1444
and they have the fucking gall to call us "parasites" (slrpnk.net)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/memes@slrpnk.net
222 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 1 year ago (6 children)

You don't own the stall of a public toilet and you can still expect to use it without having people walk on you. It's like we can all agree to distribute resources and keep rights like privacy without the need of property.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    While I agree with you, in principle, I much prefer my toilet than a public toilet with partial privacy and partial cleanliness.

    I think it's going to be interesting when we move from private ownership of cars to self driving, shared, how there may be different classes again, like trains of old. It's inevitable we transition. The gig economy is effectively a more even distribution of resource usage with benefits environmentally. However, we need to ensure it's more even ownership too, which is looking unlikely at this point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Self driving cars are not going to stop car ownership, that's pure CEO fantasy. The logistics of it doesn't make any sense. Gig economy it's the opposite of even distribution, it's companies owning everything and workers owning nothing. Stop drinking the neoliberal kool aid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Gig economy is better distribution of asset use, as I said. The problem to correct is distribution of ownership, again as I already said. Stop drinking the socialism kool aid. Nobody owning cars is more likely than community ownership.

    Car ownership may not go away but it's likely to decrease. It's rare in America to not own a car. It's less rare in cities with good public transport, eg New York, Europe. Self driving, on demand taxis may mean the same effect is carried over to places that currently don't have great public transport.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    how about instead of restricting all ownership, you instead just limited it.

    My idea is that basically once anybody hits 10 million in net worth (for example), then we just say 'well done, you've completed it mate'. Now fuck off down the beach and don't come back.

    Basically tax any further income of any kind at 100%.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    how about instead of restricting all ownership, you instead just limited it

    But basically nobody proposes this. Communists don't propose "abolishing property" altogether, we propose abolishing private capital, which is the type of property that isn't owned for its use value, but instead owned for profit. A commie would say you can own a car to use it, but you can't own a car to employ someone else to drive it as a taxi and generate a profit for you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent