wonderingwanderer

I mean yeah, if you have the investment know-how and the time to dedicate to that, you can use a self-managed retirement fund and potentially do better than you would with a 401k. But not everyone has the time or expertise to do that.

I don’t know if there are retirement accounts that solely invest in certified B-corps or with minimum ESG standards, but if so that might be an option. Those just tend not to grow as aggressively so people tend to overlook them.

I’d rather just buy the GPUs second-hand after the companies fail and have to liquidate…

I always thought it was stupid to entrust one’s retirement to a 401k, when the very basis of the economy is cracking at the seams and will eventually crumble to the ground. It’s building your future on a pillar of sand.

Of course, people rely on their 401ks as a retirement plan because the system is built around forcing that as their only option.

On the bright side, once it all crumbles and there’s nothing left for us peasants, while the executives make away on their golden parachutes, people will no longer have a reason not to tear the system down. Right now the reason it’s so hard to convince people to replace the system is because “What will that do to my 401k?”

Like, dude, you won’t need a 401k if we can successfully replace the system. That will take time though, of course. And whoever is at retirement age during the transition may be screwed for a while until we can get the new system in place.

That’s why people who want to tear the system down immediately and think about what comes next after (or not at all), while shaming people for not being onboard with that, are thoroughly deluded.

I’ve always viewed economics as a pseudo-science.

There might be some ways to apply the scientific method to economic systems, but even if so it would be a soft science at best.

But that’s not even what’s happening in conventional economic theory, and they try to treat it like a hard science.

Sometimes “we haven’t lost yet” is better than “we’ve already lost.”

As you should.

Even if they don’t promise to abolish the police, “Defund ICE” should be a winning proposal.

Yeah, one of these things is not like the other.

If you’re only punk for the aesthetic, you’re not punk. Sorry not sorry.

Rebelling against the counterculture is so punk²

… we should call them “punk squares.”

so-called risk transfers to reduce exposure to big borrowers and free up capacity for more lending.

That sounds like it should be highly illegal.

“Hey, we know this crash is coming, and we’re going to leave you with the bill for it even though we profited enormously off of the bubble economy which directly resulted in the inevitable crash. And while we wait for that crash to happen, we’re going to continue milking that bubble for the last few scraps of profit that we can squeeze out of it, which we will also leave you with the bill for when it finally crashes.”

Yeah, Lenin seized power by having all the soviets assassinated by bolsheviks after he lost an election to them. Then the USSR descended into widespread famine, surveillance, and state-sponsored massacres.

It’s wild how many people still swear by marxist-leninism, as if “just try it one more time, this time it’ll work, I swear!” Or even wilder “actually, widespread famine, surveillance, and monopolized violence in the USSR was good!”

And then they just smugly tell you to “read theory” because they assume you haven’t already, because they can’t imagine anyone would actually read it and think critically about it, since they sure as hell didn’t…

Try telling that to Alex Pretti and Renee Good.

Sorry, it’s hard not to be fatalistic when you’re living in the United States right now. Believe me, I would love to live anywhere else.

And what are those people going to pay them with after everyone loses their jobs and small businesses are pushed out of the market taken over by corporate capture?

“Because once upon a time, there were many trees. There were so many trees that they filled the atmosphere with oxygen. Since trees need carbon dioxide to breathe, and there wasn’t enough of it, many trees died. These trees got buried over time and became fossil fuels.”

“Soo… what you’re saying is, oxygen in the atmosphere is bad? And if we kill more trees there will be more fossil fuels?”

🤦‍♀️

Guys, I found Elon’s lemmy account

Okay, that’s great for everyone outside the US who aren’t going to be losing their jobs to AI.

Not sure if that’s much of a consolation to the literally millions of people in the US who are losing their jobs, or unable to even enter into the workforce.

I wonder what country’s workforce the MIT expert was talking about when he warned or AI replacing jobs.

You’re right though, they’re not replacing nurses with AI. They’re just eliminating the positions, forcing those who are left to pick up the extra work, and closing rural hospitals.

1. Social worker

2. Psychotherapist

3. Teacher

4. Nurse

5. Lawyer

Bonus: Diplomat

There are a lot jobs that a computer simply cannot do, because they are not humans.

Yes.

Until we have a robot that can mimic a human those jobs are safe.

No.

You’re assuming corporations will wait until the robots are capable of replacing humans before replacing the humans with robots.

Ah, just as the hardware shortage reaches a plateau!