There's no reason for hunger and poverty anymore. There's so much money circulating on our planet. That even one person should go hungry or homeless when even one person is a billionaire, what to speak of having several, is just sinful.
There's no reason for hunger and poverty anymore. There's so much money circulating on our planet. That even one person should go hungry or homeless when even one person is a billionaire, what to speak of having several, is just sinful.
The history of foreign aid, particularly in Africa, shows how much the issue is not just “money”. Disastrously dysfunctional institutions, or just poorly functional ones, will sop up any amount of money for little or no benefit: or even make things worse by enabling and extending dysfunction. The existence of wealthy folk ain’t the problem. The descent of South Africa into violent dysfunction is, alas, providing a sad demonstration of the institutions-and-policies problem. So, of course, does Venezuela.
Foreign aid comes at a steep price. The USA in particular isn't giving a dime to any other country without defense contractors, mercenaries, and major oil and other resource corporations being given a free pass in. Billionaires are individuals who need not go through government to just give individuals money directly, hand to hand. If I were a billionaire I wouldn't be one for long because I would give all my money away to the poorest people who could actually use it, while keeping for myself only that which I need to live safely and healthily on til I die, which certainly wouldn't be more than 1 million. But at the very least Elon Musk should be paying the slave children he has in the Democratic Republic of Congo mining cobalt for him a minimum of 100 dollars per hour.
The problem of foreign aid is not remotely limited to US foreign aid or even to government foreign aid. The capacity of any purchaser of any mineral to affect the wages of those mining the mineral is way more limited than folk seem to imagine. The employer has a much bigger say, but even with the best will in the world, it is hard to pay folk much above their productivity as a persistent pattern and stay in business. Miners in Western countries are paid way more because they, and the institutions they are embedded in, are way more productive, not because some benefactor transfers resources to them.
The reason why Musk and other billionaires employ both child and adult slaves is because that is the only way for them to become and stay billionaires. It's just pure evil. The entire monetary system that allows there to be billionaires and slaves at the same time is just evil.
You do realise you are talking to an Australian? Much of our exports consist of highly paid miners digging stuff out of the ground and exporting it around the world. They are highly paid because their skills, and the institutions they are embedded in, means they are highly productive.
The notion that poorly paid workers is necessary for great wealth is nonsense on stilts. The concentration of billionaires is highest where the numbers of highly workers are greatest. (China and India have lots of poor people but they also have middle classes that number in the hundreds of millions.) You need to sell at a massive scale to create such wealth, which means lots of consumers able to buy such products.
You're not understanding my point. There is no reason for a billionaire to employ child slaves.
Also, India's middle classes are not comparable to Australia's. The standards of living are so completely different. A comparable middle class Australian family simply would not be able to live with the standards that a typical middle class Indian family does. The only perk is that the Australian middle class family in India would be able to afford domestic helpers there whereas in Australia they wouldn't, but the rest would be almost unbearable. By the time the standard got bearable/comfortable they would be in the class of what in India is considered rich.
If your point is that child slavery is wrong, well of course. But buying the products produced by child slaves and employing them are not the same. Even trying to arrange a boycott of such would be difficult, as cobalt is cobalt, whoever and however it is mined.
And the question is not whether the Indian middle class has the same standard of living of the Australian middle class, but whether they generate demand for goods and services at scale, which they do.
"The notion that poorly paid workers is necessary for great wealth is nonsense on stilts."
--- Capitalism depends on a perpetual underclass.
"The concentration of billionaires is highest where the numbers of highly workers are greatest."
--- Billionaires are multi-nationals. They don't belong to one place and their money certainly isn't tied to anyone country and it's tax system.
"And the question is not whether the Indian middle class has the same standard of living of the Australian middle class, but whether they generate demand for goods and services at scale, which they do."
--- Unfortunately they are starting to. But it's still pretty much concentrated to the upper middle class, which is essentially the wealthy class, in India.
As far as Elon Musk and his child slave operations in cobalt Congo, you can do the research. Cobalt is "at scale" the world over. It's in high demand all the time, found in many of the products and items we all use daily, and the multi-trillion dollar industry can certainly afford to pay it's miners a minimum of 100 US dollars per hour. Minimum.
Your first claim is just obviously false. Mass access to global markets has seen the greatest fall in poverty in human history. Mercantile societies created the first mass prosperity in human history.
Where billionaires live does actually tell us a great deal about which societies produce billionaires. Nor are they billionaires because of tax systems.
