Rich people are just better, and because they’re better anything they do with their money is automatically better. So they should get all the money and if you want to be a good person just get rich like them.
The ol’ more money = better than theory
It’s actually about power and leverage, not lifestyle. Rich people don’t actually spend most of their money on personal luxuries, they spend it on acquiring more wealth, which translates into more control over resources and people’s lives. Regular people don’t actually spend most of their money on luxuries, they spend it on maintaining their place in a world someone else owns.
The narrative that it is about what level of material status someone is living in or deserves is a distraction. It wouldn’t matter at all if the rich started living more spartan lifestyles. They still have the wealth and power, that will manifest one way or another as control over other people’s lives, and that’s what they’re really there for.
Lots of bootlickers are simply not understanding the intended message, of challenging the austerity narrative promulgated by the ruling class, which supports their selfish interests of private accumulation by oppressing the working class.
Supply and demand. There are many workers and relatively few employers, so it’s much easier to find a cheaper worker than a more generous employer.
The broad discussion is based not on a misunderstanding of labor organized as a salable commodity, but as a challenge against such organization.
I’m not digging this anti-science streak running through progressive movements lately.
It’s to the point where “capitalism bad” is also “space bad”.
They’re not protesting NASA or any other public space agency. It’s the private ones owned by billionaires they have issues with.
Just about every rocket launched for a NASA mission was built by a private firm.
You are implying what I am outright saying, that there is a growing anti-space sentiment growing within progressive movements.
You’re just straight up putting thoughts in people’s heads and getting mad at them for it.
Anti-space is not anti-science.
Space exploration (which is not even the target of any reference in the post) is profoundly expensive, and carries comparatively minimal scientific benefit.
The objection is against the personal thrills of the immensely wealthy paid by the labor of their immiserated workers.
No objection was given against projects that promote the common welfare.
That’s a strawman argument. Yeah, if you can’t pay your employees what you owe them, then you go to jail. At least that’s how it’s supposed to be in the ideal “capitalism”. And we are comparing ideas, not real implementations (cause then somebody wouldn’t have any working examples to present).
The argument is not giving a strawman, but rather identifying one given previously.
