Aceticon

Well, it's their community, ain't it?!

If you go into somebody's club, no matter how insane you think it is - say, a Flat Earthers Association, Pizza Is Best With Pineapple Club or some Church or other - and start hanging post-its all over the place criticizing their mad as shit beliefs, they're absolutely entitled to tear them down and kick you out and they'll even have the Moral High Ground doing it since your "right" to loudly be a whiny insulting bitch about somebody else's beliefs doesn't trumpt their right not to have loud whiny bitches insulting them in their space.

Now, if they went after you for your opinions outside of their space, then that's a whole different mater and you would be in the right, but that's not what you're complaining about: you're going into a forum called Late Stage Capitalism to indulge in some "tankie-baiting" and then turn around and whine to the rest of Lemmy about how moderators are such nasty people and shouldn't be allowed to take down your tankie-baiting posts in an anticapitalist forum.

The simplest solution to this specific "problem" is for you to stop going into their space and act like a cunt there because you don't like them. You can even block that forum if it makes you feel bad seeing a post from there in All.

Sorry mate but you just sound like a total wanker trying to find support from the crowd to get away with being a total wanker whenever and wherever you see fit.

The Neoliberals supporting the white colonist state very overtly because of the ethnicity of the people that state claims to represent, have always been as Racist as the Fascists, they just passed themselves as anti-Racist by focusing on telling us that whole races are inherently better and deserving of better treatment than other races, whilst the Fascists tend to focus on telling us bad things about races (though, if you pay attention, the Fascists too claim that those of certain races are inherently better and deserving of better treatment).

The Racism isn't the telling bad things about a race, it's the assumption that all people of a race are the same, equally worthy or unworthy and deserving of different treatment for no reason other than the race they were born in - it's a form of dehumanization of individuals which, if you look more broadly at the suffering the Neoliberals are willing to inflict on billions of people in the Economic field in order to profit from it, is really just one facet of their general Sociopath posture towards the rest of Humanity, complete with deceit, manipulation and gaslighting.

What the Zionist Genocide - a most appalling sociopathic savagery openly committed by those the Neoliberals claim as the representatives of an ethnicity which they deem "good" - and the support of it by the Neoliberals very overtly due to the ethnicity of those committing those acts, have made very clear to everybody else is that the Neoliberal form of Racist is just as extreme as the Fascist one, and being anchored on exactly the same view of people as "etnics" rather than individuals, easily turns into the same kind of Evil: because it's entirely anchored on Prejudicial and Discriminatory views not Logic (even though they disguise their Racism by claiming it's just a logical "helping a group which is a victim of oppression"), when the "representatives" of those they see as "good races" act in even the most Evil of ways the Neoliberals just keep on supporting them far beyond the point to which the argumentation they used in their claims of anti-Racism (such as "helping a group which is a victim of oppression") can stretch.

This is the point at which we are now: their Racism together with the actions of those they see as "representatives" of a "good" race has stretched the Neoliberal "we're really against-Racism" argument so far it uncovered the real dark nature of what lies under it.

And this specific lady who has written this article was part of the people who back then helped bring down Corbyn with a slander campaign accusing him and the party under his leadership of being anti-semitic and pushed for the Labour Party to adopt that definition of anti-semitism which defines criticism of Israel as being a form of anti-semitism.

(And those paying attention might notice how the present day Labour Party, now in the hands of the faction which oppose Corbyn, and which is now in Government, are still sending weapons to Israel)

People like her and The Guardian, now crying crocodile tears, are part of the problem.

I find it hilarious that this opinion piece is in The Guardian given that it's one of the newspapers which most weaponized anti-semitism accusations in their campaign against Jeremy Corbyn when he was leader of the Labour party some years ago, to the point of accusing a Jewish Holocaust Survivor of being an anti-semite (for, as member of a panel in a conference for Palestine, comparing the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis) in order to slander Corbyn by association (as he was in the same panel).

In fact the very same person who wrote this article was part of that very same campaign: here's one of her articles back then slandering as anti-semitic the Labour party when led by Jeremy Corbyn

These sleazy hypocrites' problem isn't the weaponizing of accusations of anti-semitism, it's that the ethno-Fascist populists in Israel aren't doing it in a posh contained way like they would and instead are just firing it out indiscriminately, so the use of accusations of anti-semitism for political ends is losing its potency.

The problem is that what people need in the environment we live in (i.e. Capitalism) is monetisable skills, whilst often College Degrees, whilst teaching people things that are very hard, if not impossible, to learn elsewhere, do not in fact provide people with monetisable skills. A good example would be most Arts Degrees. I was lucky that my natural inclination was towards Science and Engineering and that I had a knack for Programming, but had I gone done the other direction that I had a bit of a knack for - Acting - my life would've been totally different (judging by some acquaintances of mine from that world, it would've been a way way harder life in the financial sense).

As for the hiring people from third world countries, in the case of India (if that's one of the ones you mean), having had several colleagues from there and from talking to them it seems that whilst indeed most people don't even have basic computer literacy (I'm not even sure if being able to read and write is something that a majority of people can do there), there are people that do have access to the same stuff as in Developed Countries (at worst they just pirate it) and even though they're a small fraction of all people, in a country with so many people it still adds to a larger number. Companies abroad aren't hiring the poor countryside illiterate people who can't even speak English (I believe most people in India can't), they're hiring the Middle and Upper Middle class from over there and given the massive, massive inequality there, those did have access to modern computers and software.

Same thing would apply to places like South America - lots of poor people who are totally computer illiterate (often just plain illiterate in the general sense) but a minority did have access to all the same things as in Developed countries - most having maybe not as powerful computers and using mostly pirated software, but still the same stuff.

