Guy Dudeman

Oh yeah then that makes sense.

Who are you with?

They are fiduciaries.

Fiduciary is a legally defined term. Fiduciaries are expected to exercise a duty of care and a duty of loyalty to clients, and as a result, are “held to the highest standard of conduct.” Fiduciaries have a bond of trust with another person (called the beneficiary or principal) and have a legal obligation to act for the beneficiary’s benefit – not their own.

Yeah that’s bad. We’re with JP Morgan through our local Chase branch and their fee when all is said and done is averaged down to less than 1% of the total account balance.

Even scarier.

I let my bank’s financial advisor handle that. They have apps that calculate everything.

Retiring on $15k is a scary fucking thought.

That sounds like a Linux community.

That’s what I came here to ask.

Kamala herself doesn’t give a shit about Zionism except for what it provides to her campaign in the form of money.

Then they were misinterpreting me.

My main issue was the attitude that I got back from them. Their responses were not reasonable like yours. They were sarcastic and toxic from the get-go.

I wasn’t going in arguing against AES. I was trying to start a conversation so that I could learn.

I’m not sure I’m understanding your meaning here.

https://hexbear.net/post/143338

https://hexbear.net/post/143473

Well, first of all, you seem to be the outlier, in my experience.

I have made accounts on all three of those lemmy instances and have been instantly banned from them for trying to have a conversation like we’re having right now.

Hexbear called me a “wrecker” and the others said I was a shitlib. Their patience is non-existent and their paranoia has become their personality. And it’s really off-putting to those of us who would like to actually discuss this stuff like adults.

Yes, we may call you guys “tankies” but surely you must have thicker skin than that, right?

Meh. What are they gonna do? Fire me?

So, in reading Socialism Developed China, I came across this paragraph:

China, as we already established, was not a developed market economy after Mao came to power. In fact, neither was Russia when the Bolsheviks came to power. This was a problem which Lenin had recognized and sought to find a solution to. The solution he proposed was his New Economic Policy. This would be a brief “state-capitalist” transition period in order to develop the economy enough in order for the transition to socialism to be possible.

Given that, why wouldn’t American leftists (if they existed) want to participate in electoral politics that can transition us to socialism? Since we are already a developed market economy, it should be just a matter of re-alignment of the cultural priorities in order to produce that change.

The path to socialism is not just through violent revolution.

Yet American leftists seem to be either nihilistic and cynical, or hell-bent on violent revolution being the only way to socialism.

A violent revolution in America would inevitably fail without buy-in from the public at large.

Buy-in from the public at large will only come through education and indoctrination and by changing minds. But American leftists seem to want to isolate themselves into exclusive online enclaves like Hexbear and Lemmygrad and reddit’s “socialist” subreddits, who ban anyone who wants or needs to learn.

Why are leftists so anti-evangelical (for lack of a better term)? Why don’t leftists want to recruit?

Thanks. I’ll read that one then. I’ve read parts of State and Revolution but never the whole thing in one sitting.

LOL… my work network blocks that site. To be expected, I suppose.