111111IIIIIII

> the EU must decide what sort of society and economy it really is

It already made that decision in the first half of the 20th century. If you haven't heard, it decided to be a capitalist society. Nothing surprising here.

That's cope.

Karl Marx showed us 150 years ago why your vision is impossible, and that is why we aren't taught about him in grade school despite him being the most famous intellectual in the world.

Under capitalism, private capital predominates; it decides the laws and the commons. If you think you've found a way around this, it's only a matter of time. We call it capitalism for a reason.

I can feel the catharsis just reading your comment

Tell that to Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, or one of the billions of working families all over the world that everyone knows is getting f*cked over on a constant basis.

Sunlight is not a disinfectant. Better to try gasoline.

If you really believe Airbnb is to blame for this, I have a bridge to sell you.

Oh my, obviously you're right. Thank you for the correction.

Fascinating that this could start in the ostensible haven of libertarianism.

Edit: Sorry everyone, I was confusing Massachusetts with New Hampshire.

Ask yourself the causes of climate change and you will be right back to political economy. Parent has a point.

Americans aren't capable of discussing political economy outright.

Then don't project such things as generalizations. The general fact was that working in factories was far more brutal than working on the family farm.

It's literally the wrong front. The font here looks like Arial, but the Windows 95 font was something else. I'm pretty sure it was one of those fonts that starts with MS.

Same. If I'm in a rush I just preorder. Apple has the easiest purchasing experience I know of.

> Twitter go boom

Holding out for which one has the least baby talk crap

That is exactly the excuse made by the ruling class for forcing people into the factories. It’s nonsense. We aren’t talking past each other. You are just talking about things you know nothing about.

No country in the world has classes as starkly as the US. No, not even China, not even close.

Impossible. Politically impossible.

If so, refusing to meet sounds like a big mistake.

The only thing I like about robotaxis is that we are calling them "robotaxis". I'm sure that won't last, but I am really sick of the referring to a taxi as an "uber" or the somehow even more ridiculous "ride hailing service".

?

> Pre-industrial revolution, most people would be farmers, and they would learn outside of school nearly everything they needed to know.

Nothing about society or college was comparable pre-industrial revolution, unless maybe you came from wealth and are comparing the life of aristocracy. What's your inheritance?

> gives you the freedom to choose from different lifestyles

See my previous comment.

> I think people may be oblivious to this if they are a few generations removed from their farming ancestors, such that they never knew a living relative who was the first to abandon their traditional life and get educated and go to the city to work.

Pre-industrial revolution peasants did not "abandon their traditional life" by choice; very far from it. They were forced into industrial centers as common lands were evacuated and commodified to staff the factories. Post-industrial revolution, they were forced by waves of technological change and economic instability. Again, only the very privileged few ever had the luxury of "abandoning traditional life" by choice.

> It would never happen, since it would ruffle to many political feathers

Wrong. It would never happen because it would be too unreliable so nobody would use it.

The few times I used DoorDash the orders took twice as long as the estimate even though I live near a city center and always tipped the highest recommended abount.

And that is why these workers are definitely employees who should be paid for their availability.

> I do not come from a country with a class structure

Excuse me? Where?

Stop trying and just have branding people do it.

It doesn't need to be a verb. Really anything that isn't so coarse would probably be fine. Twitter is not a very good name because it's so feminine, but it's way better. Threads is a perfectly fine name.

Just let branding people do it.

Material sustenance is a prerequisite for any of those things to be considered good rather than distraction. It's not ironic that the reason poor people go to college is to get a better job; it's the result of a society divided by social class. It's the poor imitating the rich in hopes that they can make a living someday. To say the least, it is cruel and unusual.

What might make "the world" better off is irrelevant when all you have us billions of individuals pitted against each other.

I think you've had your wish for well over a decade. Federal minimum wage has been beyond meaningless for multiple decades and as it stands today only coastal states have minimum wages over $12/hr.

> I am firmly ready to burn this copyright system to the fucking ground.

Same, but the issue is not copyright, which is simply an effort to wield the state to control intellectual property in the same way the state is wielded to control physical property.

The compounding problem arises when property is capital, defined as the means to convert labor into new value. Capitalism is specifically a system in which one can wield control of capital (intellectual or otherwise) to extract profit from labor then trade that profit for more capital. As a result, capital accumulates infinitely, independent of the value produced by the labor which is provided to society.

Artists require capital to convert their labor into value just as any other worker would, so where should that capital come from if not from control of the value they produce? Society must solve this problem or we will not have art to begin with. Only looking at the demand side obfuscates such issues that arise on the supply side, and the only reason we're talking about them now is that digital technology has solved the scarcity problem on the supply side. It has not solved the scarcity problem on the demand side, however.

Finally, art, just like all technological progress, is always the product of entire societies and the history of all mankind that came before it. For this reason, all copyright and patents have no rational basis and are merely bandaids for the ill side effects of controlling capital to extract profit from labor to begin with.

This is essentially the correct explanation.

Karl Marx showed 150 years ago that a state under capitalism is a capitalist state and therefore predominated by the interests of capital itself, an observation that has never been refuted.

> A fair point

Is that sarcasm? It was a terrible point.

And any lack of efficacy of said regulation is straightforwardly due to corporate influence on governments.