Ford and GM knew about climate change 50 years ago, lied

[Sanghyeok]

Democracy and capitalism cannot exist side by side. Democracy is more important, therefore capitalism must go.

you're very uninformed.

Compared to some more learned comrades, certainly. I still have a lot of theory reading left.

[Esalia]

Poverty is going down while rampant consumerism literally destroys the planet and will over the coming decades cause unprecedented movements of human populations as people have to flee environmental disasters that we caused. Progress!

Yes thats why things like environmental regulation are important. Capitalism without checks and balances is destructive after all.

At least you admit that capitalism needs some regulation.

[Kowani]

Given the state of the world that really doesn't seem to be the case.

poverty and inequality are being eliminated faster than any other point in human history

Neither of those things are true.

and the average life expectancy has improved dramatically.

That’s the exponential progression of technology, not capitalism.

Capitalism along with Democracy has ushered in an age of rapid improvements to the human condition. Regulating capitalism as well as letting democracy choose who the people want to lead in spite of its shortcomings has been the most effective at self-correcting and empowering the common man above the elites despite what the vocal minority who abuse the system like Ford and GM do.

this is radically false.

Hopefully Ford and GM will get fined, sued so they can financially contribute to the problem they made. Hopefully the people will vote those to power the ones who would carry out their will. Hopefully renewable energies can gain more traction after this.

Wow, I can pick blue corporate puppet or red corporate puppet!

[Sanghyeok]

poverty and inequality are being eliminated faster than any other point in human history

Neither of those things are true.

and the average life expectancy has improved dramatically.

That’s the exponential progression of technology, not capitalism.

Capitalism along with Democracy has ushered in an age of rapid improvements to the human condition. Regulating capitalism as well as letting democracy choose who the people want to lead in spite of its shortcomings has been the most effective at self-correcting and empowering the common man above the elites despite what the vocal minority who abuse the system like Ford and GM do.

this is radically false.

Hopefully Ford and GM will get fined, sued so they can financially contribute to the problem they made. Hopefully the people will vote those to power the ones who would carry out their will. Hopefully renewable energies can gain more traction after this.

Wow, I can pick blue corporate puppet or red corporate puppet!

Unless you're in Bolivia, in which case good job.

[The New California Republic]

Poverty is going down while rampant consumerism literally destroys the planet and will over the coming decades cause unprecedented movements of human populations as people have to flee environmental disasters that we caused. Progress!

Yes thats why things like environmental regulation are important. Capitalism without checks and balances is destructive after all.

Closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

[Nevertopia]

Yes thats why things like environmental regulation are important. Capitalism without checks and balances is destructive after all.

At least you admit that capitalism needs some regulation.

I never said it didnt.

[Esalia]

At least you admit that capitalism needs some regulation.

I never said it didnt.

I never said you said it didn't.

Just quite a lot of the "capitalism is the best system" people I've known are also very strongly anti-regulation, including anti-environmental regulation. A change of pace to have someone admit that regulation is necessary, even if it's a bit of a "too little, too late" situation.

[Nevertopia]

poverty and inequality are being eliminated faster than any other point in human history

Neither of those things are true.

and the average life expectancy has improved dramatically.

That’s the exponential progression of technology, not capitalism.

Capitalism along with Democracy has ushered in an age of rapid improvements to the human condition. Regulating capitalism as well as letting democracy choose who the people want to lead in spite of its shortcomings has been the most effective at self-correcting and empowering the common man above the elites despite what the vocal minority who abuse the system like Ford and GM do.

this is radically false.

Hopefully Ford and GM will get fined, sued so they can financially contribute to the problem they made. Hopefully the people will vote those to power the ones who would carry out their will. Hopefully renewable energies can gain more traction after this.

Wow, I can pick blue corporate puppet or red corporate puppet!

while its not perfect within the entire course of human history there is less poverty now than ever. The life expectancy of newborns are on the rise and a social awareness in poverty reduction as you cited are indeed being enacted. While the argument that your princeton article is sound the other side of their argument is that democracy is the only effective solution to dismantling the elite without bloody revolution or for another dictator to replace the previous one.

[Nevertopia]

I never said it didnt.

I never said you said it didn't.

Just quite a lot of the "capitalism is the best system" people I've known are also very strongly anti-regulation, including anti-environmental regulation. A change of pace to have someone admit that regulation is necessary, even if it's a bit of a "too little, too late" situation.

I agree, if other capitalist were more aware of the issue, people would've understood faster that the free market can sometimes act on its best interests instead of the people that depend on it. In terms of GM and Ford's legacy the damage to climate change has already passed the threshold of being solvable without massive upheaval. We've already had various species go instinct because of the affects of climate change and we have until 2024 before the damage is considered by the scientific community as irreversible. Make no mistake, people have already died due to the affects of climate change. I believe a properly regulated capitalist system will prove beneficial to combating further damage as we walk the path of environmental restoration hopefully within my lifetime.

[Kowani]

while its not perfect within the entire course of human history there is less poverty now than ever.

The irony here is that the greatest reduction of poverty in Human history was in China. Also..a large part of that was because the World Bank changed the definition of “poor.”

The life expectancy of newborns are on the rise and a social awareness in poverty reduction as you cited are indeed being enacted.

Wow. Social awareness. Ignoring for a moment that capitalism requires poverty to work, that’s not actually a rebuttal to my point.

While the argument that your princeton article is sound the other side of their argument is that democracy is the only effective solution to dismantling the elite without bloody revolution or for another dictator to replace the previous one.

...Do you think democracy dismantles the elite or something? I literally just have you an article about how that’s not true at all.
Did you actually read the Princeton study?

[Nevertopia]

The irony here is that the greatest reduction of poverty in Human history was in China. Also..a large part of that was because the World Bank changed the definition of “poor.”

Wow. Social awareness. Ignoring for a moment that capitalism requires poverty to work, that’s not actually a rebuttal to my point.

...Do you think democracy dismantles the elite or something?

No but its proven the best way for proper representation of the common masses.

[Kowani]

...Do you think democracy dismantles the elite or something?

No but its proven the best way for proper representation of the common masses.

The paper I literally just linked to you was about how that was not true.

Allow me to quote the most relevant point:

But the picture changes markedly when all three independent variables are included in the multivariate Model 4 and are tested against each other. The estimated impact of average citizens’ preferences drops precipitously, to a non-significant, near-zero level. Clearly the median citizen or “median voter” at the heart of theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy does not do well when put up against economic elites and organized interest groups. The chief predictions of pure theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy can be decisively rejected. Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all.
By contrast, economic elites are estimated to have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy. This does not mean that theories of Economic-Elite Domination are wholly upheld, since our results indicate that individual elites must share their policy influence with organized interest groups. Still, economic elites stand out as quite influential—more so than any other set of actors studied here—in the making of U.S. public policy.
Similarly, organized interest groups (all taken together, for now) are found to have substantial independent influence on policy. Again, the predictions of pure theories of interest-group pluralism are not wholly upheld, since organized interest groups must share influence with economically-elite individuals. But interest-group align- ments are estimated to have a large, positive, highly significant impact upon public policy.
These results suggest that reality is best captured by mixed theories in which both individual economic elites and organized interest groups (including corporations, largely owned and controlled by wealthy elites) play a substantial part in affecting public policy, but the general public has little or no independent influence.

[Nevertopia]

No but its proven the best way for proper representation of the common masses.

The paper I literally just linked to you was about how that was not true.

Allow me to quote the most relevant point:

But the picture changes markedly when all three independent variables are included in the multivariate Model 4 and are tested against each other. The estimated impact of average citizens’ preferences drops precipitously, to a non-significant, near-zero level. Clearly the median citizen or “median voter” at the heart of theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy does not do well when put up against economic elites and organized interest groups. The chief predictions of pure theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy can be decisively rejected. Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all.
By contrast, economic elites are estimated to have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy. This does not mean that theories of Economic-Elite Domination are wholly upheld, since our results indicate that individual elites must share their policy influence with organized interest groups. Still, economic elites stand out as quite influential—more so than any other set of actors studied here—in the making of U.S. public policy.
Similarly, organized interest groups (all taken together, for now) are found to have substantial independent influence on policy. Again, the predictions of pure theories of interest-group pluralism are not wholly upheld, since organized interest groups must share influence with economically-elite individuals. But interest-group align- ments are estimated to have a large, positive, highly significant impact upon public policy.
These results suggest that reality is best captured by mixed theories in which both individual economic elites and organized interest groups (including corporations, largely owned and controlled by wealthy elites) play a substantial part in affecting public policy, but the general public has little or no independent influence.

yes and its the best system we've currently come up with to empower the common man. I swear its like you dont even read my replies.

[The New California Republic]

...Do you think democracy dismantles the elite or something?

No but its proven the best way for proper representation of the common masses.

Sorry but no. If anything the elite has become more entrenched, not less. It means that the type of shit that Ford and GM pulled is now more likely, not less.

[Plzen]

To quote the late professor Hans Rosling, it is possible for the world to be both bad and better.

The world is ridden with intolerable problems and grave challenges, social, political, and economic, face us today. I do not deny this. But most people today are better off than most people 10 years ago. It is precisely because we have historically shown an amazing capacity to improve the human condition that we can be confident of our ability to solve the problems facing us today, if only we as a civilisation can motivate ourselves to do so.

[Sanghyeok]

...Do you think democracy dismantles the elite or something?

No but its proven the best way for proper representation of the common masses.

Not while capitalism exists alongside it.

[Kowani]

The paper I literally just linked to you was about how that was not true.

Allow me to quote the most relevant point:

But the picture changes markedly when all three independent variables are included in the multivariate Model 4 and are tested against each other. The estimated impact of average citizens’ preferences drops precipitously, to a non-significant, near-zero level. Clearly the median citizen or “median voter” at the heart of theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy does not do well when put up against economic elites and organized interest groups. The chief predictions of pure theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy can be decisively rejected. Not only do ordinary citizens not have uniquely substantial power over policy decisions; they have little or no independent influence on policy at all.
By contrast, economic elites are estimated to have a quite substantial, highly significant, independent impact on policy. This does not mean that theories of Economic-Elite Domination are wholly upheld, since our results indicate that individual elites must share their policy influence with organized interest groups. Still, economic elites stand out as quite influential—more so than any other set of actors studied here—in the making of U.S. public policy.
Similarly, organized interest groups (all taken together, for now) are found to have substantial independent influence on policy. Again, the predictions of pure theories of interest-group pluralism are not wholly upheld, since organized interest groups must share influence with economically-elite individuals. But interest-group align- ments are estimated to have a large, positive, highly significant impact upon public policy.
These results suggest that reality is best captured by mixed theories in which both individual economic elites and organized interest groups (including corporations, largely owned and controlled by wealthy elites) play a substantial part in affecting public policy, but the general public has little or no independent influence.

yes and its the best system we've currently come up with to empower the common man. I swear its like you dont even read my replies.

Mostly because your replies ignore the facts.
I have presented evidence that capitalism has, in fact, not empowered the common man, and you have repeated the same screed about how it does.

[The Emerald Legion]

yes and its the best system we've currently come up with to empower the common man. I swear its like you dont even read my replies.

Mostly because your replies ignore the facts.
I have presented evidence that capitalism has, in fact, not empowered the common man, and you have repeated the same screed about how it does.

No you haven't? Prior to Capitalism the common man was literally a slave to whoever was king. When Communism happened, same deal. You really only have two systems to compare it two. Communism (Say Hello to Stalin and China.) and Feudalism (Say Hello to being killed because your king was ornery that day.)

[Cordel One]

Mostly because your replies ignore the facts.
I have presented evidence that capitalism has, in fact, not empowered the common man, and you have repeated the same screed about how it does.

No you haven't? Prior to Capitalism the common man was literally a slave to whoever was king. When Communism happened, same deal. You really only have two systems to compare it two. Communism (Say Hello to Stalin and China.) and Feudalism (Say Hello to being killed because your king was ornery that day.)

Feudalism, monarchy, and communism (that being said, it's very evident you don't know what communism is) were not the only systems out there, and democracy is much older than capitalism. It's even older than Athens.

[Sanghyeok]

Mostly because your replies ignore the facts.
I have presented evidence that capitalism has, in fact, not empowered the common man, and you have repeated the same screed about how it does.

No you haven't? Prior to Capitalism the common man was literally a slave to whoever was king. When Communism happened, same deal. You really only have two systems to compare it two. Communism (Say Hello to Stalin and China.) and Feudalism (Say Hello to being killed because your king was ornery that day.)

I don't think you quite understand what communism is.

[Cultural Posadism]

No you haven't? Prior to Capitalism the common man was literally a slave to whoever was king. When Communism happened, same deal. You really only have two systems to compare it two. Communism (Say Hello to Stalin and China.) and Feudalism (Say Hello to being killed because your king was ornery that day.)

I don't think you quite understand what communism is.

Emerald Legion doesn't understand a lot of things. But by Jove, he won't ever let that stop him from pontificating!

[Victorious Decepticons]

What is more important to you: an iPhone, or the ability to breathe?

Either-or is not acceptable, and shall not be accepted.

I'm having my iPhone Android. That much is non-negotiable. Better figure out a way to make it non-polluting without compromising its functionality or ease of acquisition, because me and other phone users are not giving up our devices. Ever. The same goes for all other inventions that make us modern instead of cave people.

As for the breathing? It's not a problem. Move out of overcrowded smog zones and into the rural. I'm not going to sacrifice my quality of life because some people foolishly choose to live in polluted anthills like L.A. Their air quality problems would go away if their residents didn't insist on living on top of each other and condensing their emissions into a toxic soup.

[Sanghyeok]

What is more important to you: an iPhone, or the ability to breathe?

Either-or is not acceptable, and shall not be accepted.

I'm having my iPhone Android. That much is non-negotiable. Better figure out a way to make it non-polluting without compromising its functionality or ease of acquisition, because me and other phone users are not giving up our devices. Ever. The same goes for all other inventions that make us modern instead of cave people.

As for the breathing? It's not a problem. Move out of overcrowded smog zones and into the rural. I'm not going to sacrifice my quality of life because some people foolishly choose to live in polluted anthills like L.A. Their air quality problems would go away if their residents didn't insist on living on top of each other and condensing their emissions into a toxic soup.

A lot of people don't have the privilege to just 'pack up and leave', you know.

[Arlenton]

I don't blame them.

[Cordel One]

I don't blame them.

You should.