Message from @Timo)))
Discord ID: 333749372422586369
that also does not include underemployment, wage growth not actually growing (it hasn't for the last, what? 40-50 years?)
@Deleted User There is the U-6 which counts anyone who is unemployed, those seeking and not seeking job.
It is at 8%, which is fairly low for the broad scope of the measure
wages have not grown with either inflation or with productivity
because the ability to negotiate wages lies solely in the hands of the employer
as an individual worker, you have no actual power
Wage Growth in the United States averaged 6.26 percent from 1960 until 2017
You can literally get more power by becoming a better worker
fuck work
Some people won't do well, that's a given
yeah, you want to know something?
But in trying to make their work guaranteed you lower productivity, increase cost
there was more social mobility in the fucking medieval ages than today
want to get more power as a worker?
you don't
want to get richer? you won't
How was the mobility in the socialist countries?
as a whole, it's impossible
there wasn't mobility because that wasn't the god damn fucking point
it was to get rid of classes, you incipient moron
So no one moves up?\
every other system, basically
Do you understand humans at all?
capitalism has very little mobility
what the fuck is up?
more so than in any alternative
People want to compete and want the prospect of being able to have it better
The inflation average of US has been 3.81% since 1960, while wage growth remained at 6.26%. Therefore, real wages increased by roughly 2.50% yearly. Calling it as stagnant, as well as the increasing payroll jobs (no negative balance since 2009 crisis) as bad is just straight ignorance. @Deleted User
That's how humans are
Again, show me a system that promotes hard work better than capitalism
In fact, it's worth noting that economic liberalism as a whole promoted prosperity on places like US (until 1913), Brazil (until the end of the Empire), Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Macau and others.
for sure, I like Chile as an example
Much better economy than other south american countries
and why would they do better than a Brazil who has vast resources
Chile isn't a prime example of liberalism (widespread cronyism on AFPs) but yes indeed
It was under the pinochet rule
I live in Brazil and I'll assure you that the lack of economic liberalism failed us
Milton Friedman was involved in that economy
Brazil has had liberal governments supported by the U.S. before