top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 133 points 10 months ago (5 children)

yep. also people wont do any work if they dont have to because all their needs are met. this is why all rich people are retired.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    this is why all rich people are retired.

    Well...

    Veblen discusses how the pursuit and the possession of wealth affects human behavior, that the contemporary lords of the manor, the businessmen who own the means of production, have employed themselves in the economically unproductive practices of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure, which are useless activities that contribute neither to the economy nor to the material production of the useful goods and services required for the functioning of society.

    Functionally retired.

    You see it all the time among Tech plutocracy, with Bezos's Venice Wedding and Zuck's endless home construction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    I keep thinking of one of the old videos I saw.

    "...I dunno, maybe we should get rid of all of the landlords!"

    "But who would we then pay rent to?"

    I was, like, holy shit, things are so much more complicated than I even realised, everything is based on some dumb suppositions or some shit.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago*

    Not that I'm a proponent of capitalism as the default economic model (I'm very much not) but I dislike this particular argument because it misrepresent the function of capital.

    Large projects require upfront investment that is beyond the means of individuals or even groups of individuals (e.g. 100 prospective tenants cannot afford to build and office building; you need someone able to front the equivalent of X years rental costs), and those investments need to be managed by specialists. Whether those specialists are independent or employed by a central governing body, you still need capital and you still need effective oversight to prevent corruption and exploitation.

    What we need are guaranteed public offerings, with a rising baseline over time, that leave opportunity for capital investment in luxury upgrades. The guaranteed public offerings prevent gross exploitation by the capitalists, and the capital investments provide the innovation pressure and luxury offerings that incentivize those inclined to seek said luxuries without exploiting the public offering system to do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -14 points 10 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 13 points 10 months ago (6 children)
  • [+] -9 points 10 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    (a bunch of us are pretty sure they're a bot, they've been doing this kind of insane word salad all over the place and none of it has made any more sense than this)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I'm not spewing any kind of "insane word salad" here. I'm just questioning what you are doing.

    So let me reiterate.

    What

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Well that's just a contentless bait. I've never seen this, even in Reddit. True garbage for the ages. Goodbye, good sir. May you be remember'd as the shit'st troll of ever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 120 points 10 months ago (14 children)

    Having good health care means you just consume as much medicine as you can. I get vaccinated every day, I own 500 pairs of glasses, and all my teeth have been root canaled

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    I get vaccines for diseases that don't even exist... Everyone has the small poxs vaccine but I also have medium poxs and even large poxs vaccination.

    I will say one I don't recommend is I got the mumps vaccine so I figured I should get a dumps vaccine... It just made me really constipated.

    /s this is a joke, yes get your vaccines but only ones for real diseases...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Jokes aside, "great pox" is siphilis. I don't know if there a medium pox...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Something interesting about this is that Bourgeois neoclassical economics manages to acknowledge that people won't simply consume greedily, even if things are free.

    Marginal Utility asserts that people will only consume commodities such that they satisfy some want or need. If I'm hungry, I'll buy a banana, maybe a bunch to have later.

    But my hunger won't drive me to buy 800 bunches in one go, because that many bananas has a deminishing return in their marginal utility to satiate my hunger.

    If that's true, it doesn't require market mechanisms for the distribution of goods and services to continue being true. Re: your healthcare example

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    With food, in particular, the value is in the supply chain not the ability to horde individual commodities. I don't want 800 bananas, but I do want a banana stand on my corner where I can get fresh bananas daily.

    In theory, markets are supposed to organically generate these social amenities and price them at the prevailing wage rate for the community, such that individuals bid into/out of existence goods and services through a pseudo-collective "expressed demand".

    In practice, choke points in the supply chain create opportunities for arbitrage and price fixing. So goods that should be cheap and abundant - like fruit - suddenly become expensive and scarce when a single enormous conglomerate (like the United Fruit Company) holds a vertical monopoly on the commodity.

