15
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This will more likely result in collusion between the two. Your boss will subsidise your rent, but only if you live in one of his buddy's houses. It's company towns with extra steps.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I'd love to see small companies try and pry those ownership rights, out of the cold dead hands of large real estate corporations.

Now battle of the big fish? Amazon vs Blackrock. Walmart vs Zillow? Idk, but that would be dope to see capitalists cannibalize themselves.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a requirement for people to suffer for others to get ahead. It's the entire basis of our economy and given the unsustainable population, it's only going to get worse. Like much much worse. The redistribution of wealth would probably take a war tbh. There's a ton of people who just don't care, or have been indoctrinated to believe they deserve to suffer. No one wants to fight a war. We maintain status quo until the earth kicks us off. And we're left with sustainable population.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Lol what. We have machines and automation now. We can just make manufacturing equipment "suffer" while the humans "get ahead".

The zero-sum worldview has been dead since the industrial revolution. Any widespread suffering at this point is the fault of humans.

Edit: unless you're trying to say something else?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I'm making that point exactly. Why aren't we?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

So what are people supposed to do for money? Or do we get rid of that too

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Instead of money? I would imagine it would be money.

It's not that people stop working. We still need food, shelter, communication, entertainment, etc. Money is how you convert goods, and I don't understand how you think that need would vanish.

But worker efficiency is through the roof. One farmer can grow enough to feed thousands of people. A factory with 10 people can make millions of a given product a year. We can communicate from across the globe without anyone having to carry the message by hand. What makes you think we can't at the very least give everyone food and shelter in those circumstances? No one intrinsically has to suffer. It only happens because of human greed.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Right, even the Roman empire, where 90% of people were farmers, worked out how to give food to everyone. In countries where less than 1% of people are farmers they can't work out how to get enough food to people while ships dump excess grain in the ocean to stabilize prices?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
15 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

9823 readers
1706 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS