The establishment vs Uber

[FireIceTalon]

And, in general, "doing harms" to people and the environment is exploitation, and should not be tolerated in our free society.

But you can't have capitalism without exploitation. The very nature of the system requires both exploitation of people (workers) and of the environment in general to some extent. While I obviously agree that these are bad things, saying it shouldn't be tolerated is just a moralist argument and not a materialist analysis that fits reality. Capitalism and its state agencies aren't driven or operated by moral codes, so arguing from a moral premise isn't very useful in either trying to analyze or combat the material reality of things.

As you know, I'm less interested in the government swooping in to protect me from my own stupid mistakes, like taking a low paying job, or working for company that offers crappy benefits.

Yep, that's the America I know - blame and demonize the poor for their own misery. This is all part of the phony capitalist narrative. Your poor-shaming is deplorable and reminds me of why I hate this country so much (not that I would be a patriot anywhere else). It really shows just how rotten, mean-spirited, and separated from reality libertarianism is at its core. It's nothing more than a prominent form of the right-wing populism that has become fashionable in America as of late; little man fascism.

Taking a low paying job or working for a company is not a stupid mistake, but rather the only option many people have to survive. They are making a rational economic decision that is available to them, cause all too often that is the only choice that is available, or the other alternatives are even shittier. That is the capitalist system - workers and their labor power are objectified because they are forced to sell it to the owners of capital in exchange for paltry wage in order to survive, while said unproductive owners of capital leech off the value produced by labor.

I think those things would sort themselves out if "labor" were allowed to think for itself. We have a long legacy of government mothering of labor, which is due I suspect mostly because of the fear of allowing it to be independently free. Due to our history of labor riots, and politicking catering to labor, government has stepped into the labor union role and has become the adversary of the corporate side. Whereas, really, I think government should remain neutral, help arbitrate, and... you know... govern.

Were you on LSD by any chance when you typed this out? At what point in our history has government catered for the direct interests of the working class for the sake of itself? Here's a hint: never.

The notion that government is an adversary of corporations is laughable. The Federal government and international capital have never been more symbiotic than they currently are - Unless of course you are talking about life on the fictional planet Freedonia Libertopia.

As for you thinking government should be more neutral, there you go again, thinking what "ought" to happen rather than understanding what actually "is", and why. The government is doing what it has always done and supposed to do since the concept of the state was developed: manage the affairs of the ruling class as it sees necessary and fit. Sometimes it does this extremely efficiently (in a place for instance, like Sweden), or not so efficiently (former Soviet Union). But its role and purpose is always the same.

Your entire analysis and view of how things are is reality turned upside. So much so, that it would probably make a great script for the next Quentin Tarantino flick.

immigration problems

No such thing.