Wages vary enormously because how productive mines are per worker vary enormously. You can only pay miners first world rates if they have first world levels of productivity: which is a combination of their skills and the institutional structure of where the mines are.
Multinationals in developing countries typically pay higher wages with better conditions than do local firms because they sell into global markets, use better production and management techniques and can mobilise economies of scale.
Musk gets way more criticism than he used to because he allows X/Twitter to support dissenting views. This is so shameless than Tesla’s DEI scores abruptly worsened after his purchase of X/Twitter.
If Musk does not own the mining companies, they are not “his” slaves. In fact, the mining companies are mostly owned by Chinese companies. China has form when it comes to forced labour: ask the Uighurs.
"Your first claim is just obviously false. Mass access to global markets has seen the greatest fall in poverty in human history. Mercantile societies created the first mass prosperity in human history."
--- Well, mercantalism and capitalism are not the same thing. That said, access to global markets, fall in poverty AND capitalism's perpetual dependence on an underclass can all exist simultaneously. It's not either/or in this case but both/and. Though I do question the claim in the greatest fall in poverty in human history. This is still debated and not established as an irrefutable fact.
"Where billionaires live does actually tell us a great deal about which societies produce billionaires. Nor are they billionaires because of tax systems."
--- They live all over the place. It doesn't tell us about societies but about a worldwide economic system, capitalism.
"Wages vary enormously because how productive mines are per worker vary enormously... first world levels of productivity... Multinationals in developing countries typically pay higher wages..."
--- Not high enough. The child miners are living in poverty despite doing some of the world's most difficult work.
"Musk gets way more criticism than he used to because he allows X/Twitter to support dissenting views."
--- He blocks and cancels his critcs on X. Even Lemon's benign softball interview was blocked and cancelled from his platform.
:If Musk does not own the mining companies, they are not “his” slaves. In fact, the mining companies are mostly owned by Chinese companies. "
--- Then what are they waiting for? Both China and Musk have enough money to lift these child slaves and their entire families out of poverty. No excuses.
They are shameful. Their greed is pure evil.
Child slaves should not be mining for China, Musk or anybody. This is work that should be, and actually CAN be fully automated by now. The reason it's not is because it would disrupt greedy capitaist gains since humans make the best robots, the only bottleneck is manufacturing time, but not an issue since the production line is a billion+ "assemblers". Why have metal robots, high cost to manufacture, high energy costs, high maintenance, very very very high programming costs and exacting standards that might be nigh impossible to reach, high disposal costs, and unknown LoE. Humans are born from two cells and are 100% biodegradable with iterative programming they pay for and most importantly, errant logic loops dont fry the CPU.
Humans are not needed to do this type of labor anymore, but the cost of robotic labor would cut into the "income" of billionaires at the top.
Money is not what ends poverty; wealth (that is food, clothing, shelter, and the capacity to produce them) ends poverty. Free market countries reward individuals who produce wealth. The result is less poverty.
Socialist countries - to the extent they redistribute wealth according to the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” - punish ability and reward need. The result is more poverty.
There is no *economic* reason that poverty still exists, but there are, unfortunately, many political reasons why it does (see Cuba, Haiti, North Korea, Venezuela, and anywhere else people are paid not to produce.)
"Money is not what ends poverty; wealth (that is food, clothing, shelter, and the capacity to produce them) ends poverty. Free market countries reward individuals who produce wealth. "
--- And yet the wealth producers are making pennies on the dollar, such as Musk's child slaves in the cobalt mines of DRC. They labor long hours in the hot Congo sun doing rigorous physical work producing wealth and yet they and their families are still poor because the free market does not reward wealth producers.
"Socialist countries - to the extent they redistribute wealth according to the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” - punish ability and reward need. The result is more poverty."
--- The USA is the country with the LEAST social mobility in the industrial, developed world. Sweden is the country with the most.
"There is no *economic* reason that poverty still exists, but there are, unfortunately, many political reasons why it does (see Cuba, Haiti, North Korea, Venezuela, and anywhere else people are paid not to produce.)"
--- See the USA. Where farmers are paid not to produce and the producers of wealth do not own the means of their own production. Bizarre!
The DRC was a Marxist-Leninist state from 1969 to 1992, and its economy is still largely driven by the government. It is perhaps the world’s least developed nation. As a result, its people are unproductive and desperately poor. Parents send their children to work in the mines because that is the least bad option available to them.
