Proud American. Jew. Happily married conservative leaning mom. Interested in politics, culture, & other stuff.
United States
Joined November 2023
- Tweets39K
- Following5.5K
- Followers21.6K
- Likes33.7K
The Undercurrent retweeted
If a healthcare provider received confidential information from a patient in law enforcement and passed it to their spouse so they could profit from stock trades, they could face criminal prosecution and lose their professional license.
And yet we’re still debating whether members of Congress and their spouses should be allowed to trade individual stocks while in office.
Why should everyday Americans be held to stricter ethical standards than the people writing our laws?
Well, well, well
Rep. Ro Khanna sold $NVDA right before Nvidia's CEO admitted to having a Chinese spy side piece
He's a member of the following:
- Strategic Competition between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party Committee
- Taiwan Caucus
- High Tech Caucus
Apparently, federal agents informed some lawmakers last year that Jensen Huang might be the target of a foreign intelligence operation
He avoided a ~26% dip
Lolol…. Precisely. Same people, different consequences and incentives. Run a clean, well-managed business that produces services people want and customers reward you. Run it like a neglected public bathroom and they'll go somewhere else.
1
1
25
The Interstate Highway System was funded largely through fuel taxes paid by Americans participating in a capitalist economy. People worked, earned money, bought gasoline, and paid taxes. The government used that revenue to hire private companies that competed for contracts, employed workers, purchased equipment, earned profits.l, etc. Those highways then made it easier for businesses to transport goods, expand, and generate more economic activity.
That’s how public infrastructure and capitalism work together. Government funding doesn’t magically make something socialism.
There’s no objection to hiring people to clean toilets. Of course people can be hired to clean toilets under a socialist system.
My question is what happens when those employees stop doing their jobs properly. Can they be fired? What consequences do they face? And if their basic needs are provided regardless of whether they work, what incentive do they have to improve?
Buc-ee’s has a financial reason to maintain its bathrooms and hold employees accountable. Simply hiring someone doesn’t answer the question of what motivates them to perform. Especially when there is not really an incentive.
I agree with your explanation of price signals, but I disagree that this is collective management. Consumers influence businesses through their purchases. They don't collectively decide how those businesses allocate resources.
1
2
225
We have politicians openly running and winning as democratic socialists, so your first claim is demonstrably false.
I’m not even going to argue with the attempt to weaponized compassion. Nobody is arguing in favor of starving children or denying elderly people medication.
As for Buc-ee’s, it’s a privately owned, for profit company that invests in clean bathrooms because they attract paying customers. That gives it a competitive advantage, which creates a financial incentive to maintain them. I.e. Capitalism.
This quoted post is unavailable.
1
4
204
Your post unintentionally illustrates my point. You’re assuming public bathrooms keep public spaces clean. I’m pointing out that people can’t even be bothered to keep the bathrooms themselves clean. And that’s my problem with socialism. Every generation repackages it with promises about how it’s supposed to work, while overlooking how people actually behave. Capitalism creates incentives and accountability around human nature. Socialism keeps expecting human nature to change.
This analogy unintentionally makes the case for socialism. People need to pee whether public washrooms exist or not. Public washrooms provide a basic service that keeps streets, parks, and public spaces clean for everyone. Those who can afford private options are free to use them, but the public option creates a baseline that benefits society as a whole, not just the people who rely on it
If criticizing the government accomplishes nothing, why do authoritarian governments work so hard to silence it?
4
And under socialism, who cleans the bathrooms? The people running the government? Or do you imagine the political elite will be grabbing a mop and cleaning up the pee?
The Undercurrent retweeted
One of the reasons I don’t like socialism is public bathrooms.
A public bathroom is about as basic a shared resource as you can get. Everyone gets to use it, and everyone is expected to show a little consideration for the next person. The rules aren’t particularly complicated.
And yet, a shocking number of adults can’t even manage to throw their paper towels in the trash. Some will pee all over a toilet seat and leave it for the next person. And the next person, who didn’t make the mess, certainly isn’t going to clean it up either.
Now imagine trusting these same people to collectively manage an entire economy.
We can’t even get everyone to agree that cleaning up their own pee is a personal responsibility, but somehow we’re supposed to believe everyone will become hardworking, responsible, and considerate when we’re sharing the fruits of each other’s labor.
Now, compare your average public restroom to a Buc-ee’s bathroom.
Buc-ee’s figured something out. Clean bathrooms attract customers. Customers spend money. So the company has a financial incentive to keep those bathrooms spotless. They hire people to maintain them, hold employees accountable, and compete for your business.
And people will literally plan their road trips around stopping there.
That’s capitalism. Someone recognized a problem, found a way to solve it, and made money because people valued the result.
Of course, not everyone contributes equally to society. Some people work harder, make better decisions, and take more responsibility. Others seem perfectly content making life more difficult for everyone around them.
I believe people should have the freedom to live however they choose. I also believe in helping people who genuinely need it.
But I have a hard time accepting an economic philosophy that expects me to trust everyone to act in the collective interest when some people can’t be bothered to clean up after themselves.
Buc-ee’s figured out how to get people to willingly pay for a better experience.
Socialism wants me to believe the people leaving paper towels on the floor will suddenly become responsible stewards of everyone else’s resources.
I’m going with the beaver.
You’re correcting me with the exact premise of my original post. Did you read it, or just start typing?
1
17
Yes. Because they have everything. But the clean bathrooms is #1 for me.
Japan is a relatively homogeneous society with deeply ingrained cultural expectations. They have strict immigration laws and expect newcomers to respect Japanese customs. Break immigration laws, and you can be deported. You’re comparing two very different societies.
