The idealized market was supposed to deliver ‘friction free’ exchanges, in which the desires of consumers would be met directly, without the need for intervention or mediation by regulatory agencies. Yet the drive to assess the performance of workers and to measure forms of labor which, by their nature, are resistant to quantification, has inevitably required additional layers of management and bureaucracy. What we have is not a direct comparison of workers’ performance or output, but a comparison between the audited representation of that performance and output. Inevitably, a short-circuiting occurs, and work becomes geared towards the generation and massaging of representations rather than to the official goals of the work itself.

– Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism

What profits? All AI companies have major losses. Except Nvidia of course, which just sells the hardware to the other companies so that they can make a loss.

https://isaiprofitable.com/

At best, this will just socialize the losses made by decisions of capitalists.

Oh hey, it’s the “capitalism is founded on the idea of workers owning their workplace” person.

Shitty article has link to non shitty source. If you critical thinking skills were as developed as you think they are, you could click on it.

I mean, you gotta love the energy and eagerness. Would probably vote for him

If you think that a 3 tour (or was it 4?) Blackwater merc is going to move you left, you are the reason why the party isn’t moving left.

Sounds about right. Global warming didn’t exist in Australia before 2017

Don’t take it too seriously.

Trump phone? I was surprised this was not The Onion

The article is factually correct and links to another, more popular source. What is misleading about it?

Biased, yes. So what? If you are still neutral in the face of Israeli crimes, you are complicit.

You have to have the political education of a 5 year old to claim that the far right and the far left are similar. Even centrists think the theory is horseshit:

Given the basic implausibility of the horseshoe theory, why do so many centrist commentators insist on perpetuating it? The likely answer is that it allows those in the centre to discredit the left while disavowing their own complicity with the far right. Historically, it has been “centrist” liberals – in Spain, Chile, Brazil, and in many other countries – who have helped the far right to power, usually because they would rather have had a fascist in power than a socialist.

You don’t seem to understand what Marx means by dictatorship of the proletariat. His idea of implementation of the dictatorship of the proletariat was the Paris Commune, which had universal suffrage, elected and immediately recallable delegates (a better and more democratic concept that the political clownshow we have in parliamentary democracy). I suggest reading past the name of the concept before talking nonsense.

Every year there’s maybe one decent song and a bunch of generic pop crap. It’s famous because it’s a manifestation of modern chauvinism in musical form.

Most of their profits are paid out to shareholders, like last year, and the year before that. Nobody should expect anything better from any capitalist corporation.

Yes of course. In reality, capitalists would take 40% of that GDP produced and the state another 20%. So you’d be left with 40% of the “value” you produced while eating shit.

A new report by Human Rights Watch argues that the compulsory use of the Tuscan dialect as the primary language in schools in Italy raises “serious concerns under international human rights law”. At the time of adoption, only 2.5% of the population spoke Italian. This ongoing cultural genocide of 2 centuries has led to some not knowing their own regional dialect, and in some extreme cases, to people from different Italian regions understanding each other!!1

Yes, this news is so silly, that applying the same logic in Europe makes it read like an Onion article.

Two economists are walking in a forest when they Come across a pile of shit.

The first economist says to the other “Ill pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The second economist takes the $100 and eats the pile of shit.

They continue walking until they come across a second pile of shit. The second economist turns to the first and says “l pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The first economist takes the $100 and eats a pile of shit.

Walking a little more, the first economist looks at the second and says, “You know, I gave you $100 to eat shit, then you gave me back the same $100 to eat shit. can’t help but feel like we both just ate shit for nothing.” “That’s not true”, responded the second economist. “We increased the GDP by $200!”

Hey, that’s not fair! They also nuked 2 civilian cities just to prove their might. One of the biggest war crimes in history for which nobody was punished.

Yes, this has been my main account for the last year. It’s cute that you noticed.

What do your astute analysis skills tell you about Europe’s collective Stockholm Syndrome that the US “saved” them from the nazis?

Yes, they both had a part, and the USSR’s part was significantly more important. But I know that might get in the way of your American exceptionalism fantasy.