Child labor laws were passed in the United States only after they had become largely irrelevant. By that time, Americans were so productive that few children were working. Attempts to institute similar laws in undeveloped countries had disastrous results. Children had to choose between starvation and working illegally with no recourse to legal protections at all.
Regardless of relative economic mobility in the U.S. and Sweden, both countries are capitalist.
The fact that the U.S. government pays farmers not to produce is hardly an example of capitalism in action. Rather it’s an example of central planning gone awry.
More and more, the means of production are a smartphone and a laptop.
In a free market, the “producers of wealth” include workers, foremen, managers, financiers, marketers, engineers, programmers, accountants, entrepreneurs, and countless other people all cooperating and competing under a rule-of-law framework.
"The DRC was a Marxist-Leninist state from 1969 to 1992, and its economy is still largely driven by the government. It is perhaps the world’s least developed nation. As a result, its people are unproductive and desperately poor. Parents send their children to work in the mines because that is the least bad option available to them."
--- That's an old paradigm that is no longer relevant in an age of billionaires and globalization. Elon Musk can afford to pay each and every one of his child slaves their worth, which at a bare minimum I would put at 100 US dollars per hour (for the first year). He can lift those people out of poverty and MCGA, make Congo great again. There's just no excuse not to.
"Regardless of relative economic mobility in the U.S. and Sweden, both countries are capitalist.
--- The point is, the USA, world's richest country (still, I think), long sold the lie that social mobility was possible in the USA more than anywhere else in the world, and sometimes even pushed the lie it was the ONLY place social mobility was truly possible. This was part of our founding myth, our grand narrative. And it was always bullshit.
"More and more, the means of production are a smartphone and a laptop."
--- Those that make smartphones and laptops need to own the means of their production.
It's a sick, demented, purely evil system that allows billionaires to exist alongside starvation. Especially when many of the starving are working for those billionaires. Just pure Satanism.
Musk doesn’t own any mines. He purchases cobalt from Glencore’s Katanga Copper Company, which does mine cobalt in the DRC, but which maintains that it does not use child labor and that it does not purchase cobalt from artisanal mines.
On the other hand, according to Amnesty International, China’s Congo DongFang International Mining does source cobalt from artisanal mines. China has the resources to pay the children far more than what they currently earn. Why is capitalism in general, or Musk in particular, responsible for China’s actions? Why are the children who dig cobalt for China “Musk’s slaves”?
Can you quote one economist or any respected authority that has ever made the claim that the U.S. is the only place in the world where upward mobility is possible? And even if some crank did make such a ridiculous assertion, how did his claim become part of the country’s “founding myth”?
Every year, hundreds of thousands of people with little more than the clothes on their backs risk their lives to get to the United States. They certainly believe that they can materially improve their lives by coming here. You apparently believe that they are mistaken. But, if so, why do they keep coming?
At the same time, hundreds of thousands of people also risk their lives to get to Europe. They too believe that they can improve their lives by doing so. Does the “authority” who claimed that upward mobility is possible only in America believe that these people are delusional?
Why do the people making cell phones and laptops need to own the means of producing cell phones and laptops?
"Why do the people making cell phones and laptops need to own the means of producing cell phones and laptops?"
--- Because they are the wealth creators and capitalism is supposed to reward that.
"Every year, hundreds of thousands of people with little more than the clothes on their backs risk their lives to get to the United States. They certainly believe that they can materially improve their lives by coming here. You apparently believe that they are mistaken. But, if so, why do they keep coming?"
--- Those people remain poor here. They work in slaughterhouses and pick tomatos and almonds in the hot sun and do the work American citizens won't do for any price.
"At the same time, hundreds of thousands of people also risk their lives to get to Europe. They too believe that they can improve their lives by doing so. Does the “authority” who claimed that upward mobility is possible only in America believe that these people are delusional?"
--- I certainly do.
"Musk doesn’t own any mines. He purchases cobalt from Glencore’s Katanga Copper Company, which does mine cobalt in the DRC, but which maintains that it does not use child labor and that it does not purchase cobalt from artisanal mines."
--- Documentaries have already exposed Musk's child slavery. And you still don't get it. Whether he owns mines or not, he has enough money to make a huge difference in the lives of these child slaves.
"On the other hand, according to Amnesty International, China’s Congo DongFang International Mining does source cobalt from artisanal mines. China has the resources to pay the children far more than what they currently earn."
