▲ 290 ▼ don't worry about it haha (lemmy.ml) submitted 2 months ago by Salamence@mander.xyz to c/memes@lemmy.ml 8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Trex202@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (4 children) Their parents are okay with it! permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 months ago (3 children) For a lot of families, that's just how it's always been, and how it's had to be, in order to keep the farm running. Having the kids work in the family business is a sign of poverty, same as sending them to work somewhere else. A lot of them are OK with it; the "I worked on the farm since I was 5 and I turned out OK" theme gets trotted out. Others have reservations but no viable alternatives, so they just don't think about it. Being that poor sucks ass for the whole family. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago There's no good solutions that don't involve ending poverty as a whole, and the Epstein class have not given their consent to end poverty. permalink fedilink source parent [–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) farmers today are millionaires and characterizations like this help mask this reality as they keep voting for people like trump. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago Most of them are, at least in the US. A lot of farmers are genuinely wealthy and live a life of ease. Some of them are land rich, meaning they inherited a land title that's now worth 6-7 figures on paper and little else. Every year, some of the latter are at long last forced to sell their last asset (often below market value) and become regular poor, and the rich farmers (and the financiers) get a little bit richer. Sometimes it's not a farm, but some other established business outfit, farms are just peculiar because they need a significant chunk of real estate attached to them to be economically sustainable, usually, and the value of the land doesn't depreciate as the rest of the business shrivels. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 months ago (3 children) For a lot of families, that's just how it's always been, and how it's had to be, in order to keep the farm running. Having the kids work in the family business is a sign of poverty, same as sending them to work somewhere else. A lot of them are OK with it; the "I worked on the farm since I was 5 and I turned out OK" theme gets trotted out. Others have reservations but no viable alternatives, so they just don't think about it. Being that poor sucks ass for the whole family. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago There's no good solutions that don't involve ending poverty as a whole, and the Epstein class have not given their consent to end poverty. permalink fedilink source parent [–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) farmers today are millionaires and characterizations like this help mask this reality as they keep voting for people like trump. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago Most of them are, at least in the US. A lot of farmers are genuinely wealthy and live a life of ease. Some of them are land rich, meaning they inherited a land title that's now worth 6-7 figures on paper and little else. Every year, some of the latter are at long last forced to sell their last asset (often below market value) and become regular poor, and the rich farmers (and the financiers) get a little bit richer. Sometimes it's not a farm, but some other established business outfit, farms are just peculiar because they need a significant chunk of real estate attached to them to be economically sustainable, usually, and the value of the land doesn't depreciate as the rest of the business shrivels. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago There's no good solutions that don't involve ending poverty as a whole, and the Epstein class have not given their consent to end poverty. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago (1 child) farmers today are millionaires and characterizations like this help mask this reality as they keep voting for people like trump. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago Most of them are, at least in the US. A lot of farmers are genuinely wealthy and live a life of ease. Some of them are land rich, meaning they inherited a land title that's now worth 6-7 figures on paper and little else. Every year, some of the latter are at long last forced to sell their last asset (often below market value) and become regular poor, and the rich farmers (and the financiers) get a little bit richer. Sometimes it's not a farm, but some other established business outfit, farms are just peculiar because they need a significant chunk of real estate attached to them to be economically sustainable, usually, and the value of the land doesn't depreciate as the rest of the business shrivels. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago Most of them are, at least in the US. A lot of farmers are genuinely wealthy and live a life of ease. Some of them are land rich, meaning they inherited a land title that's now worth 6-7 figures on paper and little else. Every year, some of the latter are at long last forced to sell their last asset (often below market value) and become regular poor, and the rich farmers (and the financiers) get a little bit richer. Sometimes it's not a farm, but some other established business outfit, farms are just peculiar because they need a significant chunk of real estate attached to them to be economically sustainable, usually, and the value of the land doesn't depreciate as the rest of the business shrivels. permalink fedilink source parent