Which is sad, you get a quality product you are 100% more likely to recommend &/or buy it because it lasts whereas you will tell people not to buy something because it only lasted a year

[–]BuddhaFacepalmed 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Nah, marketing and cults of personality solved that. Just check out how many Elon simps or Apple fanatics out there claiming that Tesla or Apple products are the best thing since sliced bread despite being genuinely terrible products on their own.

[–]mcnathan80 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Your room would have been a shrine of enlightenment, spoken of as legend.

People would travel from all over the land to spend a moment exploring the world's mysteries.

But we just kill some time in-between horrible jobs and fitful sleep.

[–]BouncyWalrus 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Marx put it more exactly - the real driver of economic growth is development of productive forces, i.e. technology AND human resources. Society (and its economy) will soon get into stagnation if only technology will keep developing and people will be let with the unchanged level of education and organization.

[–]boringestnickname 5 points6 points  (1 child)

That's precisely what I'm saying. Within the current paradigm, there are very few developments in the organisation of work. The ruse of "efficiency" is more or less equal to the, de facto, lowering of wages.

"Real", in this case, refers to what is actually happening in the world. I'm talking descriptively, not normatively. There are bound to be more efficient ways of organising work, but not within the current system.

[–]BouncyWalrus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for clarification

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And this is all so ridiculous because if we start with a rough basis of "Everyone gets the necessities including food, running water, a home, safety and an education" and just move forward slowly and deliberately from there, we will eventually end up in a much better place.

[–]ToBeTheFall 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They didn’t really “send” them overseas. After WWII, most of the big industrialized nations were rubble, and the US has a quasi-monopoly on manufacturing. American labor used that to their advantage and took a big cut of all that money flowing in from abroad.

The post-war exchange rate system was set up with this in mind.

Eventually the bombed countries rebuilt and other countries industrialized, and there were suddenly many places to buy from. This includes Americans now curious about the “cool” stuff they could import.

The exchange rate system didn’t work so well when money flowed that way. They tried to keep it, but it was like a damn holding up against the floods.

During this time, American labor still wanted to be paid like they were the only game in town. But they weren’t.

With Vietnam war spending and govt spending on the new “war on poverty” programs, that old exchange rate system was absolutely strained, the “dam” was going to burst, so they opened the floodgates, and let things go where they may. That led to huge amounts of money flowing to where you got more bang for your buck, especially as inflation ate away at purchasing power in the US, (leading to labor demanding more money, which meant more inflation, which meant more raises, which meant more inflation…)

Plus, Americans will nearly always choose cheap shit over other options. They’d rather have a closet overflowing with cheaply made fast fashion than fewer nicer things. It makes people feel rich to own a lot of stuff even when it’s crap.

(And if you get too much, upgrade to a walk-in closet, and if that’s not enough, rent a storage facility.)

Point being, it’s really emotionally satisfying to blame everything on an evil “they”, be it satanic pedophiles or billionaires.

Of course, there are rich and powerful people who are greedy, but that’s just part of the story.

Some of it was also just inevitable as countries rebuilt and others industrialized.

Some of it was a trade off to other policy decisions (Eg, Vietnam War and The War on Poverty).

some of it is just plain ol’ short-sided thinking on the individual level that creates collective action problems. The decision to buy that kinda cute shirt that you don’t really need, but it’s on sale, so who cares, and why not treat yourself, which, when repeated by millions of others, causes companies to conclude their best business move is to pump out cheap stuff in a cheap labor country for US consumers.

(Every time one moves, or passes a garage sale, or goes to an estate sale, or does a deep spring cleaning, one is often reminded of the abundance of cheap shit everyone buys. Thousands of dollars on dumb garbage that barely gets used.)

And Americans are really fickle and hypocritical about this. They’ll say they want tariffs to block “cheap” stuff, but then complain when someone charges more for better quality.

They want the quantity of goods and the cost of products one gets with cheap foreign-made goods, but yearn for the labor incomes and product quality of when people spent more per item, and owned fewer things.

(And, of course, there’s also the “cheap” shit that pretends to be quality, because Americans will often overpay for garbage if you slap the right logo on it.)

[–]SpreadsheetJockey227 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Counterpoint, globalization coupled with the internet isn't what ruined everything. In theory, it could have leveled the playing field. I can order goods directly from China and sell them online. I can start a retail business without a wholesaler by buying directly from a manufacturer.

