this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
376 points (99.5% liked)

Flippanarchy

1108 readers
4 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to [email protected]

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

“If the stock market yesterday morning was at 11000 points and falls 30% by close yesterday. only to rise by 30% today. Will the wealthy class claim that it closed at the same level before yesterday morning or acknowledge they skimmed the top while playing it off as it bounced completely back?”

It would also be a good lesson to teach them about how percentages are multiplicative rather than additive, and can be used like statistics to trick you.

For example, a 1100 base and having the market drop by 30% then rise by 30% would leave the market down by about 9% (1100 * .7 * 1.3 = 1001). You would actually need a 43% rise after the 30% fall to bounce completely back. (1100 *.7 * 1.43 = 1101.1)