The complaints of inflation are insane.

[Lexicus]

Yes, I realized after posting that middlemen could mean any number of things, not necessarily middle management.

I've read on BS jobs, naturally. I do think you're correct. However I think the numbers are pretty clear that value is being delivered mainly to shareholders in the form of buybacks and dividends and to executives as compensation. The executives' retainers get crumbs by comparison.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I can't post a link because the URL contains a dirty word, but google "on the phenomenon of bullfeathers jobs" and "david graeber" and read through. Essentially: they are retainer positions for the new corporate elite, to pad out and augment their own prestige and marketability, and around whom much of the actual elite services economy actually revolves.

I read his rant. From his rant the man is an idiot looking for wealth and fame because anthropologists don't get paid enough and he want to be an academic anarchist living comfortably in London. Not only is his rant completely outdated (2013), he laments that we don't have enough domestic servants, factory workers and farmers. He thinks we also need more lead singers in rock bands even if no one likes their music. In addition, he has no understanding of how large corporations actually work or the small roll they play in business employment overall. I do agree with him that we have too many lawyers. I suspect that he is still angry over the fact that he did not get tenure track at Yale and was bounced. He seems very much an "angry academic who takes on the world" type of guy. I have not read any of his books though. thanks for the suggestion to give him a read.

 

[innonimatu]

I read his rant. From his rant the man is an idiot looking for wealth and fame because anthropologists don't get paid enough and he want to be an academic anarchist living comfortably in London. Not only is his rant completely outdated (2013), he laments that we don't have enough domestic servants, factory workers and farmers. He thinks we also need more lead singers in rock bands even if no one likes their music. In addition, he has no understanding of how large corporations actually work or the small roll they play in business employment overall. I do agree with him that we have too many lawyers. I suspect that he is still angry over the fact that he did not get tenure track at Yale and was bounced. He seems very much an "angry academic who takes on the world" type of guy. I have not read any of his books though. thanks for the suggestion to give him a read.

You have no idea what you just stepped on But I am happy to let others answer about the deceased.
To give a short reply: he did not thought what you want to believe he thought, obviously. Pointing out the pathologist of certain societies is not equal to thinking those are necessary, rather it is usually an attempt at convincing people to change their bad ways.

The wubjedct of the wwealthy (and the pretend-I'm-wealthy) wanting servants is old, old. An old pathology that was observed throughout the centuries. It is real. For how that impacts the capitalist system, its political workings, you have but to read that writer @Lexicus has in his signature. Read Polanyi's observations on how the upper classes in a capitalist system would rather have a depression that makes employees obedient to them (servants), that a prosperous economy where they have enough f-you money to tell the bosses off.

 

[Joij21]

I read his rant. From his rant the man is an idiot looking for wealth and fame because anthropologists don't get paid enough and he want to be an academic anarchist living comfortably in London. Not only is his rant completely outdated (2013), he laments that we don't have enough domestic servants, factory workers and farmers. He thinks we also need more lead singers in rock bands even if no one likes their music. In addition, he has no understanding of how large corporations actually work or the small roll they play in business employment overall. I do agree with him that we have too many lawyers. I suspect that he is still angry over the fact that he did not get tenure track at Yale and was bounced. He seems very much an "angry academic who takes on the world" type of guy. I have not read any of his books though. thanks for the suggestion to give him a read.

Brutally savage on the poor guy.

Guess it's neoliberalism to the max for you.

In addition, he has no understanding of how large corporations actually work or the small roll they play in business employment overall.

Yes small and medium businesses employ more, but they tend to underemploy their workers vs big mega corporations.

@Crezth I believe is talking more exclusively about the big guys because that's where the profit margins are higher per individual company and therefore under a socialist mindset ALL THE WORKERS ought to have equal slices of that bigger pie. Hence bringing up BS jobs and how they unequally redistribute a big chunk of that pie to managers who do essentially nothing verses the guys on the line in those places who do all the real work.