--- And they need to be paying them a minimum of 100 US dollars per hour. The work they do and wealth they create for billionaires is actually worth much more than that but for the first year 100 bucks/hour is at least a good start. And Musk can supply the annual bonus and new smart homes for their families. Is he still banging on about "smart homes"? Talk is cheap. Let's see some action.
"Why is capitalism in general, or Musk in particular, responsible for China’s actions? Why are the children who dig cobalt for China “Musk’s slaves”?"
Many companies in the U.S. are employee owned. One of the benefits of a free market economy is that people can experiment with any sort of arrangement they like. If employee-owned companies are superior to other arrangements, they will come to dominate the market. People in centrally controlled economies don’t have the same freedom to try different ways of doing business.
Studies that used income tax data to track individuals over decades found that most poor people in the U.S. didn’t remain poor.
Why do you think that refugees are delusional to believe that they are better off in Europe than in the places they left - places like Afghanistan, Syria, or Sub-Saharan Africa?
Please provide a link to a documentary proving that the mining company from which Musk buys his cobalt uses child labor either directly or indirectly.
Yes, Musk has enough money to help the DRC’s children, but if Glencore’s claims are true, that’s an issue of charity, not justice.
Musk’s charitable foundation gave $5.7 billion in 2021 (the latest year for which I have data). I’m not qualified to know whether the money was well spent or could have been better allocated. Perhaps it should have all gone to the DRC’s children. It’s possible, though, that humanity would have been better served if he had plowed those billions back into his companies’ production or R&D.
China is hardly capitalist, and it’s becoming less so as Xi tightens his control over the nation’s economy and society. I’ve noticed that when progressives tout China’s economic success, they credit the country’s central planning. When they criticize China (e.g., for its treatment of the Uyghurs or its imperialism) the country suddenly becomes “capitalist.”
I’ve noticed that when progressives tout China’s economic success, they credit the country’s central planning. When they criticize China (e.g., for its treatment of the Uyghurs or its imperialism) the country suddenly becomes “capitalist.”
There's no reason for hunger and poverty anymore. There's so much money circulating on our planet. That even one person should go hungry or homeless when even one person is a billionaire, what to speak of having several, is just sinful.
The history of foreign aid, particularly in Africa, shows how much the issue is not just “money”. Disastrously dysfunctional institutions, or just poorly functional ones, will sop up any amount of money for little or no benefit: or even make things worse by enabling and extending dysfunction. The existence of wealthy folk ain’t the problem. The descent of South Africa into violent dysfunction is, alas, providing a sad demonstration of the institutions-and-policies problem. So, of course, does Venezuela.
Foreign aid comes at a steep price. The USA in particular isn't giving a dime to any other country without defense contractors, mercenaries, and major oil and other resource corporations being given a free pass in. Billionaires are individuals who need not go through government to just give individuals money directly, hand to hand. If I were a billionaire I wouldn't be one for long because I would give all my money away to the poorest people who could actually use it, while keeping for myself only that which I need to live safely and healthily on til I die, which certainly wouldn't be more than 1 million. But at the very least Elon Musk should be paying the slave children he has in the Democratic Republic of Congo mining cobalt for him a minimum of 100 dollars per hour.
The problem of foreign aid is not remotely limited to US foreign aid or even to government foreign aid. The capacity of any purchaser of any mineral to affect the wages of those mining the mineral is way more limited than folk seem to imagine. The employer has a much bigger say, but even with the best will in the world, it is hard to pay folk much above their productivity as a persistent pattern and stay in business. Miners in Western countries are paid way more because they, and the institutions they are embedded in, are way more productive, not because some benefactor transfers resources to them.
The reason why Musk and other billionaires employ both child and adult slaves is because that is the only way for them to become and stay billionaires. It's just pure evil. The entire monetary system that allows there to be billionaires and slaves at the same time is just evil.
You do realise you are talking to an Australian? Much of our exports consist of highly paid miners digging stuff out of the ground and exporting it around the world. They are highly paid because their skills, and the institutions they are embedded in, means they are highly productive.
The notion that poorly paid workers is necessary for great wealth is nonsense on stilts. The concentration of billionaires is highest where the numbers of highly workers are greatest. (China and India have lots of poor people but they also have middle classes that number in the hundreds of millions.) You need to sell at a massive scale to create such wealth, which means lots of consumers able to buy such products.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_billionaires
You're not understanding my point. There is no reason for a billionaire to employ child slaves.