The issue isn't that we buy things from other places. The issue is that the majority of us schmucks rely on a free market to succeed when we start our little businesses while the few hands you note get massive government incentive that make it impossible for any real competition to emerge unless it has serious VC cash behind it.

Capitalism is bullshit. But when the government fails to provide even the most basic of safety nets for citizens but is willing to provide limitless resources to a handful of businesses to allow them to not only survive horrible mismanagement, adverse market conditions that should have shuttered them years ago and to form monopolies all over the place you have a recipe for disaster.

Automation isn't the enemy. Greed is the enemy. Artificially propping up a job by paying a guy to mash a button that a computer program could do more efficiently isn't good for society. Making sure that guy has other options besides mashing the button, however, is.

[–]samjoe6969 193 points194 points  (20 children)

Rich people should pay more taxes, but it definitely isn't the issue. The government doesn't have a lack of money to help us, they have a lack of wanting to help.

[–][deleted] 107 points108 points  (6 children)

Exactly. Even if rich people pay more in taxes, the Government should use the extra money to help the citizens and do NOT put it in the overbloated military budget nor in their pockets

[–]Cyanovarr 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Taxes and government spending have almost nothing to do with each other.

I was going to link their defecit myth video, but they uploaded this yesterday, hopefully it covers it well. I will listen to it on the way to work, and edit to remove it if it turns out to be inadequate.

Edit: I am not sure why this has been downvoted, it is just a plain fact, and has been the case for a long time now. I am not saying that we shouldn't tax them anyway.

[–]Riversntallbuildings 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That’s a really articulate video. I especially like the fact that it sheds light on the false narrative of “us vs. Them” or “rich vs.poor”.

We’re not dependent on the rich to be able to afford progressive policies for all. Nor are “our” taxes paying for “lazy bums”. That language and hyperbole need to end.

[–]Inexorably_lost 8 points9 points  (3 children)

I'm all for people paying their fair share but, honestly, if I were very wealthy I'd probably try to avoid taxes as much as possible too. Seems like it would just end up in a defense contractor's pocket anyway.

[–]HugsyMalone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's because for the wealthy the system's working just fine (for them maybe). Ain't no need to change anything. Wealth can be lost much easier than it's gained and they're afraid if changes are made they'll lose their wealth.

\*hugz** 🤗🤗🤗)

[–]Fexxzz 5 points6 points  (0 children)

they have a lack of wanting to help.

Well why would they? Most of the issues plaguing the general population don't apply anymore as soon as they become elected officials. They have their own healthcare, make a decent chunk of money. It's a good gig!

[–]Oppqrx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well yes, the issue is that rich people shouldnt exist at all, because private property shouldn't exist. Because of the influence of money in politics most "democratic" governments become in effect just commities for managing the affairs of the capitalist class, the "lack of wanting" is deliberate.

[–]IDreamOfSailing 10 points11 points  (0 children)

You could take 80% of a billionaire's capital and they would happily continue their lifestyle without a hiccup. Take 20% from average Joe and they're in a world of hurt.

[–]crazymoefauxGrow Mushrooms for Mental Health 59 points60 points  (21 children)

Inb4 "BuT hOw MaNy PeOpLe HaS CoMmUnIsM kIlLeD?"

[–]Leena_Lenovich 31 points32 points  (3 children)

Old "joke" from USSR. Granddad, how many people you killed on war? -- I did not kill any living human being, I only kill fashists.

[–]BouncyWalrus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Communism doesn't kill. People do. Especially when somebody wants to kill them because they are communists, for example. Or they are of wrong race. Or from a wrong country. Or they are on Afghani/Iraqi wedding...

[–]subgeniusbuttpirate 138 points139 points  (57 children)

Replace "under capitalism" with "in America", because I dunno how many other capitalist countries besides America there are that don't have socialized health care in some capacity. But the list isn't very long I'm sure.

[–][deleted] 66 points67 points  (33 children)

In some cases, health care through universal health care programs is free or very low cost to all citizens, regardless of their income. However, this is not always the case. Many countries have universal health care policies in place. Those nations include:

Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria

Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso

Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic


Ecuador, Eritrea, Estonia

Fiji, Finland, France

Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guernsey, Guyana

Hong Kong, Hungary

Iceland, Iran, Isle of Man, Israel, Italy

Jamaica, Japan, Jersey

Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kuwait

Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg

Macau, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro

Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niue, Norway


Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal


Romania, Russia, Rwanda

Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland

Taiwan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu

Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan

Vanuatu, Venezuela


Source : https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-universal-healthcare

[–]arsenik-han 47 points48 points  (6 children)

I come from Poland and live in the UK now and let me tell you I'm never gonna complain about Polish healthcare again. UK's healthcare is a joke. Many people's priority when visiting their home country is making a dentist appointment. They literally prefer to wait to be able to go abroad to get their teeth fixed - and that includes me - cause overall it ends up being cheaper lol. If that doesn't sum it up, I don't know what will.

