The US peoples could create an organization that issues a RENT token that is nominally worth 1 USD each of debt as a kind of bond to every homeowner so there is no excuse and you will not be making other people homeless.
- Democratic, bottom-up cryptocurrency creation. It already is easy to do this. I will make it trivialer with some tutorials.
- Value is *volunteered in*, not expected.
- Wallets contain *small money*. Loss=IDC
(cc: @HelderUBI)
More from Fabiana Cecin 🏴 🌹
But you see you don't actually understand how lawmaking works there's this set of procedures and dates that BLEAAAARGHHHHHvomitvomit
Neoliberalism is an economic genocidal ideology predicated on maintaining capitalism, and capitalism is the impoverishment, oppression and death of poor people because that's the OBJECTIVE of capitalist ideology. It's a malthusian ideology.
Neoliberals are the original Alt-Right
Capitalism has ZERO todo with "markets vs. no markets," or "central planning vs. decentralization." That's *propaganda*. That's a diversion.
Capitalism is the NAME OF THE ABSENCE of any support for poor people. In capitalism, giving ANY power to poor people is a CRIME.
Capitalism has an *exception* to the strict forbiddance of giving any economic power to the 99%, and that is the concept of "Merit."
If you act as a SLAVE (wage slave), then you can get some crumbs to *temporarily* avoid your death. While you are mechanically useful.
These fucking Neoliberals which are 99% of the Democratic Party in the US are all POSING as nice people. They are not. They are all sociopaths.
This economic fascism is so thoroughly normalized in the US that nobody has a concept of what capitalism is.
The next day, she voted to move the bill without the 2k. Such a fucking phoney. https://t.co/3aiwDROypo
— ProgressiveSoapbox (@theProgSoapbox) December 31, 2020
Neoliberalism is an economic genocidal ideology predicated on maintaining capitalism, and capitalism is the impoverishment, oppression and death of poor people because that's the OBJECTIVE of capitalist ideology. It's a malthusian ideology.
Neoliberals are the original Alt-Right
Capitalism has ZERO todo with "markets vs. no markets," or "central planning vs. decentralization." That's *propaganda*. That's a diversion.
Capitalism is the NAME OF THE ABSENCE of any support for poor people. In capitalism, giving ANY power to poor people is a CRIME.
Capitalism has an *exception* to the strict forbiddance of giving any economic power to the 99%, and that is the concept of "Merit."
If you act as a SLAVE (wage slave), then you can get some crumbs to *temporarily* avoid your death. While you are mechanically useful.
These fucking Neoliberals which are 99% of the Democratic Party in the US are all POSING as nice people. They are not. They are all sociopaths.
This economic fascism is so thoroughly normalized in the US that nobody has a concept of what capitalism is.
More from Society
This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?
My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.
But what if that wasn't true?
Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.
The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!
I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.
My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.
But what if that wasn't true?
Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.
The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!
I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.
I appreciate his intellectual curiosity and effort. I have quibbles. But my big disappointment is there was no mention of unintended consequences, which we discussed and which are kind of THE core conservative concern on this issue.
— \U0001d682\U0001d68c\U0001d698\U0001d69d\U0001d69d \U0001d686\U0001d692\U0001d697\U0001d69c\U0001d691\U0001d692\U0001d699 (@swinshi) February 18, 2021