• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        68
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        After 9/11 the airline industry was in shambles, no one wanted to fly

        Stocks plummeted, regular people sold as fast as they could.

        Billionaires bought it at the bottom, because they had already started lobbying for the bailout. They got big checks, stock recovered, they made crazy money.

        But it wasn’t enough, they instituted these “temporary fees” to pay for what they lobbied for to make Americans feel safe enough: security theater.

        20+ years later we’re all still paying money in taxes for this, even if we’ve never set foot on a plane. And the airlines use it to justify getting their own slice.

        Like, you realize tax money pays for it already anyways, right? We’re all paying the security billfor private billion dollar corporations, and because we have no other options, they still have the balls to charge customers for it.

        That’s just how it is in capitalism, when ethics aren’t mandated any organization that forgoes ethics for profits will do better than others and eventually absorb or replace them.

        Cyberpunk dystopia isn’t a possible future, it’s the inevitable result of unregulated capitalism

        • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          4 months ago

          None of that makes it capitalism, which is an economic system where private companies own everything. A company charging fees isn’t capitalism.

          Using capitalism to describe every negative thing a company does is no different than the other side calling every social policy communist.

          Capitalism is bad, but use the term correctly.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            28
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            This is like saying a person isn’t a murderer for just pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger…

            Because all that does is put a bullet where they aimed the gun

            • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              You clearly need to know the difference so let me help you:

              Something bad happens: It is the fault of socialism

              Something bad happens because of a company: Clearly the company is just looking out for its best interests and even if it’s at fault it’s unspeakable to blame the system for the actions of one bad company on the system that incentivizes companies to do that. Have you considered people are lazy?

              I hope that helped.

              • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                Ah you’re right, why hold individuals accountable when we can just blame the system and absolve them of responsibility

                • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Neither of those are mutually exclusive. You can and should do both.

                  Personally responsibility should be enforced.

                  But a system that not only encourages but rewards that behavior should be dismantled/changed/attacked.