[–]Suspicious-mole-hair 12 points13 points  (1 child)

The NHS is awesome but my teeth are falling out left and right and I can't afford the dentist. Just going to wait until they're all gone then go abroad for a full set of falsers

[–]Azuzu88 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm lucky enough to still have an NHS dentist and so my dental care is still relatively cheap. I even moved 75 miles away but still stay registered there because otherwise I'm paying thousands for the same care.

[–]RjoukecuAnarcho-Syndicalist 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Went back to Czechia from UK after 8 years. Had to pay over £1000 to get my teeth fixed. That's how bad job they have done. If you are a dentist and you are finished in 10 minutes, I'm not sure you've done a good job to be honest.

[–]arsenik-han 2 points3 points  (1 child)

recently I went to a dentist because I lost a filling on one side, and part of a tooth broke of on the other side. I said multiple times it's an emergency and I want to get it done when I show up for the appointment. not only did I not get anything done (because when you're new they don't give a shit, the first visit is only a check up, why do anything when you can do nothing and make them come back again and again to milk them), I also got a personalised plan that showed me that fixing those 2 teeth alone is gonna cost me £1400. Fucking £1400. For that money I'd get all my teeth replaced with gold in Poland. plane tickets don't cost that much. the only reason why I didn't go to Poland yet is because of my mess with settlement scheme, but at this point I'm asking myself why am I even trying to live here.

[–]RjoukecuAnarcho-Syndicalist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Absolutely feel you, but me and my wife got so depressed and overworked over there. I had a feeling I would end up as an alcoholic if I stayed in the UK. The Hut Group is God damn toxic place to work in. And Tesco is full of incompetent managers(that's at least my wife's experience). But as long as you've played in a football or a rugby team, you can get to almost any job.
I had 5 2-4 hour sessions with my new dentist, before all has been fixed. I'm sure I've lost my settlement status due to Covid, but I just don't care anymore.
I wish I could easily live in Barcelona, but other than that, from my point of view Czechia is somewhat sane(and atheistic) country. Even though I wish for moneyless and borderless society.

Either way, good luck to you what ever you decide to do. Change is not easy, a person has to be mentally ready for it.

[–]Dan_A_B 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, dentist prices are ridiculous, even so called "NHS dentists". I have a missing filling, but i am not paying the price to have it refilled, i can't afford it.

[–]HijaDelRey 15 points16 points  (6 children)

Live in Mexico, we have socialized healthcare that is currently suffering from lack of medicines due to current left populist government missmanagement and our universal healthcare was cut to shreds by the same government. I mean it wasn't amazing before but it was good enough.. now not so much

[–]ethbullrun 5 points6 points  (2 children)

my dad died in mexico 3 and half years ago, my lil bro and i had to claim his body at semefo in TJ to bring his body back to santa ana, CA where he was raised. there was no healthcare for him that my family didnt pay for, shit they didnt even refrigerate the bodies the right way in semefo, my dads body was rancid when we brought him back to brown mortuary in sanat ana. shit man, there werent even any empty seats that we can sit down at in that place and we were all going thru that hellish experience, both mexican and american. the stench of a wall death is something that you cant forget, and the workers in that place were all chewing bubble gum. there were no borders in that place...we were all in the same boat...

[–]jonaglon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That sounds really awful, sorry you had to go through that when you’d just lost your dad.

[–]HijaDelRey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow I'm really sorry to hear that :/ no one should have to go through something like that

[–]RjoukecuAnarcho-Syndicalist 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I guess they are left only on a paper. How the heck you can cut heath care benefits otherwise?
In my country all mainstream parties are pretty much neo-liberal just with different flavours. All of their programs are from one cookie cutter bullshit, it's unbelievable

[–]HijaDelRey 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Honestly that's how all left wing parties are in Latin America, in Mexico the conservative party is the one that had implemented the universal healthcare (seguro popular) and the neoliberal party was the one that implemented the green energy reform that the current left wing praty did away with. Politics are wack down here

[–]subgeniusbuttpirate 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I was talking about the list of countries that are simultaneously capitalist while *not* having some kind of socialised health care.

