These debts are not just held by people who are unemployed. Given around 1 in 5 Americans already self-identify as having a disability, and most disabled people can't get employment, there are a lot of people who aren't even hitting $30k. The trend of increasing disability prevalence will also continue with an aging population, more people contracting long COVID and climate-change and environmentally influenced health problems that come with polluted air/water and extreme weather events.
How is it that the richest people in the world can't afford to live but also can't afford time off work to protest the own government's internal policies? It's a little weird to me that people aren't on the street in the US protesting about slow death from economic inequality, but the Palestine genocide protests have been huge. Granted, the Levantine has a pretty strong cultural tradition and pride around protests.
I honestly don't know. I'm just thinking out loud about why protests only really happen with immediate events and how political movements mobilize. Maybe this is actually a media coverage issue rather than a people motivation issue.
it's a little weird to me that people aren't on the street in the US protesting
You literally say it in the sentence above: we can't afford to. Best case you lose wages. Worst case you get fired, then you have literally no wages and also no health insurance.
That's why I only said it was a little weird. But there have been many populations in the world who have still protested despite the risk to their lives, immediate or otherwise, which is why I can't quite grasp how a slow death is what people are choosing for this specific issue.
It's not a US only problem either, most of the world is willingly going down the same slow death route with roughly equivalent problems, despite better laws around healthcare. This is why I wonder about the psychological aspect of protest and immediacy and what public political pressure needs to look like in today's world.
Because all of these people are not facing true suffering. They know where their next meal is coming from, they got a roof and bombs aren't incoming. We'll put up with anything as long it doesn't involve facing a missed meal, no shelter or no enemy to fight to get the other two.
Ask yourself; If I threw your ass out in the woods, butt naked, what would your priority be? Shelter probably, depending on your environment. Next, food. Starve the staunchest vegan for 72-hours and they'll be scheming on how to trap, kill and eat raw squirrel. LOL, bet a bunch of us would quickly reinvent the bow-and-sting fire starter!
I got 2.5 acres of mostly swamp in NW FL. Rarely freezes too hard, fair bit of forage and game, still, very thin on both counts. I have plenty of small caliber guns, shotguns and camping gear, all on site right now. I'm no Navy SEAL, but I could maybe get by out there? For a minute? (And that's with a load of simple infrastructure and tools in place!)
How about the rest of you? How long until you riot in the streets for lack of food security? Even given my extremely favorable circumstances, I ain't got a 2-weeks until I go full-on nuts. 6-weeks and you're looking like steak.
tl;dr We're collectively fine with being slowly boiled alive, as long as we have a roof and a chicken in the pot.
And it would bear no fruit. Only a true nationwide general strike would do anything, and that's not happening, ever.
That's just propaganda to dissuade local action. There are plenty of unions everywhere getting things done for their members on much smaller scales through local industrial action.
bullshit. most workers cannot unionize, and unions only do so much. The owner class has us and always will.
What would happen if we all stopped paying at the same time?
The entry level salary for a US restaurant worker is $30,000. That number also puts them at around the 50% mark for the globally richest people, when measured by income.
These debts are not just held by people who are unemployed. Given around 1 in 5 Americans already self-identify as having a disability, and most disabled people can't get employment, there are a lot of people who aren't even hitting $30k. The trend of increasing disability prevalence will also continue with an aging population, more people contracting long COVID and climate-change and environmentally influenced health problems that come with polluted air/water and extreme weather events.
How is it that the richest people in the world can't afford to live but also can't afford time off work to protest the own government's internal policies? It's a little weird to me that people aren't on the street in the US protesting about slow death from economic inequality, but the Palestine genocide protests have been huge. Granted, the Levantine has a pretty strong cultural tradition and pride around protests.
I honestly don't know. I'm just thinking out loud about why protests only really happen with immediate events and how political movements mobilize. Maybe this is actually a media coverage issue rather than a people motivation issue.
You literally say it in the sentence above: we can't afford to. Best case you lose wages. Worst case you get fired, then you have literally no wages and also no health insurance.
That's why I only said it was a little weird. But there have been many populations in the world who have still protested despite the risk to their lives, immediate or otherwise, which is why I can't quite grasp how a slow death is what people are choosing for this specific issue.
It's not a US only problem either, most of the world is willingly going down the same slow death route with roughly equivalent problems, despite better laws around healthcare. This is why I wonder about the psychological aspect of protest and immediacy and what public political pressure needs to look like in today's world.
Because all of these people are not facing true suffering. They know where their next meal is coming from, they got a roof and bombs aren't incoming. We'll put up with anything as long it doesn't involve facing a missed meal, no shelter or no enemy to fight to get the other two.
Ask yourself; If I threw your ass out in the woods, butt naked, what would your priority be? Shelter probably, depending on your environment. Next, food. Starve the staunchest vegan for 72-hours and they'll be scheming on how to trap, kill and eat raw squirrel. LOL, bet a bunch of us would quickly reinvent the bow-and-sting fire starter!
I got 2.5 acres of mostly swamp in NW FL. Rarely freezes too hard, fair bit of forage and game, still, very thin on both counts. I have plenty of small caliber guns, shotguns and camping gear, all on site right now. I'm no Navy SEAL, but I could maybe get by out there? For a minute? (And that's with a load of simple infrastructure and tools in place!)
How about the rest of you? How long until you riot in the streets for lack of food security? Even given my extremely favorable circumstances, I ain't got a 2-weeks until I go full-on nuts. 6-weeks and you're looking like steak.
tl;dr We're collectively fine with being slowly boiled alive, as long as we have a roof and a chicken in the pot.
And it would bear no fruit. Only a true nationwide general strike would do anything, and that's not happening, ever.
That's just propaganda to dissuade local action. There are plenty of unions everywhere getting things done for their members on much smaller scales through local industrial action.
bullshit. most workers cannot unionize, and unions only do so much. The owner class has us and always will.
What would happen if we all stopped paying at the same time?
An absolute level is not helpful. That is expected with inflation. What % of gdp?