this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
667 points (80.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

30044 readers
1116 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I think you can say is a pyramid scheme in the way you can't really make money if you aren't making money for someone upper on the ladder, even if are an independent business owner, you still have loans to pay or equipment that is sold by a corporation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Generally the idea is that both parties need to benefit from any transaction if it is voluntary.

[–] migo 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When you have to eat and the means to feed ourselves is held by few, no transaction is voluntary.

[–] hemko -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Of course it's voluntary. You choose what you buy, when you do it, how much and from whom.

If someone held you on gunpoint and told you to buy their product, that would be involuntary.

[–] Ranolden 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can choose what, when, how much, and from whom, but you are still are still forced to do so. Choosing which person puts me at gunpoint doesn't make it voluntary

[–] hemko -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You can also feed yourself by growing food or hunting. Neither of those are banned, just more inconvenient and you probably have some other skills to sell and buy food instead

[–] Ranolden 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I can only do so on land that I purchased. Or on someone else's land I purchased the right to do so on

[–] hemko 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then do that, or choose not to.

[–] Ranolden 3 points 1 year ago

If I choose not to I die. I can buy the food from someone who already has it, I can buy the right to make my own food, or I can choose to starve to death

[–] Godric -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Ranolden 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That costs money. I have to buy the right to hunt on public land or I go to prison for poaching

[–] Godric 1 points 1 year ago

Can I interest you in CWA (Crackers With Attitude)'s Fuck The DNR?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are forced to buy food, shelter, healthcare, a vehicle (US). You are forced therefore to have a job to pay for these things. Employers know this, and suppress wages with those together, the proverbial gun.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Generally speaking, slavery is also benefitial to both parties, you're either a slave out you get killed. While technically voluntary (because a slave can still choose stand up to the oppressor, even if it's guaranteed to fail) we don't consider slavery voluntary. We can say that in this day and age our work is voluntary, but it's debatable.

You can look to this year how "voluntary" it is when the Hollywood execs literally said they will wait for the protesters to starve so they'd get back to work. When there's such a severe power dynamic it becomes almost no different to slavery, because you, individually, can be effectively forced back to work. The only reason Hollywood protests have any chance to have impact is because they collectively oppose the oppression. The power dynamic is being balanced (or dipped in the favor of labor) by sheer number of protestors / workers.