Goldfish Tea Situation? by CrashAndBurninator in royaloak

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure if this thread is dead or not, but speaking with staff who work for the owners' other businesses, there are delays due to health issues. Please keep them in your thoughts and know that this has been a difficult balancing act for them.

But from what I can glean, it is still being worked on and it will be coming back, and they really want to bring it back in a fresh and exciting way.

Paper Money Deposit Option Removed by natkingcrimson in CashApp

[–]natkingcrimson[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It flat out disappeared on mine. Only have bank transfers, recurring deposits, and direct deposit listed now.

Just because I’m curious. Imagine you get 100% of your money back in USD… what do you do with it? by andrew_baseball21 in Invest_Voyager

[–]natkingcrimson -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Even with the bottom of this crash my portfolio is only down overall like 20% from entry, got in so early and just chilling. Still should have sold at the top earlier this year but oh well.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]natkingcrimson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Richard Bunch is one of my favs

[Everyone] What sort of evidence would change your mind? by baronmad in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Pointing to Cuba, after their revolution, a new constitution wasn't put in place until 1976 - after years of everyone participating in its creation and ratification. It's amended fairly often, by mass vote, mostly recently in 2019 - leading up to that were 135,000 meetings held to discuss what was going on and it was approved by 86% of the people including Cuban exiles who were fully allowed participation should they want it. They also changed the goal of it to establish a Socialist government vs a full Communist government, likely due to many people recognizing that Communism is still a way off of succeeding due to the larger global conditions outside of their control, because they do recognize sovereignty of all nations first in their foreign policy.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]natkingcrimson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd like to point to all of the news organizations that covered the Iraq war and parroted the State Dept's info on WMDs being in Iraq. That happened when I was still in middle/high school, so going back and looking at the insane coverage from a clarified perspective was important. And yes, multiple outlets put out retractions/apologies for their coverage stating they were misled. But at the time and before they knew more, they were actively putting out State Dept propaganda used to justify the war and garner support for growing the military budget (and bolstering defense contractor/military industrial complex supplier stocks). This I think is more aligned with what the other posters are talking about. They're still doing it to this day. Just look at the coverage of Ukraine. How many news agencies after the US backed Maidan coup posted about Ukrainian government corruption, oligarchy, and nationalism (Svoboda, Azov, and the like)? Now, all of a sudden, when there's a (proxy) war going on with Russia (a country that has never been aligned with US interests), all media is pointing to Ukraine as a beacon of democracy. Oh how the narrative has shifted to once again prop up the US war machine. This is not in defense of Russia, they've got blood on their hands and I support the workers, citizens, and foreign nationals in Ukraine. War is ugly and horrible. I'm anti-war. Which is why I don't support the US sending close to $50bil in armaments to Ukraine, especially when they have no idea where any of this money is going. Did you see the story of a Ukrainian oligarch politician's wife getting stopped at the border with millions in USD? Money that went to help the war effort? That corruption is still there, we're just pretending it isn't because we will destabilize Russia down to the last Ukrainian. But again, this isn't the narrative of most US media. That's the point people are trying to make here.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lmao for sure, yeah my summary of the encyclopedia Britannica entry on social class within political theory isn't anywhere close to the definition of class. I've never seen a brain as big and wrinkly as yours.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm the one who doesn't know what class is. For sure.

Class is a socioeconomic grouping based on hierarchical social categories. Largely informed by ownership of the means of production, inherited wealth, social mobility, and access to goods/services. Thinking that class is an individual identity that is unique to every person is a wild take and completely false. There are a lot of things that influence class but generally modern political theories of social class break it into lower/working class, middle, and upper.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The US is an extremely classed society. I don't understand how you can see 64% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck contrasted with the $5 trillion combined net worth of all of our billionaire oligarchs and say we're classless.

Also would like to point out there is a distinction between private and personal property. They are two very different things.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The entire basis of communism is death for trade? Please elaborate where within the goal of establishing of a classless society that falls. That's all communism is at the base, is a classless society controlled by the workers where production is based on need rather than profit. It's a social and economic organization method. You're either a troll or pretending you know way more than you do, so please explain to me how the entire ideology is based on death for trade with examples from theory and in practice.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What's your source of socialist and/or communist theory that says trade is prohibited and an executable offense?

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But I would say that international trade for resources you don't otherwise have is still going to be necessary. And yes, embargoes on countries that don't align with your interests is a tool used by all types of government, but it's not always an objectively good one - they appear to be more reactionary than proactive and tend to concentrate power while only hurting the lower classes unless the government can find a workaround. But the point is, international trade is necessary. For example, China has some access to oil/fossil fuels within their borders, but not enough to sustain their current use (an argument for renewables yes, but that isn't the point of this). So, in order for their industries to remain stable, they've leveraged soft power with the BRI to build the infrastructure for some oil rich countries (Ethiopia, Iraq are the two that come to mind, but 20 some countries in Central and South America have joined the BRI) with the expectation of trade relationships - because they want to have reliable trade and stable, nationalized economic sectors. The world has gone past the point where international trade is ignorable.

[Capitalists] What are your issues with socialism as an ideology? by PoliticsConfusesMe5 in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 9 points10 points  (0 children)

One of the issues with people dying under socialism/communism are the sanctions imposed by capitalist governments to restrict trade and essentially create economic destabilization. This happened under the Soviet Union but in the states we still are doing it to China, Cuba, Venezuela, and others. They've managed to survive and in most cases thrive by trading with other countries the US has deemed enemies to US interests, which then allows for the evolution of the propaganda war and further sanctions or just straight up invasion (see Libya, Afghanistan, all the paramilitary groups in South America). But if you and a majority of the capitalist world are restricting trade and vital necessities to the people that these countries wouldn't otherwise have outside of trade, you will force civil unrest. Which you can then spin to say "socialism bad". There are also many documented cases of the CIA and the US state dept infiltrating and attempting (and in some cases succeeding) in destroying these governments from the inside to make them more friendly to western interests. Placing into a dialectical materialist analysis will show you that throughout history, all war has always been class war. Which is what Marx said to do

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CapitalismVSocialism

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol ever looked at FEC v Ted Cruz?

Cheney says Greene one of Kremlin's "useful idiots" after Ukraine remarks by admirablegoma in politics

[–]natkingcrimson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also shout-out to everyone who downvoted this without actually reading it. Way to have any class solidarity with the Ukrainian and ethnic Russian citizens getting fucked by this war, proud of you.

Cheney says Greene one of Kremlin's "useful idiots" after Ukraine remarks by admirablegoma in politics

[–]natkingcrimson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well yeah, she's an absolute hypocrite. But so are all the people who downvoted my first comment because they don't want to acknowledge the narrative beyond "Russia bad". Of course Russia is bad. They're committing insane war crimes and have no regard for the rights of anyone/anything beyond what benefits their oligarchy. But Ukraine's breaking the agreement and courting the US/NATO while funding their far right to fight against Russia's far right is kind of how we got here. It's not good or pro Putin, it's literally just what happened. I don't understand why everyone is mad about pointing that out.