TheRealGChu

Late reply, sorry. I’ve got a couple Snyder Spindles, I think. Bought them off Etsy.

Handspinning. I do a lot of fiber crafts.

I think it should be on a case-by-case basis. I’m in the legal field, and there’s definitely days I don’t need to be in the office as almost all of our work is online now. State and federal mandatory efiling, e-discovery is online, and even our document management system is headed to the cloud, so no need for remoting in, just log into Microsoft 365 from any browser. Don’t even need to own any Microsoft apps natively anymore.

On the other hand, there are days that I do need to be in the office: depositions and prepping witnesses, trial preparedness, and sometimes, you just need to touch base with everyone to see how things are going. I work in securities litigation, and those are frequently very complex, document and fact intensive cases.

We have a entire practices that are 100% remote now. The partners are either elderly, or they live far away from the office and were hybrid remote before the pandemic. The paralegal that works with those attorneys is also 100% remote.

Lastly, I am much more productive at home than in the office. I do not have ADHD, and do not have a problem with attention, and do not get distracted easily. On the other hand, I’m an introvert, and really loathe the interpersonal nonsense and constant interruptions of ppl barging into my office, more often enough that just to chat. Last month, I had to do a major document review of going through 10s of thousands of emails, and to just plow through that at home, comfy in my bed, where my bathroom is just a few steps away, made me so much more productive than being stuck in the office.

Btw the 1929 great crash was facilitate and exacerbated by lax Federal Reserve control of money issuance and the drastic tightening after the crash. This is actually an argument against centralized money.

I’d suggest you look up the Panics of the 19th century.

Well a joint stock company also does that. It engages in production. It does redistribute wealth. For a long time, public services e.g. firefighting, were provided by private entities. Is it socialism? I don’t think so. It has to involve coercion, say, via monopoly of violence to be socialism as it is a form of governing.

You obviously don’t understand what socialism means. Socialism, by its definition, means involving government, be it local or federal. So, a private company is not socialism, a private fire fighting brigade is not socialism.

I’m an immigrant that has worked extensively in the legal community with immigrants. I’m more than aware of what other regimes are like.

That being said, what I’d like to see is more nuance. There’s this bizarre belief, and I’m not sure if it’s age or lack of education, that says that only pure capitalism or pure socialism is BEST. When, in actuality, I don’t think a healthy society can exist without the other. Pure capitalism will eat itself without the checks socialism brings; whereas pure socialism will reify itself into inertia without the incentives capitalism brings. The trick, of course, is finding a balance.

Unless you’re an insane person like Maggot Trash-Garbage, I don’t think anyone thinks the FDIC is bad, or government funding for new antibiotics, or NASA, or necessary municipal utilities like sewage systems or fire fighters. All of that stuff is socialism, and they work great along side capitalism. I also don’t think the average person thinks breaking up monopolies is bad. Anti-trust laws and legislation are also socialism, remember.

So are you saying, after the New Deal, the US was/is no longer practicing capitalism? I am afraid I have to disagree.

What? Do you have only a black/white mentality? Of course not. We have a mixed system, as does almost the rest of the world that isn’t a dictatorship. Capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive; in fact, there’s a compelling argument that one really can’t exist without the other.

Yes the government funded them with public money, public money paid by the taxpayers.

Yes, that’s called socialism. The government levies taxes from its people, then the government redistributes the wealth, that’s the very definition of socialism.

That is why renaissance and enlightenment is such a big deal in history.>

Umm…capitalism didn’t exist in the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations wasn’t published until 1776. Most of Europe was still feudal during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. England is the exception, but England was always the exception. So, I’m not sure what you’re talking about. The Royal Society, for which Newton, Hooke, Halley, etc., were all members of, was funded by the Crown, hence the name, “Royal Society”. The European savants all had royal patrons, like Leibniz, Brahe, and Huygens, that funded their livelihoods.

For note, I am a published historian by education that specialized in Tudor England.

