An inevitable fallacy of capitalism is its inherent nature of self servitude towards a selfish goal to maximize profit. Without gross capital, it's impossible to hire and without social capital, it's impossible to increase profit.

You'd think at some point, a human will be able to become content with what they have. The reality is, we feed off each others energy. One of us might feel content with our peers, another one of us might have some discontent about how that someone sits still and reinforce positive traits within a social group. Knowing how to balance a social group takes a lot; instead spreading continuity across multiple people would make it less of a burden on the person with an original idea.

Social groups don't just form spontaneously. Like minded people come together based on a set of thoughts they've already thought out about and share those thoughts with each other. Someone with more original ideas lives the life on the edge because they have to learn to balance language meant no indicate assimilation into a social group or something completely original. Capitalism is a unique human-invention that cultivates the expediency of production of a product. ( Some might call that a circular statement. ) It is, by nature, intended to reduce labor and workers to a number rather than using a label for each labor unit. As a result, the expected output would be a yield with immense returns on investment.

The language of capitalism is concrete at this point, it is also gate-kept from autistic individuals such as myself. We're excluded not by intention, but by design of how humans behave as a group. It is a common fallacy for people to believe that autistic people are sub-par based on how people hold themselves accountable. How they've learned to hold each other accountable, except for that one outsider. You've spent the majority of your life learning the rules you live by, being the best human possible, why shouldn't this weirdo also follow the same rules you have to follow?

What if they physically can't, and the only difference is, you can't tell the difference?

This behavior, so natural in everyday life, is alien to most autistics because of the variance in thought we have relative to our nuerodivergent, allistics. As a result, it is more likely we would be cast out into the cold while the group survives. Our species, learned to survive hard winters and brutal summers. The behavior is now, a signature of an immature social group or a single actor acting in bad faith within the social group. When the social group is grossly misinformed on how to behave towards someone who is autistic, or just, different.. they don't have to be autistic.

Capitalism allows us to fire someone.

Everyone loves a good rule book, not just us autistic types.

How do we pull back from this fallacy though? How do we correct, not just ourselves, but also our peers before we walk ourselves off a cliff?

"Cutting back on employees is a way to convince shareholders that the companies are 'investing in a responsible manner,' Mr. Luria said."

When did cutting employees become an indication of social responsibility?

Where do we go from here?

Well, thats kind of the point. To go, but how to go about it is up to you. How you activate in the world is how you affect the world. Capitalism is so well established that it has an answer to pretty much everything, however it doesn't have the ability to squander other capitalistic goals. Stay small, lean, and agile, and you'll notice that you'll make enough money to live comfortable and enjoy your pursuits. Sure, there are big fish in the sea that can push you out of the way. However there are also big fish in the sea, that need help from your startup.

Regulation through government is easier to trace and accountability can be more visible. Regulation though a capitalistic influenced government is more choppy and creates too much noise for my liking. Not to mention, the amount of money it takes to convince a group of people is far higher than what it takes for a good idea to naturally propagate from the resulting regulative legislation.

My question is: When will the richest people in the world realize; they can generate more wealth through philanthropy and collaborative regulation than they ever could through the plight of might they've committed to in recent elections?