That said, I totally agree that college degrees shouldn't be required for many positions they are required for nowadays. The degrees there aren't really required because they teach things needed or even useful for those positions, they're required because there's an imbalance of offer vs demand for those jobs (too many candidates, too few jobs) so those hiring just put that requirement there because "we lose nothing from doing it and, who knows, maybe the degree will come in handy at some point" plus they're kind of an easy way to thin the applications.

If the job market was tighter demanding degrees for jobs not requiring them would stop. And, yeah, at least in certain areas the mainstream parties helping out business interests by giving away work visas like confetti is the reason why the job market is not as tight in many areas as it would naturally be.

It's funny because i learned 6 foreign languages, 2 of which to fluent level and another 2 to good level (and the other 2 to "I manage to get away with it" level ;)), and the approach of using of a dictionary to learn the meaning of the words which I tried at first didn't work at all well (it was slower and way more frustrating) and what did work best was just exposing myself to the language (in two different ways for two different languages, one by just consuming media of that language whilst the other by living in a country were people spoke the language) and going along with the flow without worrying about the words I didn't know, so quite a different experience from that.

Anyways, my point isn't that most people can't dig down on things by for example going into Wikipedia or that I wouldn't prefer if they did, it's that most people either don't have the time or the inclination to do so, and expecting them to be different is denying human nature.

In my experience with explaining expert domains to non-experts, you have to try and meet them in the middle, which will pull more people in to try and understand it that merely standing fast on my side of the domain language barrier and demand that the climb that mountain to get to me.

That said, some people will never even try, no matter how much effort you put in making it easy for them, and sometimes it's not even stupidity (which, as something one is born with, it's kinda excusable, IMHO), it's just laziness.

If you've ever tried to read a foreign language book when your knowledge of the language is merely basic and tried to use a dictionary to solve the problem of many words being unknown, you'll know how frustrating that becomes and fast - one actually learns faster at the beginning by just keeping on reading even if not understanding a lot of things.

Further some of the "words" are often not words but acronyms, so not likely to be in a dictionary, plus a lot of domain specific words aren't in general dictionaries either (good luck finding the names of certain chemical chains and their properties in a general dictionary when trying to understand the booklet in a box of medicine).

Last but not least often even the explanations for some words require understanding of some concepts that people do not understand (most people probably know what "analgesic" is, but how many know what "antipyretic" - a not to far away concept given how many common medicines have both - is?).

Things which are supposed to be simple can turn into veritable dives down the rabbit hole to fully understand for those outside that expert domain if they were not simplified for ease of access to the general population, so it's hardly surprising if many people just chose to blindly use something as advised without even trying to understand it (which, let's be honest, it's probably the correct way for most people to used things like for example medicine if the source of the advice is a medical doctor).

Don't get me wrong: people should be more curious and more often trying and figure things out beyond the merely "how to use". At the same time, the information that comes with from expert domains in things targeted at non-experts should be as much as possible reduced to common language (though even that is a balance, since a ton of things required several layers of explanation to fully explain to non-experts).

That's a tiny minority of people and an ultra-specific belief.

I would say that the prevalence of the belief in fairy stories being real (aka Religions, Cults and so on) would be a pretty good indication of just how common and widely spread the Comprehension Handicapped are all over the World.

This is a way broader phenomenon than just the US, though granted the US educational system might skew things a bit in a negative direction versus most other supposedly "Developed" Nations.

IMHO, in general very few people have to really think things through in their life or work and most people can live life in what's pretty much an auto-pilot of habits most of which were picked up in childhood, teen and early adult years, and such people simply don't have any "training" on figuring complex things out by themselves and will have trouble understanding complex subjects.

Further, the instructions for advanced domain stuff (for example Medicine and some kinds of Tech) are often riddled with domain specific language that people without a broader vocabulary won't understand.

In a wall near were I live somebody in the time of peak Covid vaccination tagged a slogan (in a language other than English) that roughly went like "50% or the prickled will die" - so prickled here meaning those who got the Covid vaccine - which might sound like a smart anti-vaxxer slogan until one thinks about how it implies that 50% of those who get the vaccine will never die, or in other words that the Covid vaccine actually gives eternal life to half the takers.

I can't really speak for other areas, but at least in Science and Engineering what a College does that you don't get "in the field" (because it doesn't directly lead to operational results so you don't get the time to learn it) is the foundations for the work you do, so the Mathematics and the "why" certain things work as they work rather than merely the "how" to do it (or at least it did back when I got my degree 3 decades ago).

Mind you, in my experience your "9 out 10 times" point is probably right at least in what I do - Software Development - that kind of knowledge is only useful in a fraction of the work for a fraction of the people, generally the kind of developer who is a "tool maker" rather than just a "tool user" working in things which are stretching the envelope of what can be done and are innovative or unusual technically (so, not "innovative" business models, which are what most of Tech Startups do nowadays), which might actually be an even worse ratio than 1 in 10 for those people vs the general universe in even just Software Development (much less Tech in general).

I supposed that what I'm trying to say is that at least in Tech you're not going to be all that great at doing work which extends the boundaries of what is possible without the kind of foundations a good Science or Engineering degree will give you - hence there is value in such education - but the vast majority of people in even the supposedly expert positions in Tech aren't extending the boundaries of what is possible, not even close.

(In other words, I'm expanding on what you said rather than disagreeing with it)

Yeah, you're right,

I forgot that when I read about it, it was also mentioned they got payment processor fees.

As for the way they handle late fees, the article I read was about the US (somebody posted an article about it here in Lemmy not that long ago) and indeed some other countries limit that sort of thing in general, so it should apply the same to this kind of operation.