this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024

345 points (95.0% liked)

memes

10397 readers

3793 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civil

No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politics

This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent reposts

Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No bots

No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads

No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

[email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
[email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
[email protected] : Linux themed memes
[email protected] : for those who love comic stories.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Tenthrow

The_Picard_Maneuver

[email protected]

345

You deserve it :-) (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago by livewithinyourmemes to c/memes

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Mighty 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

can i replace "affordable" with "free" please? these are human basic needs. just give it to me.

[+] BaardFigur 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Legitimizing capitalism will not free us from our material conditions

[+] BaardFigur 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Personal property and private property are important distinctions. Personal property is established and maintained autonomously through social connections, while private property is maintained thru coercive systems and institutions (an invention from capitalism).

The threat of starvation and coercive violence are the main factors incentivizing people to work under capitalism.

For more - read ANARCHY WORKS by Peter Gelderloos. Chapter: Economy, "Without wages, what is the incentive to work?" (pg. 61)

https://anarchy.works/primer.html#toc22

[–] Mighty 0 points 10 months ago

Capitalism isn't broken, you're right. The misery of 90-95% if society is expected under capitalism. It's not a sign of capitalism being broken but for it working as intended.

[–] Mighty -2 points 10 months ago

There's no such thing as a free market. It's a myth. I'd rather believe in unicorns.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Okay, but unless healthcare workers, teachers, First Responders, construction workers, you, me, and everyone else is willing to work for free, it still has a cost, even if the government pays it. I agree that it should be a basic human right though...

EDIT:

Clarification: OP is asking for these things to be "free". Free is if I start handing out hamburgers on the street, no strings attached. We already pay for these services, we pay the most of any country in the world, and we get worse results.

[–] okamiueru 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are you... Hm.. Where to start.. Do you know the concept of taxes?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Taxes which... pay for all of those. Not sure why you have to jump to condescension, I'm not being obtuse. Things cost money, and we pay for it either way, that's my only point.

[–] okamiueru 1 points 10 months ago

But... Maybe I'm the one being obtuse here. What was your point? Even though you pay for it either way, the difference for how that works out with taxes or direct expenses is the whole point of taxes

When someone says "college is free in most of Europe". It's wouldn't be a counter argument to say "well, it's not free is it, because its paid for with taxes". The people who would (without it being "free"), need to pay for college themselves, are not in the position to possibly cover that cost (college funds are irrelevant). But, since a skilled labour force is important and a value to society, it should be covered by everyone.

[–] Mighty -2 points 10 months ago

Why? What does the one thing have to do with the other? There's always money for war, for bailing out banks, for lobbying... Thus there's enough money for basic human needs to be met without me working for nothing. It's a choice whom to give the money to.

But I agree to a certain point: if I don't need to pay rent, healthcare and education, I don't need to slave away in jobs that I don't want.

[+] [email protected] -19 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Affordable always seems to equate to government spending

[–] JusticeForPorygon 34 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can't be having the government spending all our money!.

Oh? What's that? Lockheed Martin designed a new jet? We'll take 400 of them.

[+] [email protected] -14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah the government has a bit of a spending problem. You don't see companies blowing though money as they don't want to go bankrupt.

[–] surewhynotlem 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You absolutely do see companies blowing though money and going bankrupt. All the time. Companies are always failing.

[–] RQG 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In this case it is the government spending money from taxes paid by the people to improve the lives of the people who elected the government to govern the country to make it worth living in.

[–] kibiz0r 10 points 10 months ago

Yes. Yes it does.

U.S. per-capita healthcare spending (including public and private as well as compulsory and voluntary spending) is higher than anywhere else in the world, with second-placed Germany trailing quite far behind.

On average, healthcare costs in the U.S. amounted up to $12,318 per person in 2021. In Germany that number stood at $7,383 - 40 percent lower. Yet, the U.S. lags behind other nations in several aspects such as life expectancy and health insurance coverage.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Doesn’t have to. Just need laws and stuff that say the owner of single family homes have to be single families (and not big corporations or landlords)

[–] [email protected] -5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think a lot of families can't afford a home. This law would cause a huge amount of homelessness and lead to the suffering if many many people.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In my mind the prices would go down if you don’t have big hedge funds and shit to compete with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Prices are primarily controlled by demand that is why properties in areas that are growing are very expensive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Right. Block big landlords from buying up houses wholesale = less demand = lower price.

[–] SeeMinusMinus 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Instead of moving a few things around thinking it will make a lasting difference we need to move in a different direction. tbh Karl Marx really had something going on even if some of the people that read his stuff were complete assholes (cough cough Stalin).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

It implies the State, through the government, represents the country and deals with suppliers to achieve universal healthcare, education and housing goals.

But the State should always (must) be the primary provider for healthcare and education, although not denying private initiative but instead heavily regulating it to ensure safety and quality.

Health and Education are services, not for profit enterprises.

On the housing front, many countries own and manage large numbers of affordable housing projects and to great success. This isn't to say the housing market doesn't require an heavy regulatory, as it does.