A Boring Dystopia

9804 readers

743 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

givesomefucks

1379

Consumer, we have detected that you are above the poverty line. The 99¢ price printed on this Arizona tea can only applies to those below the poverty line. Your total comes to $3.67. (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 months ago by LengAwaits to c/aboringdystopia

265 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ensign_Crab 38 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

I think it's cute that people think the dynamic pricing is charging the poor less,

If you see someone shoplifting anything from Kroger or one of their subsidiaries, no you didn't. Now cause a distraction while that shoplifter does the Lord's work.

[–] wondrous_strange 9 points 3 months ago

Amen

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Being poor is expensive as hell. Ironically being richer makes things around you cheaper.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Which is why parents need to teach their kids about the realities of life. Modern life, specifically. And prioritize them accordingly.

[–] bitjunkie 3 points 3 months ago

Fediverse has a real Hoffman vibe sometimes and I'm here for it

[–] AeonFelis 1 points 3 months ago

Charging the poor more is, first and foremost, stupid. Giving them bad products and/or services that will cost them more in the long run? That I can see. But you never want to charge them more upfront. You'll always want to charge the rich more, because the rich have more money and are more willing to spend it (when it benefits them), and you want them to give you that money.

Joel Spolsky wrote a great post about this two decades ago (and it's still relevant today). The idea is as follows:

Lets say you have two potential customers - one rich who can afford to buy your product for $2 and one poor who can only afford to buy it for $1. If you charge $1 you'll be able to sell it to both of them and get $2. If you charge $2 you'll only sell to the rich - also getting $2.

Joel says that if you find a way (e.g. - by creating different versions) to sell it to the rich customer for $2 and the poor customer for $1 - you'll get $3. Which is more than $2.

You, on the other hand, suggest that it's going to get offered to the rich customer for $1 and the poor customer for $2. But then the poor customer won't be able to afford it. They won't be it or maybe even steal it - either way you won't get $2 from them. You'll only get the $1 from the rich customer.

$1 is less than $3. It's even less than $1. If you want to earn money - this is the worst outcome. Why do you think capitalists hate the poor more than they love money?