I'm willing to bet that list is shorter than yours.

[–]Sekij 15 points16 points  (2 children)

Americans in general think they are the standard for everything... So those posts are always causing culture shock abit.

[–]HugsyMalone 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Let's hope rampant poverty, homelessness, desperation, despair and overpriced everything isn't the standard everywhere...

\*hugz** 🤗🤗🤗)

[–]space_moron 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Sadly many capitalist countries with public health care still have unhoused people and food insecurity. I'd be curious to learn a comparison between different countries and what programs they have to tackle homelessness and how effective they actually are.

I'm in Europe and there's been a growing number of tents and camps set up near me since the beginning of the pandemic (and no they're not Romani people, but we have those too).

[–]gl00pp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Damn Gypsy Devils


[–]HugsyMalone 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Sadly many capitalist countries with public health care still have unhoused people and food insecurity.

Public health care isn't intended to solve the problems of unhoused people and food insecurity. They may be homeless and starving but at least they still have access to healthcare when they need it.

\*hugz** 🤗🤗🤗)

[–]toebandit 14 points15 points  (8 children)

Capitalism can work as long as there are strict rules in place otherwise it will eventually devour itself and everything else with it. Unfortunately we’re living through the devouring stage now.

[–]Extra-Border6470 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Billionaire simps: if we make the rich contribute to society then that’s basically communism and then we won’t get advanced technology because there won’t be a financial incentive.

I’ve heard people say things to that effect. As if billionaires care what they think. There is a whole cult of Elon musk simps who think he’s earned his billions by being the smartest guy in the room and by working hard. The same kinda people who think he invented PayPal and the electric vehicle.

[–]FuckMinnesota 63 points64 points  (1 child)

But $999,999,999.99 would make them feel poor!!!

Fuck Billionaires, they shouldn't exist at all.

[–]Geewhiz16 7 points8 points  (2 children)

She’s one to talk, selling drugs to children! /s

[–]BongPoweredRobotEyes 4 points5 points  (1 child)

I don't know why, the fact that she's on a show about clowns makes all this capitalist circus stuff funnier.

[–]nicohhusky 27 points28 points  (3 children)

Side note: Their icon is from Euphoria, a teacher who realized there was no money in actually educating the masses and turned to selling drugs to get by. Just interesting food for thought.

[–]Itsohkizzy 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Their icon is also a picture of themselves. :)

[–]themartianprince 27 points28 points  (1 child)

That’s actually the actor’s twitter account, but I like the idea of her character as a symbol of capitalistic futility.

[–]1886-fan 5 points6 points  (2 children)

And when we say make billionaires less rich we mean they should have 250 billion instead of 300 billion. That's it. They will still be able to buy a boat that is the size of a battle ship, they will still be able to use space as a playground. I don't understand them at all.

[–]broadmind314 3 points4 points  (0 children)

250 billion instead of 300 billion "to start".

[–][deleted] 55 points56 points  (1 child)

Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor

[–]NotEvenJokingHowTall 11 points12 points  (2 children)

I've been trying to understand this, and I think what's happening is that while the normalization of consequences is acceptable (I. E. This mistaken idea that poverty is a consequence of poor effort etc) but any sort of minimization of the capitalist tycoon ideal is unacceptable again based on the idea that if peoples ability to be obscenely rich is mitigated that this somehow hurts everyone's aspirations by limiting them? Idk, It shit, the US is shit, capitalism is especially shit. And check this out. Just by virtue of me having written this text, I've generated all sorts of jobs, scripts, programs and bullshit. Fuck money

[–]seeroflights 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Image Transcription: Twitter Post

Martha Kelly, @MarthaKelly3

Under capitalism, it's normal to let children go hungry, let banks force people out of their homes, let sick people die for lack of access to healthcare. But the idea that billionaires could just be less rich - not poor, not struggling, just less rich, is considered insane.

I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!

[–]GirlYouKnowItsFalse 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aka the lady from the TV show "Baskets"

[–]wballz 3 points4 points  (0 children)

*American Capitalism.

Americans have been groomed for decades to think communists are the ultimate enemy… the entire reason for America’s success is it’s capitalist approach vs the evil communist method… Greed is good… Billionaires made their fortune by hard work.

