this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
1764 points (98.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
9914 readers
3600 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I honestly don't think the problem is that Capitalist's don't understand that concept; they very much do.
They also understand that the money for raising that floor would likely come from taxes on them; and so keeping the floor low means that they can keep even more profit.
It's not a lack of understanding. It's pure unadulterated evil.
The rich capitalists sure, but there are plenty of poor capitalists being fed misinformation, in order to maintain the status quo. And when it is the many vs the powerful few, then the more we have on our side the better
Capitalist generally refers to people who own and control capital, not to fans of the system. One cannot be a poor capitalist, it's a contradiction.
I used to use the term the same way as you, but I think using it the way it's meant is better.
Of course you can be a poor capitalist.
That seems an odd definition to me, to my knowledge all other definitions of ideologies depend only on ones own beliefs or values, not upon ones physical possessions or life situation. What else would you call a poor person who fervently believes that capitalism is the best system for the world? If Bezos suffered some catastrophic business collapse and went broke, would he suddenly no longer be a capitalist?
Edit: also I thought the traditional name for those who own capital is "bourgeoisie"?
Depends, if that collapse meant that he can't live from his ownership of capital anymore, he would not be a capitalist.
I think its more than that, they already have all the money, but wealth is relative so if they can make everyone else twice as poor then their wealth relative to everyone else just doubled.
There are definitely bad actors out there trying to convince people of misconceptions, and I'm sure they have a non-zero amount of success. I recall being told some overly simplifying misconceptions of socialism when I was young.
this is the reason social democracy rarely works in practice.
The reason social democracy doesn't work is because it doesn't change the power structure. It's treating a symptom and not the root cause. By leaving the root cause untouched, the symptoms will always come back.
that's pretty much what happens in my country. without other countries our rich can extract value from, it's still business as usual and purchased/pressured politicians because money is still power.