Which platform would that be? I am not trying to be difficult, but I think probably all platforms are heavily biased.
CableMonster
joined 9 months ago
I didnt stop reading, but comments get too long and it gets lots in the noise. But if you want it
"Why would investors be ok with Amazon not turning a profit for 9 years?" Because they had vision that amazon would become one of the biggest companies in the world.
"What magical force brings down the price of necessities when there’s less government?" - Competition.
As a former engineer and current construction business owner that deals with actual codes, I can tell you that you dont understand what is happening. As someone who has been on both sides of regulations, I understand why they exist, but they either are ignored, are overkill, or have so low a probability of happening its not worth the cost. I can give you an example of each, but I absolutely promise you that you have a false understand of what is happening.
What platform are journalists supposed to be using when almost all of them seem to be biased?
Trickle down economics isnt a thing, its propaganda.
I understand the full scope of what you are saying, but if these factors were the cause then you would see higher relative rates among groups that have been even more harmed throughout history.
I think most sane people want to have it lower, the contention comes when we get to how to lower it.
The main flaw that I think you are making is that you see similar circumstances to something in the past and think the same thing will happen again. Its kind of like with the Ukraine war, people see a country invading another country and think russia is nazi germany and will take over the continent, but in reality the material conditions are completely different. No, we would not start having company stores pop up and kids losing hands on sewing machines, things are drastically different from the industrial revolution.
There is a lot here, so I will directly answer your questions - what part? Because the government is huge I will talk about what I know best - housing. The government(s) add over $100k for every single family house new build, on average. These are things that are not necessary but are required. I can explain in detail because this is going to sound crazy but it is not, I would eliminate nearly all government involvement in everything two story and under. All the government should do is verify location and then verify appropriate utilities (which is both gov and private). We should do a lot of this on most things and make it so people can afford things.
The other big thing would be ending the fed.
So as you say influencing public opinion is bad because then that public opinion is used by a POWERFUL government to harm people. I agree that is what I am talking about, the government having the power over your life is the bad thing, not the opinions of rich people. They can have whatever opinion they want, and the only way they can make it count is if they can sway the people to vote your rights away or directly sway the current officials.
What were the two things he listed after he said he was going to be dictator on day one?
The issue is that they are misleading you with lying facts. For example if I said "A person is YY times more likely to die in a hospital than at the grocery store", that would be true but its misleading to believe that if I go to the hospital I am more likely to die than at the grocery store.