• jUzzo6 [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    Also, do you see how in a moment slightly socdem policies could be implemented, rich dems immediately betray their party for class warfare? And they have gall to ask left for “unity”

  • glimmer_twin [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    The response to a milquetoast social democrat not even being elected but winning a primary(!) shows that if there was ever any serious risk of a socialist revolution in America, they would nuke themselves to death rather than let it happen

    • DragonBallZinn [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      “Better dead than red” isn’t just to them a condemnation of socialism, it’s a promise.

      Like they would rather die than not be whacked with the imperial boomerang. Questioning porky to them is akin to insulting God.

  • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    His feed has been exactly as racist and big mad as you’d expect. My favourite unhinged tweet by him (well, retweet) is the following that says the presence of some government owned grocery stores will immediately lead to mass civil unrest and starvation:

    Naturally they’re prepping some sort of legal shenanigans and a spoiler candidate:

    • “It turns out we can void this election due to an 1802 city ordinance that declares ‘No darkly’d skinned men shall allow’d to be mayer.’ To date, the ordinance has only been enforced 87 times in the history of Da Greatest City in Da World.”

    • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s sort of an example of the fetishism of commodities, assuming that those private grocery stores are the reason food is available at all. Dawg, there’s still the government stores and the local vendors who were selling to the private stores who now can only really sell to the state, in this catastrophization. You are literally just making an argument that government stores are at least marginally better in this case.

      • CarbonConscious [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        Yeah it would be a real shame if some dastardly, evil people were to buy desirable foodstuffs from government subsidized sources, and then turn around and mark those prices up to make a huge profit by selling them to people without that same access…

        I mean, those people might even jack up prices 300% due to some Crisis™, and then bring them back down to only 250% when it’s resolved. Can you imagine the gouging if private actors were just completely able to do that with no oversight or regulation??

        And even worse, as we often see in these unregulated markets, eventually some of the actors get together and collude on pricing, and they all go up at exactly the same time! And then there would be no way for the regular people that don’t have any other options to be able to continue to afford that food!

        They might even get together as some kind of gang and forcibly buy out the other players in the market, further consolidating their wholesale access, pricing, and regional availability! Like some kind of, idk one-sided polar market capture. Wish there was a word for that, because it really does sound like it would be terrible.

      • 0__0 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s funny because if anything, this would benefit the industrial capitalist greatly. The merchant doesn’t get to sink his teeth into his rate of profit nearly as much, whilst the industrialist is able to realize more of his commodities.

    • Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      So…stores will sell things cheaply and affordably, and this will somehow lead to people stealing more stuff, not less?

      These are the failsons and faildaughters in charge of everything in the west. This is why everything is going to shit, their parents and grandparents understood that the working class needed concessions and distractions, but this generation is pure kool-aid drinker. These guys literally don’t even understand the basics of the economic system that they are in charge of.

  • Wheaties [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    this is like when an international business locks the doors and leaves the country in response to local unions forming

    and they always seem surprised that the people who’ve been working the factory floor for years are able to restart the machines without managerial oversight

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Ok close them then? The city can buy the empty property and use it for exactly the same thing. You’ve already done the work of determining the most profitable locations for stores which is really useful. The city can use the profit turned on these ideal locations to operate stores in areas you would usually not bother with because the profit isn’t there.

      • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s a one time expense that isn’t even that huge in order to meaningfully shift at least a facet of the relations of production. Expropriation is cool but it’s not worth it here if you can afford to buy the plots.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Path of least resistance. They will launch dozens of court cases about it if you try and seize it for a socialist and their socialist plans, not to mention some of those cases will go in front of judges hostile to socialists and set precedents we don’t want.

        Yeah I know libs have seized stuff before but they’ll do it purely because it’s a socialist doing it for socialist plans.

  • Rom [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Oh no, what would this mayoral candidate who promised to create city-owned grocery stores do with a bunch of empty grocery stores in the middle of the city?