    This artificial scarcity is then used to justify price-rationing of the commodity. And pretty soon you're selling people $500 Bijin Hime strawberries in a Japanese mega-mall, while working class people can't afford basics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    There’s actually limits on the frequency you can do stuff. From somewhere that has mostly feee healthcare.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 10 months ago (10 children)

    Humans will take more than they need of what’s free, if there’s a way to turn it into profit for them. If profit is allowed to be a way to secure power and control, there will always be be a desire to hoard for oneself.

    Capitalism rewards hoarding and profiting, and also rewards making the in group as small as possible.

    Other factors can cause hoarding as well to be clear, such as fear of scarcity/needs not being met.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 10 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    If you're not allowed to do profit then who would do trade and why?

    Because one can't possibly own or learn everything so you'll have to trade some thing you have for something you want. Skills, food, stuff, art, tools, music.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    Are you arguing against a medium of exchange? Bartering is just less efficient trading.

    A medium of exchange is entirely unrelated to profit that bartering still enables.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 0 points 10 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    And your point here being...?

    Are you implying that currency is a product of capitalism or that currency only exists under capitalist societies?

    Lol, I'm no historian but I almost sure that currency has existed in basically all big societies way before capitalism was a thing...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago

    I love working in retail. I was a contract analyst for some years (very boring, highly paid and painstaking insurance work), now I work in a bakery as a barista, and I’m dragging my feet about finishing my masters because I don’t really want to stop working there.

    Sometimes people are shitty, but it’s clear work that doesn’t stress me out at home and I’m glad to provide my community with bread.

    I can’t really imagine plumbers hate being plumbers- it’s work that they train years for, with very transferable skills if they wanted to switch to anything else along the way. Do you have any evidence that plumbers hate their jobs?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    As others have pointed out, profit is not the reason for trade, and profit is not the reason for currency to exist.

    Understand that you are coming from a place of having grown up under capitalism and anytime you questioned it, or anytime you saw it questioned, those were the responses. “Of COURSE we need to profit! Why would LITERALLY ANYONE do LITERALLY ANYTHING without profit? We’d all still be cave people like those DAMN DIRTY COMMIES”

    But my brother in Christ, you’ve never profited before! The owner class profits. The owners get to take all the wealth generated by the workers, and fucking keep it for their own power! It’s that simple. We don’t get it, they do. The profit we generate for them doesn’t protect us. It doesn’t enrich us. They can take away our wages at anytime, they can manipulate their markets and often gamble with our nest eggs. They set up systems where they can rob us of any money we did not allow to remain under their control (civil forfeiture), they allow us access to the illusion of wealth in exchange for all of wages for the rest of our lives. And they don’t even take good care of us to do it.

    It’s all a scam brother, whether or not it’s a good system doesn’t matter if it’s allowed to be captured and manipulated. It’s a trap, don’t be a sucker.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 68 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I know this is a joke but... Communism doesn't mean "free stuff". Probably the opposite of what this joke implies, it's communal ownership. You wouldn't waste water if you felt it was your water. People waste water when they feel it's someone else's water (government, landlord).

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I know it’s not really your point, but I don’t think this is about homeowners. I've never paid for water (or behaved like this) in a rented apartment. Unless you have a well, you often do have to pay for municipal water if you own the property. Even with a well, you’re paying for any filtration based on usage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    I wasn't talking about homeowners. I just reused the water example. In an ideal communist society, you'd still need a way to prevent people from overusing the communal resources.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    If one cut out the profit motive, people may be less inclined to waste some resources. i.e. not growing unneeded food in the desert. It would not reduce some wastage due to other motivations. i.e. I won't have access to this tomorrow, so I shall use it for non-productive usages today.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 10 months ago (6 children)
  • [+] [S] 11 points 10 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Is it free or is it paid through taxes? If it's paid through taxes how much does it cost you in taxes? Also, are there any other fees that aren't "paying for water" but functionally are?

