Most any graph about human well-being and capitalism well and truly goes to hell about the time Reagan and Thatcher get their grubby hands on power, but while you're looking at it, an economist will be right along to tell you that if we really have a go at trickle-down economics this time it'll be wine and roses forever for everyone.
1 Boost
0 Likes
Being an asshole to most people is more expensive than trying to build fully automated luxury gay space communism and I'm tired of bawbags in suits saying otherwise.
Absolutely last on my list of grievances is the fact that rich people are dull and boring and they can't even be bothered to build supervillain lairs. I bet their bunkers are beige inside, with not a piranha tank to be seen.
Once someone is rich enough, money becomes an abstract genital measuring system for the most unrepentant boring assholes.
What is very real is that a lack of investment in third spaces because of right-wing propaganda means there are no GODSDAMNED BENCHES where you need them.
Spend whatever it takes to house everyone so we can have GODSDAMNED BENCHES.
What has been studied, and with relatively simple maths involved, shows consistent humanitarian and economic benefits:
Investments in education and housing return between 5-12 times the initial budget back to the economy (GI Bill).
Universal basic income works. People still work. They start businesses. Or they engage in hobbies that build community (multiple pilot studies).
The solution for a lack of housing is giving people homes. This is less expensive than all the ER visits and policing involved in having people without housing around (one notable study, among others, in Finland).
Most medical research is publicly funded. Getting rid of pharmaceutical company profits does not harm medical research, it just returns benefits to the people who actually paid for it.
People who get welfare payments spend that money locally, providing more economic benefit to the community than a billionaire stashing profits in the Cayman Islands.