What a simplistic, solipsistic, history-blind take! Do you have no knowledge of the 19th century? Arguably, before the Civil War was the prime time of truly “free markets” and pure capitalism in the US. It was also a time of drastic wealth inequality, exploitation of anyone that wasn’t a white, male landowner, to say nothing of slavery. How many thousands died creating the railroads in the US? All of those millionaires like Carnegie, JP Morgan, Vanderbilt, Rockerfeller, all made their money on the backs and deaths of poor people.

Prior to FDR and the New Deal, we’d have Panics, where there’d be massive bank failures about every 20-30 years because of unfettered capitalism. And, just like the Great Recession, the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. It was the New Deal and the FDIC that stopped the cycle.

Workers rights are antithetical to capitalism. Triangles Shirtwaist Factory Fire, children in the coal mines in Appalachia, coolie labor building the railroads.

We are not “wealthier, healthier, and happier” because of capitalism. It was the New Deal that helped shape the world the US has now, for which conservativism has been chipping away since Nixon. Socialistic practices like labor unions, collective bargaining, etc., brought wealth and stability, and created the massive middle-class that we have now. There had been no real middle-class before that, historically, just the rich and the poor. FDIC stopped the Panics; labor unions and collective bargaining brought wealth and education the working class, thus elevating and creating the massive middle-class we have now. Prior to the Great Depression, life was pretty awful and hard if you weren’t rich in the US.

I’m not shitting on capitalism, but it needs the limitations that socialism brings to keep it in check, to keep it accountable, and not run roughshod over minorities, women, and children.

Also, scientific advancements actually came a lot from war, sad to say. The exponential growth of computers, GPS, obviously nuclear technology, a lot of medicine and medical procedures (thanks MASH units in Korea!) all came out of war. As for later 20th century advancements? All funded by the government. I’d suggest reading Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s book, Accessory to War.

Have you not played Bioshock?

Anyway, any extreme “ism” is inherently unstable without the other side balancing itself. That’s cos humans are greedy, selfish fucks. The free market doesn’t work because humans are greedy, selfish fucks. Pure capitalism will eventually eat itself. On the flip side, pure socialism doesn’t work cos humans are greedy, selfish fucks. Pure socialism will eventually reify itself into complete inertia. Capitalism needs the inherent brakes that socialism provides; while socialism needs to incentives capitalism provides. Pure capitalism causes massive boom/bust cycles. Before the Great Depression, there were the Panics that happened about ever 20-30 years, where, similarly to the Great Recession, banks would overleverage themselves, and go bust. What ended up stopping those kind of panics were the socialistic programs of FDR and the New Deal.

Free markets only work when they’re actually free, that means no monopolies. We’re in an extreme stage of capitalism right now with monopolizes all over the place. There is no free market. Ppl like to say “late stage capitalism” but it’s more more similar to the laissez faire capitalism of the robber-barons of the late 19th century. Monopolies everywhere, wealth concentrated in the <1%, etc. Profits at any cost, including human life. Extreme capitalism is also tied into conservativism. This results in “rules for thee, not for me” circumstances. In other words, capitalists and conservatives believe laws should protect them but not bind them; while poor ppl, minorities and women should have laws binding them, but not protect them. This, of course, leads to massive social inequities and social unrest.

For more context, read the the Wikipedia articles on the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire, child labor in the Appalachian mines and how many children died from it, the Pinochet regime, etc. And, more recently, the actions at Amazon by not letting their employees evacuate or shelter from the horrific tornadoes that ripped through IL and collapsed a warehouse where 6 employees were killed (Amazon is being sued for it). The maquilladores in northern Mexico (thanks NAFTA!), child slavery in South and SE Asia (don’t buy Nike), and the general destruction of the environment. Hope you’re enjoying your heatwave!

I’m a Minnesotan. We know HHH (though, it prolly helped that a stadium was also named after him =P).

HHH/Mondale/Wellstone. Wellstone died too young.

Depends on what you mean by “background”. I’m an ex-lawyer (practiced for a couple years, but hated it, doing other law-related things), but I’m an old school geek that was using the internet in the late 80s, building my own boxes in the 90s, etc. I’m also a woman.

I like the fediverse because it reminds me of the free-wheeling, anarchical days of the interbutts in the early 90s with IRC (EFnet only, mind), usenet, etc., before Endless September.

Sweet. Loved that sub. Now I can join again.