Comments by "" (@SG-js2qn) on "According to Nicole" channel.

The chronic reduction of quality in products - the shittification - is a form of economic plundering of the lower classes, designed to make people pay more for things over time. You pay more to get less. People have been complaining about this for decades, since they started building home appliances out of cheap materials that won't last. It's completely possible to build refrigerators, washers, and dryers that will not only last a lifetime, but ones that can be repaired in a cost effective manner, and which can be recycled. People used to be able to repair their vehicles, change batteries in their phones, upgrade their home computers, etc. It's much cheaper, better design, and FAR better for the environment. But we've moved away from this as labor has been sent overseas. There are people fighting for us to retain the "right of repair," and I think it is absolutely essential to bring back manufacturing to our own shores so we control design and replacement parts.
305
@thedemonnemo I was thinking that it's a problem if you are in the lower class, because if your fridge or washer goes out, you're basically screwed, unless you can find a used one for sale somewhere. You may be thinking "Well, if they were lower class they would have that," but that doesn't account for the very common situation of people falling from middle class into lower class.
6
BlackRock owns Vanguard and State Street. Each owns some of the other, but BlackRock owns more, and BlackRock is with the WEF. BlackRock also has a special relationship with the CCP. BTW, it's looking now like somehow both Crooks and Routh appeared in BlackRock commercials. What are the odds that two assassins would be in commercials for the same shadowy company? 🤷‍♂ (Is BlackRock ... the CIA?)
5
@ajstockt4832 Nonsense. You don't understand capitalism at all, having been educated by socialists.
4
People failed to notice and take proper corrective actions when the incentives shifted. The shifts occurred in the late 80s and 90s. So now we have endless crapification of everything, and the CEOs and boards of companies are getting rich off of ruining companies and ruining the products and services they provide. The incentives have been perverse for about 30 years, making things worse and worse and worse. We have to correct this. Globalisation is not good. Easy money policy is not good. Localization and real qualification for credit is what built prosperity in every country that has had it.
4
@dilsiam Yes, it takes all your money to be poor.
2
I appreciate self-checkout, because I'm fast, all business, I only have a couple items, and I prefer it when I can just zip in and zip out. Where I live, I don't get crazy looks from self-checkout monitors, and the regular checkout lines are typically busy. For me, self-checkout is a blessing. As for it being a scam, I don't think I'm paying for labor that's just sitting around. I think prices are probably lower because they are paying fewer employees. Or at least that could be the case. If I was a member of a shopping co-op, I'd definitely assume that self-checkout was saving the co-op on wages.
1
@cloudyview Open your mind. Look at the behavior of the companies. Do not assume everything is above board. Do you think everything Wells Fargo does is above board? You won't ever see wrongdoing unless you look for it.
1
@sammiller6631 In the end, everything comes down to moral / altruistic versus immoral / hedonistic. 🤷‍♂ The point of bringing manufacturing back is not because of some notion of local superiority. It's because most people find it harder to screw over your neighbor. Some are just fine with that, but some people who have no problem shortchanging strangers halfway around the world grow a tiny bit more conscience when what they're doing could affect someone they know.
1
@Flipper-r8m Hey lefty ... you have a screwball view of history. One of the things you fail to acknowledge is that GHW Bush was CIA, and the CIA is Democrat. Reagan was shot, and Bush was elevated in a deep state takeover of the Republican establishment. Perot was the true voice of Republicans warning against shipping jobs overseas, but he was steamrolled with the feds wanting either Bush or Clinton. With the Republican vote split, Clinton won, and what did he do? He signed Bush's trade agreements, like NAFTA. Clinton removed the depression era protections on the market, allowed hedge funds like Goldman Sachs to trade in commodities, created the subprime bubble for the banking cartel, and invited China into the WTO. To YOU that's the Republicans. 🙄 FWIW, Carter opposed the shoe unions and sent those jobs overseas before all of the above. In fact, IIRC, it all began with Truman sending fabric making overseas after WW2.
1