While most of the total GDP in the economy is throughout the ma & pa shops, it's thinly spread out and divided by different ownership. Meaning each individual ma & pa shop is not making revenues as high as those who are bigger (what we would call "concentrated nodes" of wealth). Therefore socialist (particularly vanguardist) strategy prefers to go after and call out the concentrated nodes for their ills specifically because it allows reforms from which would allow a revolutionary vanguard to more easily seize those hyperconcentrated means of production. A hyperconcentrated means of production which they need to control to make up the base of their war logistics come the inevitable civil war between bourgeoisie and proletariat.

 

[Hygro]

I know but I WANT the unemployment rate to go up.

Maybe then I'll be able to pick up some desperate chicks.

Lots of people do. This inflation period has taught me just how much people cling to what petty and minor domination they have in society.

We’re still paying for covid and for Russia’s choice to invade. The cheapest fairest way is through supply and demand adjustments aka inflation. The caveat is the economies of scale cheap goods suppliers became monopolies for a couple years, so that’s bad. The covid price gouging happened in 2022 instead of 2020 effectively.

But the economy has never been fairer in decades. The only sectors for workers that I know are suffering are tech and finance, big contributors of inequality. Everywhere else, bad jobs are getting unfilled as people are finagling better ones.

But this means everyone is basically lacking servants. Ooooh nooooo. Except tons of people actually hate this. The US economy has passed Europe, every USSR country, and a few more, combined. People are doing more productive work, the bubble is popped, we are seeing some compression of living standards, upward and downward.

And people miss the unemployment and service of stratified desperation.

 

[Lexicus]

I read his rant. From his rant the man is an idiot looking for wealth and fame because anthropologists don't get paid enough and he want to be an academic anarchist living comfortably in London. Not only is his rant completely outdated (2013), he laments that we don't have enough domestic servants, factory workers and farmers. He thinks we also need more lead singers in rock bands even if no one likes their music. In addition, he has no understanding of how large corporations actually work or the small roll they play in business employment overall. I do agree with him that we have too many lawyers. I suspect that he is still angry over the fact that he did not get tenure track at Yale and was bounced. He seems very much an "angry academic who takes on the world" type of guy. I have not read any of his books though. thanks for the suggestion to give him a read.

Yale ratfudged him for real. He died tragically a few years back and was widely considered one of the most brilliant anthropologists of his generation.

 

[Hygro]

I’ve been wanting to read his book on debt since it came out.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Ah, I did not know he died. Nonetheless, based on his rant which was what was offered up, my opinion still stands. If his books were brilliant, fine, but his rant was certainly not.

 

[Lexicus]

Ah, I did not know he died. Nonetheless, based on his rant which was what was offered up, my opinion still stands. If his books were brilliant, fine, but his rant was certainly not.

Briefly reading through the essay again, it looks to me (assuming you read the same essay) like you got triggered by it and then went fishing on Graeber's wikipedia page for stuff you could use to attack him. I wouldn't describe the essay as brilliant but your interpretation of it is silly.

I’ve been wanting to read his book on debt since it came out.

It's quite good, but ultimately limited in vision because Graeber doesn't really reckon with how the rise of cities bringing us into regular contact with strangers makes hunter-gatherer forms of social organization untenable.

 

[Crezth]

I’ve been wanting to read his book on debt since it came out.

It makes a very interesting case for the history of money that completely rejects the "barter economy" hypothesis. Essentially he argues the origin of money is in blood debts, which eventually takes us to war and coins. "Money" existed so that conquering soldiers/overlords could requisition their conquered subjects' produce, as well as their conquered subjects as slaves, in what he called the "military-slavery-coinage" complex.

It's quite good, but ultimately limited in vision because Graeber doesn't really reckon with how the rise of cities bringing us into regular contact with strangers makes hunter-gatherer forms of social organization untenable.

I'm not sure about that. To my view he argues that cities were created by war and conquest, as places to distribute goods won by plunder and, later, slavery, and how this contributed to cycles of revolts that would overthrow the cities and wipe the debts which were hallmarks of ancient Mesopotamia.

