• Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I honestly don’t think the problem is that Capitalist’s don’t understand that concept; they very much do.

    They also understand that the money for raising that floor would likely come from taxes on them; and so keeping the floor low means that they can keep even more profit.

    It’s not a lack of understanding. It’s pure unadulterated evil.

    • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I think its more than that, they already have all the money, but wealth is relative so if they can make everyone else twice as poor then their wealth relative to everyone else just doubled.

    • Kacarott@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 days ago

      The rich capitalists sure, but there are plenty of poor capitalists being fed misinformation, in order to maintain the status quo. And when it is the many vs the powerful few, then the more we have on our side the better

      • ᴍᴜᴛɪʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴᴡᴀᴠᴇ @lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Capitalist generally refers to people who own and control capital, not to fans of the system. One cannot be a poor capitalist, it’s a contradiction.

        I used to use the term the same way as you, but I think using it the way it’s meant is better.

        • Kacarott@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          That seems an odd definition to me, to my knowledge all other definitions of ideologies depend only on ones own beliefs or values, not upon ones physical possessions or life situation. What else would you call a poor person who fervently believes that capitalism is the best system for the world? If Bezos suffered some catastrophic business collapse and went broke, would he suddenly no longer be a capitalist?

          Edit: also I thought the traditional name for those who own capital is “bourgeoisie”?

          • Wrrzag@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            If Bezos suffered some catastrophic business collapse and went broke, would he suddenly no longer be a capitalist?

            Depends, if that collapse meant that he can’t live from his ownership of capital anymore, he would not be a capitalist.

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      There are definitely bad actors out there trying to convince people of misconceptions, and I’m sure they have a non-zero amount of success. I recall being told some overly simplifying misconceptions of socialism when I was young.

    • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      this is the reason social democracy rarely works in practice.

      • freagle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The reason social democracy doesn’t work is because it doesn’t change the power structure. It’s treating a symptom and not the root cause. By leaving the root cause untouched, the symptoms will always come back.

        • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          that’s pretty much what happens in my country. without other countries our rich can extract value from, it’s still business as usual and purchased/pressured politicians because money is still power.