    For example, I pay approximately $50 per month for water, but if I wanted to be cute I could say I only pay $7.00 per month because the rate is $3.50 per 1,000 gallons. The other $43 dollars are in fixed meter, availability, and stormwater charges (basically the basic price needed to ensure infrastructure is maintained no matter how much water I use).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (3 children)

    It would be paid through taxes, just because people don't get a bill specifically for a certain service or utility they assume it's free.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    That's what I would assume as well. I would be curious to know how much in taxes it costs each person, but they probably don't get that level of detail in their tax breakdown and progressive tax structures probably mean some people pay proportionally more than others. Just doing a quick look ~80% of water public utilities are provided by Irish Water, a government run utility program. In the 2025 budget they had €2.2 billion in funding for projects and €2.5 billion for water service. Ireland has a population of ~5.4 million people so the monthly per capita cost would be ~€72 per month in taxes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    This is so wrong. I don‘t know where you live, but at least in Germany tap water is not free. Of course everyone drinks roughly the same amount of water, but most water is consumed in other ways where it totally matters to price it. For example taking a bath consumes much more water than showering. People have private pools where one fill-up can easily double the water consumption of a year.

    The water pricing is actually progressive so the more you consume the more you have to pay per amount. This allows cheap prices for the average consumer and discourages to overconsume.

    Water is precious and shouldn‘t be treated as an abundance.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Idk of this happens in Germany but in the U.S. some landlords, mostly smaller ones, will fold the water bill into the rent. So it is effectively "free" in that you are not charged by the amount you use.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    In Germany that's not a thing. You get billed separately for utilities by the landlord, and they have to show how they calculate your share from the building totals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    It's funny how billionaires all seem to have 10 houses isn't it?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Poor dears and their scarcity mindset, overcompensating. Always needing more. Always egged on by the fear of loss and insecurity, and fear of those with less, wanting what they have.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    I mean, if I had, essentially, unlimited money, and there were places in the world I liked to visit repeatedly, and I don't mean "for a weekend" but months or seasons at a time? Hell yeah I'd buy a house there.

    At a minimum, one Southern Hemisphere, one Northern Hemisphere. Never see Summer again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Meaning "presence in blood."

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 15 points 10 months ago (16 children)
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    That's because Starbucks is a corporation; they only care about making their number go up. People don't really behave like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (7 children)

    They needed to be heavily taxed thirty years ago.

    They need to be butchered now, for the damage they have done to the earth. They and their heirs must be exterminated to the last. If there is one survivor, all our futures are forfeit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 10 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    There's like a couple thousand billionaires, maybe a couple million of the ultra-wealthy. You wouldn't need a majority

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (2 children)

    Starbucks wastes water by leaving the taps running in its worldwide stores all day. The Starbucks officials defend that practice by saying that the purpose is to clean utensils and meet health standards.

    Well that was a short article that ended abruptly and offered no further details about anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago*

    Yes I quoted the fourth paragraph which was the only paragraph that contained any information. The first few paragraphs were fluff and it was a very short article. I'm happy you say that BBC went into more detail in the original article. That's great.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    I dont pay for sewage and I crap as much as I want, too.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    I mean yeah but theres a silver lining because people are extemely wasteful with water where its easily available. This is solved by raising awareness and education which is obvious but its important to remember the whole picture. A functioning society is a delicate balance of a million different factors. I am an optimist tho and believe that one day well find that balance.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

    This is solved by raising awareness and education

    Not sure that's possible. Despite decades of trying, they continue running marathons everywhere for raising awareness of breast cancer, because apparently people still aren't aware. If it hasn't worked for breast cancer, then how will it work for water? Giving up on humanity might be the best move here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Are people unaware of the general idea of "breast cancer"? I had assumed the presence of informational campaigns were either for encouraging testing, or a way to fund-raise with a nebulous goal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Meanwhile people living in literal deserts are draining the water table to grow lush green lawns and fill swimming pools ...

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (1 child)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›