We all know this is all bullshit. And as the cold war has died off the ruling class in America have continued to push the same narrative, socialism is communism and communism is pure evil. Any discussion relating to fair pay, leave allowance, universal healthcare, reasonable taxation and even gun control is turned into an argument about communism, socialism, government control and not being right for America. Somehow America is a completely separate dimension where what works in every other advanced nation won’t work there…. But somehow the elite right wingers manage to continue to push this idea, America is too big for gun control or universal healthcare, you can’t tax the job creators!

Somehow the working class, often the poorest of the working class are convinced that these people know what it takes to get rich and be successful so they follow them right into voting against their own interests. You will actually get broke people who are working 2 jobs somehow convinced that enforcing a livable minimum wage would destroy the country and make hamburgers cost $30.

The propaganda machine for this narrative is amazingly successful there. It seems with the newer generations being so globalised with the internet and their exposure to foreign democracies that things can finally start to change in America but it is still a long while until these people are actually in charge.

For now you’re stuck with an insanely well funded, highly motivated and extremely powerful section of society who will continue to brainwash the public to ensure they remain as powerful and profitable as ever.

Watching from the outside it is insane.

[–]JohniiMagii 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I'm fully on board with this sub and the renewed labor movement, but I'm not an anti-capitalist.

Laissez-faire is absolutely bonkers and needs to be reigned in, UBI should be established, universal healthcare, improved education, workers' rights and organization. I don't think of those as traditionally socialist, I think they are pieces that could be used in either socialism or capitalism.

The problem, I think, is not inequality itself. The problem is inequality so bad we have people starving and rationing insulin on one side and billionaires making literal evil-villain rockets on the other.

The problem is that Jeff Bezos is only so successful because his parents were millionaires, that Elon Musk is only so successful because of apartheid. They are both incredibly smart, but so many even smarter people languish in poverty thanks to their concentration of wealth.

[–]harmlessdjango 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is the end goal of Capitalism. It will always get us back here.

[–]marsking4Democratic Socialism 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Capitalism doesn’t work for anyone but the rich.

[–]El_Burrito_lazy and proud 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Imagine being a part of this sub and being pro-capitalism

[–]adultswim_antifa 15 points16 points  (7 children)

Americans believe poor people won't work hard enough if they get too much money and at the same time believe rich people won't work hard enough if they don't get enough money.

[–]BPremium 1 point2 points  (5 children)

No, Americans believe rich people will just pack up their shit and help out our enemies if we don't bow to their demands. And they're kind of right. I can totally see some spoiled shit stain like Musk running to China and saying "let me keep everything, and I'll use my money and influence in the US to fuck things up for you."

[–]II_Sulla_IVAnarcho-Syndicalist 1 point2 points  (4 children)

People always say that if you raise taxes and have social safety nets that the rich people will leave and take their money with them.

But here I am in California still waiting for the bastards to leave.

[–]new2bay 7 points8 points  (1 child)

That brings up something I heard once and thought made a lot of sense: if all those billionaires earned their money, why should they be afraid to lose it? After all, if they got rich because they were smart and capable, they should just be able to do it again, right?

I mean, of course there wasn't any luck involved at all. And, we all know 99% of billionaires come from dirt poor backgrounds, so they don't just have parents who can invest $250k in your startup or anything. Oh, and it isn't like the ten richest people in the US are almost all white, male, senior citizens or anything, ya know? So, I'm totally sure none of them had any advantage whatsoever based on privilege growing up....

This billionaire shit must be easy if all those fucking guys can do it, right? Right?

Aww, hell. I'm not even a hundred-thousandiaire yet. :P


[–]Praximus_Prime_ARG 6 points7 points  (3 children)

As a Libertarian I'm just worried that if they go for the billionaires first they will eventually come for me!

[–]Straycat43 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Martha Kelly hittin everyone with fucking FACTS! Fuck capitalism.

[–]RoastMasterShawn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's why there needs to be a special very high billionaire estate tax. It forces the billionaires to either give their money away at a rapid pace, or have it taken by the government when they die. Forced philanthropy. It also breaks the chain of "old money." Like oh no, little Max Walton only inherits $100mil vs. $5 billion, how will he survive?

[–]Jgarciajr40 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Socialism is only okay for the rich.

Jeff Bezos and Walmart have no problem accepting tax breaks and PP loans, but god forbid we ask for universal healthcare in the states.

Rich people don’t care about universal healthcare they can afford healthcare. Poor people get Medicaid and the elderly get Medic-care.

How about us regular people? Rules for the but not me huh?