Also, India's middle classes are not comparable to Australia's. The standards of living are so completely different. A comparable middle class Australian family simply would not be able to live with the standards that a typical middle class Indian family does. The only perk is that the Australian middle class family in India would be able to afford domestic helpers there whereas in Australia they wouldn't, but the rest would be almost unbearable. By the time the standard got bearable/comfortable they would be in the class of what in India is considered rich.
If your point is that child slavery is wrong, well of course. But buying the products produced by child slaves and employing them are not the same. Even trying to arrange a boycott of such would be difficult, as cobalt is cobalt, whoever and however it is mined.
And the question is not whether the Indian middle class has the same standard of living of the Australian middle class, but whether they generate demand for goods and services at scale, which they do.
"The notion that poorly paid workers is necessary for great wealth is nonsense on stilts."
--- Capitalism depends on a perpetual underclass.
"The concentration of billionaires is highest where the numbers of highly workers are greatest."
--- Billionaires are multi-nationals. They don't belong to one place and their money certainly isn't tied to anyone country and it's tax system.
"And the question is not whether the Indian middle class has the same standard of living of the Australian middle class, but whether they generate demand for goods and services at scale, which they do."
--- Unfortunately they are starting to. But it's still pretty much concentrated to the upper middle class, which is essentially the wealthy class, in India.
As far as Elon Musk and his child slave operations in cobalt Congo, you can do the research. Cobalt is "at scale" the world over. It's in high demand all the time, found in many of the products and items we all use daily, and the multi-trillion dollar industry can certainly afford to pay it's miners a minimum of 100 US dollars per hour. Minimum.
Your first claim is just obviously false. Mass access to global markets has seen the greatest fall in poverty in human history. Mercantile societies created the first mass prosperity in human history.
Where billionaires live does actually tell us a great deal about which societies produce billionaires. Nor are they billionaires because of tax systems.
Wages vary enormously because how productive mines are per worker vary enormously. You can only pay miners first world rates if they have first world levels of productivity: which is a combination of their skills and the institutional structure of where the mines are.
Multinationals in developing countries typically pay higher wages with better conditions than do local firms because they sell into global markets, use better production and management techniques and can mobilise economies of scale.
Musk gets way more criticism than he used to because he allows X/Twitter to support dissenting views. This is so shameless than Tesla’s DEI scores abruptly worsened after his purchase of X/Twitter.
If Musk does not own the mining companies, they are not “his” slaves. In fact, the mining companies are mostly owned by Chinese companies. China has form when it comes to forced labour: ask the Uighurs.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/02/01/1152893248/red-cobalt-congo-drc-mining-siddharth-kara
"Your first claim is just obviously false. Mass access to global markets has seen the greatest fall in poverty in human history. Mercantile societies created the first mass prosperity in human history."
--- Well, mercantalism and capitalism are not the same thing. That said, access to global markets, fall in poverty AND capitalism's perpetual dependence on an underclass can all exist simultaneously. It's not either/or in this case but both/and. Though I do question the claim in the greatest fall in poverty in human history. This is still debated and not established as an irrefutable fact.
"Where billionaires live does actually tell us a great deal about which societies produce billionaires. Nor are they billionaires because of tax systems."
--- They live all over the place. It doesn't tell us about societies but about a worldwide economic system, capitalism.
"Wages vary enormously because how productive mines are per worker vary enormously... first world levels of productivity... Multinationals in developing countries typically pay higher wages..."
--- Not high enough. The child miners are living in poverty despite doing some of the world's most difficult work.
"Musk gets way more criticism than he used to because he allows X/Twitter to support dissenting views."
--- He blocks and cancels his critcs on X. Even Lemon's benign softball interview was blocked and cancelled from his platform.
:If Musk does not own the mining companies, they are not “his” slaves. In fact, the mining companies are mostly owned by Chinese companies. "
--- Then what are they waiting for? Both China and Musk have enough money to lift these child slaves and their entire families out of poverty. No excuses.
They are shameful. Their greed is pure evil.
Child slaves should not be mining for China, Musk or anybody. This is work that should be, and actually CAN be fully automated by now. The reason it's not is because it would disrupt greedy capitaist gains since humans make the best robots, the only bottleneck is manufacturing time, but not an issue since the production line is a billion+ "assemblers". Why have metal robots, high cost to manufacture, high energy costs, high maintenance, very very very high programming costs and exacting standards that might be nigh impossible to reach, high disposal costs, and unknown LoE. Humans are born from two cells and are 100% biodegradable with iterative programming they pay for and most importantly, errant logic loops dont fry the CPU.
