Thinking is too shallow when it comes to this. Yes, there is absolutely the direct results: starvation, death, and malnutrition.
And for whatever reason people seem ok with that to save US $ and force the other country to pick themselves up by their bootstraps.
The shallow thinking avoids the indirect issues. The starvation leads to instability. The instability can cause war and fighting on a local level that can damage US interests and trade. It can spill over into neighboring countries causing the same issues. Increase radicalization and terrorism. They’ll blame the “West”, likely justifiably, for supporting some dictator that steps in to crush opposition yet protect the West’s interests in whatever resource they’re stripping from the country or ag product like chocolate they’re making people grind at growing and underpaying for. It could have the country(ies) switch allegiances to competitors like China. All of this can directly increase costs to the US or indirectly to the US via regional instability disrupting trade. That’s ok, they’ll just pass the cost on to consumers while business profits are protected. It beats spending any tax money on things.
This is typical reductionist and oversimplified thinking by the Right. Just punish people into changing behavior, nevermind the indirect costs.
Two things happen when we centralize. Doesn’t matter if it’s big business or infrastructure.
Profits go up for the controlling few
consumers get fucked.
We get fucked when things go wrong, the system fails, our data gets hacked, our power goes out, our rents go up, insurance rates go up… etc etc. MegaCorps all say sorry, give us 50¢ off our next purchase and a free credit check, and carry on while we eat the losses and increasing costs.
We’ll see if the monster she helped create crushes her, or, if for some bizarre reason trump doesn't run again, Republicans hate Democrats enough to vote for a woman.
She’s just going to push her own brand of awful. Don’t think for a second that she’s grown a conscience. Probably going to make a run for prez, hardline dictator instead of stupid dictator.
Playing “Who is the more extreme patriot?” Trump went in like an aimless wrecking ball, she’s going to do precision extreme moves. Bet she runs for prez. All or nothing.
Capitalism run amok with the increasing need to push the line higher and maximize profits resulting in gluttony eating up all the spare money in a market.
Yeah. The problem is that the goalposts keep getting pushed away faster than income is keeping up. Someone might have what is considered a good paying job, but the buying power for major purchases like cars and homes keeps taking hits. On top of that the bills get steeper and steeper. Six figures should be a fortune.
Middle class didn’t mean a big McMansion or desirable area. It meant a modest house in a small lot in a boring suburb of someplace like Detroit where you’d work for Ford or something.
Our ideas of what kind of house we should have is really distorted. It’s like pickup trucks. What was considered an everyday pickup 40 years ago was 1/3rd the size of the behemoths available today, and of course today’s trucks cost $80,000 compared to the $6,500 of something like a ‘85 Toyota Pickup ($20k in today dollars).
Looks like they paid off the big debts with the Big Tech salary first, then took the lower pay job. So yeah, if you grind out the big bills first it’s absolutely possible.
I do not understand why people cannot see him for what he is. He’s shown everyone over and over again exactly what he is. Yet somehow they tell themselves this time he’ll actually do something right.
Maybe if someone enlisted long enough to get the GI bill for education and used it things would be different, but if one only does short military time and leaves with no further self-improvement the odds of being better off financially probably aren’t great.
Thinking is too shallow when it comes to this. Yes, there is absolutely the direct results: starvation, death, and malnutrition.
And for whatever reason people seem ok with that to save US $ and force the other country to pick themselves up by their bootstraps.
The shallow thinking avoids the indirect issues. The starvation leads to instability. The instability can cause war and fighting on a local level that can damage US interests and trade. It can spill over into neighboring countries causing the same issues. Increase radicalization and terrorism. They’ll blame the “West”, likely justifiably, for supporting some dictator that steps in to crush opposition yet protect the West’s interests in whatever resource they’re stripping from the country or ag product like chocolate they’re making people grind at growing and underpaying for. It could have the country(ies) switch allegiances to competitors like China. All of this can directly increase costs to the US or indirectly to the US via regional instability disrupting trade. That’s ok, they’ll just pass the cost on to consumers while business profits are protected. It beats spending any tax money on things.
This is typical reductionist and oversimplified thinking by the Right. Just punish people into changing behavior, nevermind the indirect costs.