1258
It's true. (lemmy.world)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 84 points 1 year ago

I'm old enough to remember the Reagan years. They absolutely sucked. I also voted for and was happy with Clinton. That said, in hind sight, Reagan set the house on fire, but the deregulation during the Clinton years threw a barrel of napalm into it to help it along. 1980-2000 is when we destroyed it all.

[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 23 points 1 year ago

If Gore had won the presidency, things would have turned out very differently. And let's not forget that things worked out quite well for a while under Clinton.

[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Same with Reagan (for some). When you rip out the brakes you get to go fast, which is great, until you need to turn or avoid a brick wall.

The positive effects of deregulation are instantaneous, which is great for the current administration. The shit hitting the fan takes its time, which is bad for later administrations.

EDIT: Gore did win. Never forget that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Things only worked out well for those not paying attention. Clinton was horrible

[-] Illuminostro@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Well, that's because Clinton and every Democratic President since has been an Eisenhower Republican. Hilary campaigned for Barry Fuckin' Goldwater.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/126630

[-] MoodyRaincloud@feddit.nl 8 points 1 year ago

The Clintons also laid the groundwork for scaling up the prison population to boost slave labour and poors suppression.

Something the republicans gladly inherited.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not old enough to have voted, but I remember the last few of the Reagan years, when his dementia was just as obvious as McConnell's or Feinsten's.

Wilson started it, Roosevelt and Eisenhower propped it up, inadvertently or not, Nixon continued it, and Reagan paved the way for the shit we see today.

[-] rockandsock@lemm.ee 55 points 1 year ago

Let's not forget to give Nixon his due, and the evil bastards that made Citizens United a law.

[-] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago

And Jude Wanniski, author of The Two Santa Claus Theory, which has become the backbone of Republican stupidity ever since.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Don't get me wrong, absolutely fuck Reagan and lady Reagan (Thatcher), but to ignore the framework that preceded them and enabled them to do what they did is being wilfully ignorant and is counter productive.

Yeah, they fucked society up in their unique and terrible ways, but they are absolutely not the cause of our problems, just another symptom.

The cause is capitalism (and before that, feudalism) and the varied systemic oppression and exploitation it relies on to exist.

It is a tangible cause we can and should fight against, not a ghost to pointlessly shake a fist at for a quick dopamine hit.

[-] lugal@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago

Reagan and Thatcher introduced neoliberalism into their respective countries. If you were right, it would have been pointless to vote for a center left party in the next election because they wouldn't abolish it. But when the Democrats/Labour came into power, first thing was to undo all the shit and abolish neoliberalism, right? Right?

John the Duncan made a good video about how the center left parties legitimized and normalized neoliberalism in the next legislative period. If you want me to, I can see if I find this video.

[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Democrats/Labour came into power, first thing was to undo all the shit and abolish neoliberalism, right? Right?

Right! If Reagan and Thatcher made neoliberalism law, then Clinton and Blair made it doctrine.

[-] biddy@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago

In New Zealand, neoliberalisim was introduced by the center left Labour party.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I would like to watch said video please

[-] lugal@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Give me a day or two to find it. If I forget, remind me 😉

It's not that he did only one video on neoliberalism, it's one of his favorite topics.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, they fucked society up in their unique and terrible ways, but they are absolutely not the cause of our problems, just another symptom.

It may be simplistic to focus blame on some individual antagonist, but the one named is probably the one whose choices carried the greatest weight toward achieving the current condition of disaster.

At any rate, as a champion of individual responsibility, he would happily accept, no doubt, his own.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It may be simplistic to focus blame on some individual antagonist, but the one named is probably the one whose choices carried the greatest weight toward achieving the current condition of disaster.

no, but feel free to continue focusing on a symptom rather than on the problem, and

At any rate, as a champion of individual responsibility, he would happily accept, no doubt, his own.

Lmfao, absolutely never happen

[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

feel free to continue focusing on a symptom rather than on the problem

I think you are extrapolatng, and not interpreting my response in context.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 31 points 1 year ago

And let's not forget Rupert fucking Murdoch.

[-] SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

Rupert Murdoch wouldn’t have been a thing if Reagan hadn’t ended the fairness doctrine. Rupert Murdoch is Reagan’s fault.

[-] K1nsey6@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Bill Clinton gave us Murdoch with his telecom act. Before Clinton, Murdoch wouldn't have been able to own Fox News in the US because foreign nationals couldn't own US news providers

[-] Kage520@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Woah. Never knew that was illegal before. We need that law back.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Grayox@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago

That's the biggest problem with a social democracy, it just takes one bad faith actor supported by Capital owners to completely derail the system of social safety nets that were built with good faith over almost 200 years...