 

[Farm Boy]

Lots of people do. This inflation period has taught me just how much people cling to what petty and minor domination they have in society.

We’re still paying for covid and for Russia’s choice to invade. The cheapest fairest way is through supply and demand adjustments aka inflation. The caveat is the economies of scale cheap goods suppliers became monopolies for a couple years, so that’s bad. The covid price gouging happened in 2022 instead of 2020 effectively.

But the economy has never been fairer in decades. The only sectors for workers that I know are suffering are tech and finance, big contributors of inequality. Everywhere else, bad jobs are getting unfilled as people are finagling better ones.

But this means everyone is basically lacking servants. Ooooh nooooo. Except tons of people actually hate this. The US economy has passed Europe, every USSR country, and a few more, combined. People are doing more productive work, the bubble is popped, we are seeing some compression of living standards, upward and downward.

And people miss the unemployment and service of stratified desperation.

You live in a different world.

It's like gentrification is progressivism from where I look.

 

[Joij21]

Ah, I did not know he died. Nonetheless, based on his rant which was what was offered up, my opinion still stands. If his books were brilliant, fine, but his rant was certainly not.

Doesn't matter if his rant was bad/wrong in the details. His rant holds value to a socialist specifically because it's the kind of rant which would trigger a certain kind of thinking/thought process to appear (potentially I must add) in the would be reader which could lead to said person to achieve a sense of class consciousness.

Think of it as a hypothetical brainstorming session which then in turn causes the reader to be forced to think and then question wether or not there are actual real life conspiracies of social control (mainly from the capitalist system) similar to the "fictional" idea of BS jobs.

And there are many IRL conspiracies of social control imposed by capitalism according to an actual socialist, the job of the socialist is thus to educate you (similar to how a teacher would enlighten a school child) by feeding you fictional works which have a deeper moral innuendo or meaning behind them. To expand your mind to what other people are capable of and how they could "in theory" conspire against you to uphold an unjust economic "way of doing" to protect their own selfish class interest.

 

[Lexicus]

It makes a very interesting case for the history of money that completely rejects the "barter economy" hypothesis. Essentially he argues the origin of money is in blood debts, which eventually takes us to war and coins. "Money" existed so that conquering soldiers/overlords could requisition their conquered subjects' produce, as well as their conquered subjects as slaves, in what he called the "military-slavery-coinage" complex.

This is a bit of a simplification. Incidentally, Graeber's argument here follows pretty closely Polanyi's in The Great Transformation. The barter-origin theory of money was blown out of the water by the deciphering of mesopotamian clay tablets which clearly demonstrated that money and credit had existed and been used for thousands of years before the invention of precious metal coins. That hasn't stopped bourgeois-ideology economists from ignoring all the evidence and continuing to put the barter fairy tale in economics textbooks, of course.

I'm not sure about that. To my view he argues that cities were created by war and conquest, as places to distribute goods won by plunder and, later, slavery, and how this contributed to cycles of revolts that would overthrow the cities and wipe the debts which were hallmarks of ancient Mesopotamia.

As I recall he doesn't really advance a theory of the origins of cities, but whatever one's position on that matter it is rather difficult to imagine turning back the clock on agriculture and urban civilization at this stage.

 

[Hygro]

You live in a different world.

It's like gentrification is progressivism.

I live in a world where everyone is paying 20% of their incomes to pay for covid’s effect on us and I’m laid off because tech took a hit, missed my first credit card payment in years.

Traffic, here, however, has never been busier. The bubble isn’t the city, but that’s for another thread.

But when you’re over in /r/overemployed where people are like “I have 3 remote jobs and I’m a millionaire next year god this economy is sh**” and the /r/antiwork people are like “they will never pass an infrastructure bill” right after passing an infrastructure bill at some point you have to trust the numbers because people are doubling down on bias and blind to their own contradictions.

 

[Farm Boy]

I'm sore man, and no, a millionaire isn't in the cards. Will need to evaluate my health insurance status again pending review of the son's medicaid.

Sounds like you're getting gentrified.

 

[Hygro]

It makes a very interesting case for the history of money that completely rejects the "barter economy" hypothesis. Essentially he argues the origin of money is in blood debts, which eventually takes us to war and coins. "Money" existed so that conquering soldiers/overlords could requisition their conquered subjects' produce, as well as their conquered subjects as slaves, in what he called the "military-slavery-coinage" complex.

Yeah I want the deeper dive into that. I know he makes some errors and it’s not a pure catalogue but I’m ok with that.

It’s very good the barter myth is largely debunked at least in academia. Gifting -> debts -> money. No wonder ancient religions had sophisticated usury laws, it precedes written record.

Crezth I wish you were here regularly to have read my posts from like 2013-2017 you would find it so amenable!

 

[Lexicus]

Polanyi's is probably the better book to deep dive into that stuff tbh. Or Keynes' Treatise on Money.

 

[Lexicus]

Read Polanyi's observations on how the upper classes in a capitalist system would rather have a depression that makes employees obedient to them (servants), that a prosperous economy where they have enough f-you money to tell the bosses off.

Kalecki argued this, not Polanyi afaik. Kalecki argued that social democracy with full employment etc would be more profitable for capitalists but capitalists would prefer to maintain their position of social superiority than make more profits thus eventually and inevitably leading to crisis.

 

[Hygro]

I'm sore man, and no, a millionaire isn't in the cards. Will need to evaluate my health insurance status again pending review of the son's medicaid.

Sounds like you're getting gentrified.

I don’t know how much more gentrification is even possible here, we’ve been an epicenter, unless tons of new people are getting new money, which is the good thing.

I’m talking about country wide. I remember driving to Missouri in 2010ish. Dead. Almost no radio, just Bible/guitar solo/twang. Everywhere is packed now even with gas way up, people are in motion.

Not everyone is doing better. But more people, even if they’re doing better or worse, are still doing good from their point right now. Only some “should” be complaining. The doofuses at /r/overemployed keep talking about how terrible the economy is and that’s why they have to have 3 high paying jobs that they secretly juggle and clock into at the same time.

Like you can’t get 3 jobs when the economy is bad. I know it’s not for everyone. I have 0. Rose and fell. But my friend with a psych degree got offered like 7 jobs in 2 months, and they are fast tracking teachers in the cuts starting 70k or so because they can’t fill the positions. So that’s what he took. “But I had to apply to 300” he said. Yeah but 290 people applied to the same 300.

In 2010 you couldn’t get those jobs.

Now some states are doing better, some areas, some people. I don’t feel rich, everything costs more and I don’t have an income. About to drive Lyft again and the wages are lower than before I hear. Yet “somehow” I’m alright. Stimulus, a previous job, the change in unemployment that gave me, and how all of that gave me a superior line of credit. I even made a couple hundred bucks betting on stocks. None of that was possible before covid. Though maybe without covid I’d have been making a clean 55k after graduation in 2020 buying more than the same total amount of money I got from the government and a brief higher salary. Like I said, we’re all paying for the crunch. Like you’ve said, it hasn’t been fair, and sometimes we’re in company town logic, which for that we need policy. But at least of those “paying for it” at least in the bottom 95%, it’s tech workers here in the bay and finance workers in nyc who can’t find a job sharing in “paying for it”, while the numbers show most other sectors are hiring at higher wages and hotels can barely staff a cleaning crew because upward and onward.

 

[Hygro]

Polanyi's is probably the better book to deep dive into that stuff tbh. Or Keynes' Treatise on Money.

I’ve read much of treatise in money on that subject, it’s good but not totally comprehensive. But it is good. It has enough history and ties is very solidly to theory while making fun of other economists for being wrong, the trifecta. And of course a bit of Polanyi but not on the origins of money so very seriously point me in the right direction.