Humans are not needed to do this type of labor anymore, but the cost of robotic labor would cut into the "income" of billionaires at the top.
What a sick, depraved, immoral system.
Money is not what ends poverty; wealth (that is food, clothing, shelter, and the capacity to produce them) ends poverty. Free market countries reward individuals who produce wealth. The result is less poverty.
Socialist countries - to the extent they redistribute wealth according to the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” - punish ability and reward need. The result is more poverty.
There is no *economic* reason that poverty still exists, but there are, unfortunately, many political reasons why it does (see Cuba, Haiti, North Korea, Venezuela, and anywhere else people are paid not to produce.)
"Money is not what ends poverty; wealth (that is food, clothing, shelter, and the capacity to produce them) ends poverty. Free market countries reward individuals who produce wealth. "
--- And yet the wealth producers are making pennies on the dollar, such as Musk's child slaves in the cobalt mines of DRC. They labor long hours in the hot Congo sun doing rigorous physical work producing wealth and yet they and their families are still poor because the free market does not reward wealth producers.
"Socialist countries - to the extent they redistribute wealth according to the rule “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” - punish ability and reward need. The result is more poverty."
--- The USA is the country with the LEAST social mobility in the industrial, developed world. Sweden is the country with the most.
"There is no *economic* reason that poverty still exists, but there are, unfortunately, many political reasons why it does (see Cuba, Haiti, North Korea, Venezuela, and anywhere else people are paid not to produce.)"
--- See the USA. Where farmers are paid not to produce and the producers of wealth do not own the means of their own production. Bizarre!
The DRC was a Marxist-Leninist state from 1969 to 1992, and its economy is still largely driven by the government. It is perhaps the world’s least developed nation. As a result, its people are unproductive and desperately poor. Parents send their children to work in the mines because that is the least bad option available to them.
Child labor laws were passed in the United States only after they had become largely irrelevant. By that time, Americans were so productive that few children were working. Attempts to institute similar laws in undeveloped countries had disastrous results. Children had to choose between starvation and working illegally with no recourse to legal protections at all.
Regardless of relative economic mobility in the U.S. and Sweden, both countries are capitalist.
The fact that the U.S. government pays farmers not to produce is hardly an example of capitalism in action. Rather it’s an example of central planning gone awry.
More and more, the means of production are a smartphone and a laptop.
In a free market, the “producers of wealth” include workers, foremen, managers, financiers, marketers, engineers, programmers, accountants, entrepreneurs, and countless other people all cooperating and competing under a rule-of-law framework.
"The DRC was a Marxist-Leninist state from 1969 to 1992, and its economy is still largely driven by the government. It is perhaps the world’s least developed nation. As a result, its people are unproductive and desperately poor. Parents send their children to work in the mines because that is the least bad option available to them."
--- That's an old paradigm that is no longer relevant in an age of billionaires and globalization. Elon Musk can afford to pay each and every one of his child slaves their worth, which at a bare minimum I would put at 100 US dollars per hour (for the first year). He can lift those people out of poverty and MCGA, make Congo great again. There's just no excuse not to.
"Regardless of relative economic mobility in the U.S. and Sweden, both countries are capitalist.
--- The point is, the USA, world's richest country (still, I think), long sold the lie that social mobility was possible in the USA more than anywhere else in the world, and sometimes even pushed the lie it was the ONLY place social mobility was truly possible. This was part of our founding myth, our grand narrative. And it was always bullshit.
"More and more, the means of production are a smartphone and a laptop."
--- Those that make smartphones and laptops need to own the means of their production.
It's a sick, demented, purely evil system that allows billionaires to exist alongside starvation. Especially when many of the starving are working for those billionaires. Just pure Satanism.
Musk doesn’t own any mines. He purchases cobalt from Glencore’s Katanga Copper Company, which does mine cobalt in the DRC, but which maintains that it does not use child labor and that it does not purchase cobalt from artisanal mines.
On the other hand, according to Amnesty International, China’s Congo DongFang International Mining does source cobalt from artisanal mines. China has the resources to pay the children far more than what they currently earn. Why is capitalism in general, or Musk in particular, responsible for China’s actions? Why are the children who dig cobalt for China “Musk’s slaves”?