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Good faith is a bit of a weird way to say exploitation, slavery, genocide and war in the global south

[-] Grayox@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago

I was more referring to good faith governance (govermeny working for its citizens best interests and not corporations), not saying that social democracy aren't fueled by those sources. But fuxk me for not writing an essay decrying every crime of social democracy's lmao my bad.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It seems that what you mean is social democracy broadly fails to meet the needs of the working class because it binds our fate to the exercise of ruling power.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nulluser@programming.dev 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I had no idea Reagan was responsible for people not knowing how to use capital letters.

Edit: Reagan was, apparently, also responsible for people misspelling Reagan. 🫣

[-] negativenull@lemm.ee 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The War on Education started with Reagan! It tracks

[-] phorq@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

yeAh capItal leTters aRe liKe caPital ciTies, thEy beLong nEar tHe cenTer.

[-] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

United States of America has left the chat.

[-] Rinox@feddit.it 15 points 1 year ago

You gotta wait for the capitals to trickle down

[-] lugal@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago
[-] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

tHis buT uNironIcally

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 15 points 1 year ago

There are pretty substantial ghouls that preceded Reaganomics: chartered monopolies, anonymous transferable shares of companies (thinking Dutch East India Company here), prohibition of local currencies, central banking, labor theory of property

And that succeeded Reaganomics: Chokepoint capitalism, evergreen IP, the gig economy

Yes, in a proximate sense, specifically in the US, Reagan broke a lot of dams that were holding back the most calamitous floods that were poised to drown us... but he didn't fill them with water in the first place.

[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

yeah I was going to say not to forget nixon but reagan was really a turning point but so is trump now. pre/post wise I feel trump is worse but that just might be the bias of how adjacent it is currently.

[-] kingludd@lemmy.basedcount.com 15 points 1 year ago

The bailout system we have now, starting in 2008, is way worse than any reaganomics. Now we just hand them cash and don't even expect it to trickle down.

[-] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bitcoin was created in response to this, it's even written in the first Bitcoin block ever minted "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks". The US government printed nearly a trillion dollars to bail out the banks, governments worldwide did the same as the economic crisis unfolded. People lost their jobs, their savings, all of us had our currency devalued by the massive (but necessary) money printing to stave off a total financial collapse. And the CEOs of those failed banks had the audacity to give themselves lavish bonuses with that money. It was a massive wealth redistribution. And not a single one went to prison for it. 99% of us were forced to foot the bill for the reckless actions of a vanishingly small but ridiculously wealthy and powerful portion of the population.

And unfortunately, we have had to do this again and again because of a crucial flaw in modern banking: if banks loan out money, and everybody is all loaning to each other, there will be an economic shock that comes along that causes a bank run. When that happens in an interconnected, global economy, you can't have a big bank fail, because all the other banks will fail too, and the entire financial system will outright collapse, just like it did during the great depression. The guy who realized this is ben bernacki, he won a nobel prize in economics for pointing out that much of the harm from the depression came not from the market panic but from the failure of the banking system and faith in it afterwards. You don't know his name, but you would recognize his face, he is the one that sold the bailouts to congress and the world. But he does not have a solution to this problem aside from bailouts. Constant wealth distribution trickling up to those who are already the most wealthy and powerful in the system.

Satoshi saw this and knew there was a better way, so he created a new currency system in which no one person or organization could ever have the power to just turn on the money printer like that ever again. Because the temptation is just too strong. Every empire or nation that has ever failed ended with a period of hyperinflation caused by the massive increase in the money supply. Both sides in the US civil war did it, Zimbabwe did it, Nazi Germany did it, the USSR did it, Venezuela did it, the Roman Empire did it. Every country that is at war and runs out of money to fund the war does it.We need a system which does not rely on human choices being the difference between a sound money supply and a useless one. That is what Bitcoin is. It has a fixed supply. And the only person who can spend that BTC is the one with the keys: you. And it can be accessed by anybody in any country in any economic situation so long as they have a computer or phone and internet access.

Edit: Got Bernacki's name wrong

[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Unfortunately, since apolitical money is not meaningful as a concept, any viable solution to ineffectual political processes must entail repairing if not reconstituting such processes within the political frame.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Underwaterbob@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago

I'm partial to blaming European colonialism myself.

I blame the wrong side winning at Thermopylae.

[-] MargotRobbie@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Ronald Reagan is proof that most actors should not become politicians.

You get too good at pretending to be somebody you're not when it is your actual day job.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Nivekd@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Does anyone have any book/article recommendations if I'm unfamiliar with this topic, but may want to start down this rabbit hole?

[-] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

More than emphasizing the figure of Reagan, I suggest learning about neoliberalism overall, and its emergence as the global order.

Frankly, Reagan was just a simpleton in a suit, by my estimation.

Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman are the more relevant figures historically.

[-] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I'm not familiar with books on Reagan but if you want a great book on how the right wing billionaires manipulate things with money I suggest Dark Money by Jane Meyer. It's in the same vein and dark money is a highly interesting topic.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BilboBargains@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The best thing he did was marry the Throat GOAT.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
1258 points (96.3% liked)

Antiwork

8282 readers
5 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS