videos
Breadtube if it didn't suck.
Post videos you genuinely enjoy and want to share, duh. Celebrate the diversity of interests shared by chapochatters by posting a deep dive into Venetian kelp farming, I dunno. Also media criticism, bite-sized versions of left-wing theory, all the stuff you expected. But I am curious about that kelp farming thing now that you mentioned it.
Low effort / spam videos might be removed, especially weeb content.
There is a cytube that you can paste videos into and watch with whoever happens to be around. It's open submission unless there's something important to commandeer it with at the time.
A weekly watch party happens every Saturday (Sunday down under), with video nominations Saturday-Monday, voting Monday-Thursday. See the pin for whatever stage it's currently in.
view the rest of the comments
Let that be a lesson to you.
I was busy man. It's my days off. I have a lot of time to reddit/Lemmy at irregular intervals with work (layovers, waiting for work to show up). But when in home, I'm home. Plus I broke my screen and had to get that fixed today. Such a pain.
Lastly, everyone else either gave links to things to read, which is useful information but not something to debate about until after familiarizing myself with them. Which I did respond to one of those, iirc. Asking about the resulting efficacy of those theories and calculations. No response there as well.
My point is that ideology has no place in economics. Just what works and what doesn't based on results. For example, out current tax structure means heavily on shifting taxation from the wealthy to the low earners. That has fairly consistently failed to produce anything other than market instability and poverty. Same with our lack of education funding. And crumbling infrastructure. All things that economists (who are almost exclusively capitalism leaning) have been screaming would happen since the Regan days. From my limited knowledge, Marx's theories failed to produce the results they promised to produce. Meaning that when calculating the projected ROI (for example) it was unable to predict the outcomes reliably, while other theories were able to predict those outcomes much more consistently.
Anyway cheers.
The fact that you are naive enough to believe that the study of economics can be divorced from 'ideology' is why nobody is taking anything you say seriously. You so clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and yet you are so confident in your answers that it doesn't really seem worth it to most people here to explain it in painstaking detail, since you clearly have done no actual research yourself before spewing your opinions online.
When Marx was writing, economics, or at the time as it was called, the study of political-economy, was not about specifically getting ROI's, a.practice at which even modern 'economics' is shaky at with the best of times (given that they are constantly changing their weighted values). After all, that's less about the study of human political economy, and more the study of statistical outcomes. Hilariously enough, the very fact that you can predict ROI's to even a certain degree is something that Marx would have been alone at the time in predicting would occur in the field, with neo-classical and Austrian school economists claiming since Marx that the market has too many variables to predict accurately, which is why a completely free market is the best statistical judge of people's wants and desires. After all, if you can predict an ROI, then you can accurately forecast demand.
I'll explain it to you like this. You think that your whole bottom tax heavy, lack of educational infrastructure spiel doesn't fit square within Marx's predictions (which was predicted and cautioned against by American Marxists since even before Reagan) of the inevitable outcomes of capitalist political-economy, which means to most people here you are simply not worth the economic investment of time to explain shit to for the outcome we will receive, especially for anonymous online horseshit forum.
Marx's problem is that despite creating an incredibly accurate picture of the political economy of capitalism, he never actually created an outline for what a socialist political economy, or even transitional socialist economy looks like, which means that even people who believe his economic-political structure of capitalism can and will get things incorrect about how to transition away from that model of ownership and production.