Looking at the responses in this thread, I’m pretty sure I don’t know enough to comment on the situation. Seems like you would have to study this subject semi-exclusively in order to have an informed take.

Doesn’t feel good when you read something from 200 years ago and it’s still mostly applicable

It’s not your fault.

Damn, I should have placed quotation marks around “democratic”

Don’t forget the app-enabled gig economy.

They no longer need to advertise to kids because the kids they used to advertise to grew up

Should compare the wealth of billionaires to the wealth of the middle and lower class. The point still holds true but people can’t accuse you of comparing apples to oranges.

Looks like something that needs to be burned with fire

deleted by creator

It’s a bit odd to frame voting as inherently deontological and the AES model as consequentialist. Independent of some involved philosophical argument, the choice of political system is prima facie orthogonal to the question of meta-ethical frameworks. A consequentialist, for example, could just as easily espouse voting.

The alternative to individual action is collective action. Not that I’m expressing a personal opinion either way…

Yeah, I didn’t mean that as a “gotcha”. But I know Germans who are freaking out about their job prospects

edit: Cool username btw

The populace has stockholm syndrome.

Lesser known fact: the German economy isn’t doing so hot right now either

Ah, I see. The economic argument falls apart by its own terms. Fair point.

I agree with your point but we should avoid equivocating our words. The capitalists sees housing as a financial investment while we see it as an investment in the well being of the person/community. Housing may give a “return” on the productivity of the workforce, but we should house people regardless of financial incentive.

98% of Americans believe the top lines and thats why the ruling class goes through the trouble of lying to us.