Can you quote one economist or any respected authority that has ever made the claim that the U.S. is the only place in the world where upward mobility is possible? And even if some crank did make such a ridiculous assertion, how did his claim become part of the country’s “founding myth”?
Every year, hundreds of thousands of people with little more than the clothes on their backs risk their lives to get to the United States. They certainly believe that they can materially improve their lives by coming here. You apparently believe that they are mistaken. But, if so, why do they keep coming?
At the same time, hundreds of thousands of people also risk their lives to get to Europe. They too believe that they can improve their lives by doing so. Does the “authority” who claimed that upward mobility is possible only in America believe that these people are delusional?
Why do the people making cell phones and laptops need to own the means of producing cell phones and laptops?
"Why do the people making cell phones and laptops need to own the means of producing cell phones and laptops?"
--- Because they are the wealth creators and capitalism is supposed to reward that.
"Every year, hundreds of thousands of people with little more than the clothes on their backs risk their lives to get to the United States. They certainly believe that they can materially improve their lives by coming here. You apparently believe that they are mistaken. But, if so, why do they keep coming?"
--- Those people remain poor here. They work in slaughterhouses and pick tomatos and almonds in the hot sun and do the work American citizens won't do for any price.
"At the same time, hundreds of thousands of people also risk their lives to get to Europe. They too believe that they can improve their lives by doing so. Does the “authority” who claimed that upward mobility is possible only in America believe that these people are delusional?"
--- I certainly do.
"Musk doesn’t own any mines. He purchases cobalt from Glencore’s Katanga Copper Company, which does mine cobalt in the DRC, but which maintains that it does not use child labor and that it does not purchase cobalt from artisanal mines."
--- Documentaries have already exposed Musk's child slavery. And you still don't get it. Whether he owns mines or not, he has enough money to make a huge difference in the lives of these child slaves.
"On the other hand, according to Amnesty International, China’s Congo DongFang International Mining does source cobalt from artisanal mines. China has the resources to pay the children far more than what they currently earn."
--- And they need to be paying them a minimum of 100 US dollars per hour. The work they do and wealth they create for billionaires is actually worth much more than that but for the first year 100 bucks/hour is at least a good start. And Musk can supply the annual bonus and new smart homes for their families. Is he still banging on about "smart homes"? Talk is cheap. Let's see some action.
"Why is capitalism in general, or Musk in particular, responsible for China’s actions? Why are the children who dig cobalt for China “Musk’s slaves”?"
--- China is capitalist.
Many companies in the U.S. are employee owned. One of the benefits of a free market economy is that people can experiment with any sort of arrangement they like. If employee-owned companies are superior to other arrangements, they will come to dominate the market. People in centrally controlled economies don’t have the same freedom to try different ways of doing business.
Studies that used income tax data to track individuals over decades found that most poor people in the U.S. didn’t remain poor.
Why do you think that refugees are delusional to believe that they are better off in Europe than in the places they left - places like Afghanistan, Syria, or Sub-Saharan Africa?
Please provide a link to a documentary proving that the mining company from which Musk buys his cobalt uses child labor either directly or indirectly.
Yes, Musk has enough money to help the DRC’s children, but if Glencore’s claims are true, that’s an issue of charity, not justice.
Musk’s charitable foundation gave $5.7 billion in 2021 (the latest year for which I have data). I’m not qualified to know whether the money was well spent or could have been better allocated. Perhaps it should have all gone to the DRC’s children. It’s possible, though, that humanity would have been better served if he had plowed those billions back into his companies’ production or R&D.
China is hardly capitalist, and it’s becoming less so as Xi tightens his control over the nation’s economy and society. I’ve noticed that when progressives tout China’s economic success, they credit the country’s central planning. When they criticize China (e.g., for its treatment of the Uyghurs or its imperialism) the country suddenly becomes “capitalist.”
I’ve noticed that when progressives tout China’s economic success, they credit the country’s central planning. When they criticize China (e.g., for its treatment of the Uyghurs or its imperialism) the country suddenly becomes “capitalist.”
Touche. No comeback, I notice!
Objective facts, evidence and data will not convince people to abandon their confirmation biases and favored narratives, even when wrong.
https://paultaylor.substack.com/p/psychologically-illogical-part-1
paultaylor. substack. com /p/psychologically-illogical-part-1