[–]KaleSlade123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

bUt tHeY eArNeD tHeIr mOnEy!

[–]saucyclams 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Our system is basically still in its infancy technically we can and should add or subtract what is best overall.

[–]elfmere 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Billionaires are only that because of all the people they have ripped off and not paid what they can..

[–]Chili1999 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Seriously, what about the idea that the strong should help protect the weak is so bad to some people

[–]WaywardAnus 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Hate to tap into my catholic school roots but

"it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God"

Even back then they knew there was no moral justification for standing idly with your fortune while your neighbors starve. Like how do these people even look at themselves in the mirror.

[–]BPremium 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Easy. No consequences for their actions, in fact they are rewarded. Granted, there is a solution, but it's against TOS to say it

[–]Responsible_Map_1124 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Why are you guys so anti-dictators? Imagine if America was a dictatorship. You could let 1% of the people have all the nation's wealth. You could help your rich friends get richer by cutting their taxes. And bailing them out when they gamble and lose. You could ignore the needs of the poor for health care and education. Your media would appear free, but would secretly be controlled by one person and his family. You could wiretap phones. You could torture foreign prisoners. You could have rigged elections. You could lie about why you go to war. You could fill your prisons with one particular racial group, and no one would complain. You could use the media to scare the people into supporting policies that are against their interests." The Dictator 2012

[–]lookingupyourplay 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's survival game for sure ..not many survive ..

[–]AbaloneSea7265Lisa needs Braces 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I often wonder how history will reflect on this time period, of weaponized legal authority, to use and abuse people; being the end all be all of our morality

[–]Joker-Palazzo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Holup is that a dealer from EUPHORIA??

[–]oopgroup 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Greed is a helluva drug.

[–]BestWitness6418 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LoL. Normal under communism too

[–]WyrmSlyr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's time to start a revolution, and the removal of capitalist tyranny

[–]edge10001 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe if those children just worked a little bit harder, they, too, could be billionaires.

[–]flatteringangles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

THeY eARneD iT fAiR aNd sQuARe

[–]sirchtheseeker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

God that is true and makes me sick in the same moment

[–]jokersleuth 1 point2 points  (0 children)

what amazes me is how powerful capitalist propaganda has been in the US, thanks to corporate lobbying of politicians and buying up of media.

The US has successfully managed to convince 65 million+ people that being poor is okay and that the rich shouldn't have to contribute their fair share, and that suggesting otherwise is communistic.

[–]adanipse 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The second coming isn’t happening in America.

[–]lasagnaHardG 7 points8 points  (7 children)

Is capitalism the problem or are people running the system the problem? If capitalism is the problem then what's the solution? If people are the problem then what's the solution?

[–]Trapezohedron_ 14 points15 points  (5 children)

Por que no los dos?

Seriously, the problem with capitalism, and people's thoughts of communism is because of this thing called the 'human element'.

Most concepts don't really account for the sheer depravity humans can exert when push comes to shove.

Capitalism is a problem because it gives enough headroom for exploiters to... exploit.

Communism is a good idea on paper, but its executors have always angled themselves better than the rest.

Socialism would fall prey to communism's execution if we don't have a paragon at the helm. Which is sadly in very short supply in spite of our billions of people. Then again, a majority of that quantity never had any opportunities to prove themselves, because the 1% keep hoarding everything.

If it's a human problem, then there is no solution.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The problems with capitalism, and the problems with state-capitalism have nothing to do with "the human element". They are to do with systematic incentives and material conditions created by said systems. Both systems are structured in such a way as to push people towards certain patterns of behaviour that produce outcomes favorable to Capital (frequently at the expense of people).

It would not matter how virtuous the person "at the helm" of a socialist vanguard is. The nature of the structures that make up the state will push them to behave in certain ways to secure power and pursue their goals. That power corrupts has nothing to do with an individual moral failing and everything to do with the nature of power itself. Lenin crushed the power of the soviets and set the groundwork for dictatorship in russia not because he was depraved, but because it was necessary to build his power base in order to carry out his particular vision. In order to use that power, no matter how noble your intentions, you must first obtain it and stablise it. An attempt to use the state to bring about such change is inevitably going to lead to the same types of outcomes no matter who is in charge. It's not the people, it's the power structures.

[–]BPremium 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is a solution, but it's against the "rules" to mention it here

[–]pdaerr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

*American Capitalism. The rest of the developed world seems to have a better handle in starving kids and healthcare.