Interesting
this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
735 points (98.4% liked)
memes
11269 readers
3812 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This meme implies they even considered the possibility of paying a fair wage.
And that the costs are the same. Nets are likely much more expensive than living wages.
Theyll spend a billion so we dont get an extra million
"Nets are likely more expensive than living wages" How do you figure?
More over, even if nets were less expensive than a living wage, how would that make the company any less evil?
Yeah the nets are cheap, what they'll spend on is union busting.
Consumers: Well, that's fine!
consumers: my boss says i need a smartphone for MFA and will only give me a small stipend
I love the notion of a Mcdonald's employee needing MFA.
Or that the only reason people buy smartphones is for MFA (in the years before widespread MFA, I'm sure they were getting them because they knew MFA was just around the corner.)
Edit: I think it's just easier to admit people don't really give a fuck about other folks if it would cost them anything. Walk down any street, most people are wearing clothes they know to be made by children who occasionally burn to death and many of those same people will happily fork out $200 for the "coolest" versions of those same child slave made clothes.
Some people be like that.
But also there is so much toxic stuff with our world its impossible to avoid all of it. You cant do good on all the fronts at once.
To illustrate (this is not a critique of any person)
Lets say your deciding to not have that phone and only get clothes you know are made fairly.
Good job. But are you still driving that dirty car? Even if its electric your still a part of the to overpaving of natural ground.
How about turning vegetarian because we aint blind for the animal cruelty. And don't forget to donate to save the sea projects because on a water based planet the health of the ocean is always the most important conversation of the day.
Btw we still looking for people to join the anti war protest. If you truly care about the routine murder of civilians you will be there,
While were at it we should probably quit our jobs. Being a programmer at a tech company isn’t exactly doing mych ney positive. Also the modern economy is screwing everyone and killing any chance of a future so its more ethical to volunteer instead of work.
Also you are late to bring the kids to school. And your youngest is trowing a tantrum because you tried to feed them a more ethical alternative for nestle products.
I am just illustrating. People have needs, lives and others to take care off. With out limited energy we can try and put some towards doing something good. We have to respect the choices people make to do that good. Even if its not our personal branch of activism.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Where can we buy ethically made phones, clothes, etc that we can easily afford? I can assure you most people aren't buying $200 pants/shirts.
Fairphone makes ethical smartphones. I've got the latest model, it's good 😃
Any second hand store means you're not contributing to the problem!
And look at what people are wearing on any downtown street and ask how much that outfit cost etc.
Second hand isn't always practical. For some things, sure. But definitely not even for most things. And if everyone did it regularly, it'd be even less practical/reliable.
And again, you have a wildly inaccurate view of what most folks are spending on clothes. There's a reason Walmart and other affordable clothing stores like Target, Kohl's etc are so widely available and used across the US.
I don't think "yeah sure, that'd be great but if we all started doing good things it wouldn't work!" is a particularly valid critique. We are nowhere near the point of too many people buying second hand clothes.
Yes, cheap stores are common.
But the most valuable brands in America are not at the cheap level, they are things like Nike, Levi's and The Gap. Hell, even in progressive bastions so many people are rocking Arcteryx, REI etc, none of which are cheap.
Again, go to any downtown, look at the outfits and consider how much they cost. Just the same as people wearing hundreds of dollars in jewelry (yes, there's costume jewelry but that's not what most folks are wearing downtown.)
My point is that one person is only able to produce 1 second hand item at a time. So you're saying roughly 50% of the population gets to buy new and the other must by used. The logistics don't make sense long-term. I wear my clothes until they have holes in them. I'm not giving that shit to a thrift store, because they legitimately won't accept items like that. I know there are plenty of other people who do the same. Pants are actually the most consistently relatively expensive clothing item, usually costing $40-60. Because of that, I only own 3 or 4 pairs of pants and when they start getting tattered, they become my yardwork/garage work/etc pants until they legit fall apart. If everyone does this same approach, there isn't much of a second hand market, no?
The national average wage in the US according to the Social Security Administration is $66k. People are barely able to pay rent. According to various surveys, anywhere from 40-60% of Americans are living check to check. And a quick search shows the most purchased clothing brands include Under Armour, Levi, Adidas, Nike, Hanes, Fruit of the Loom, etc. All of those btands do make items that cost $50+, but they also sell tons of shit that's $20 to $30 or less.
Except most people aren't buying second hand, so you're complaining about a non-existent problem.
Edit: As an amazing proof of concept, I'm in a dive bar, saw a pair of gloves in a wicker basket of lost and found and asked about them. The bartender gave them to me, notinf they'd been here for more than a year. These are easily several hundred dollar gloves.
But if things really got to the point where many people were willing to buy second hand, there are in fact ethical brands as well for those who need new. Myself, I buy few things but as much as I can ethical either 2nd hand or from happy factories. (Though, goddamn I cannot find ethical boxers for a semi reasonable price. If you got tips...)
There's no ethical consumption under capitalism. Please don't blame the average phone buyer.
That's a silly slogan, I get the appeal but I think it's just an easy way to avoid taking responsibility for our own decisions.
At the very least, there is better and worse consumption. It is utter nonsense to say that buying something made possible by modern day slavery is the same as paying a local artisan for something.
By your logic, you must be happy about climate change since you're okay with using the Internet which is mostly fueled by fossil fuels
Oh, neat! I didn't realize that much like clothes there are ethical internet alternatives. Which do you use?
Shiny!
Foxconn: “We take offense to that. We make more than just phones. We also make TVs, PlayStations and EVs.”
Traditional Slavery is cheaper than paying a wage, so is modern slavery
This is the reason I imported a Fairphone 4 to the US (before they got a US vendor... Would not recommend it unless you want to work on your phone instead of having it just work (they are fine now, there is proper support, I just have the old hardware). Im functionally locked to T-mobile, it has very unusual issues when Im on a call while moving and it was a bit pricy for what you get. But all that was worth it to be able to say I have a smartphone where noone died while making it.
Time off is included in the living wage part -.- can't believe that needs to be said. These fucktards don't know how to maximize their wealth extraction. Motivated laborers will labor harder.
What's this in reference to?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn_suicides
They installed nets as one way to address the problem.
One thing I always feel should be pointed out is that Foxconn is enormous. When you look at the number of employees vs number of suicides, they're actually lower than the average company.
Yea, those nets are really working!
If you install nets just below rooftop edges to catch jumpers... What stops them jumping down to the net, then jumping from the net?
Suicide can often be a matter of convenience and impulse. Even putting pills in blister packs instead of bottles has been shown to reduce suicides by overdose. After England switched from coal gas to natural gas, not only did suicide by gas inhalation decrease, all suicides decreased.
Having nets will keep many people from even trying. Killing yourself is inherently irrational, folks contemplating doing it are rarely thinking pragmatically.
From what I've seen they kind of fall down into the net and it sinks, so it's pretty hard to climb up and over the edge. But I guess it's possible.
I upvoted this post from my name brand flagship phone.
Is the problem really one of salary when it comes to the suicide nets?
Are the workers driven to suicide for the low pay, or is this actually a matter of horrifyingly bad working conditions?
Well I guess a lot can change with money...
The worse people are payed, the more they are prone to exploitation no?
I mean, lots of comparatively wealthy people are under some pretty horrible working conditions, so I don't know that I would call the two tightly linked.
Sure, Foxconn should probably pay at rates that are livable for their workers, but the more acute problem is probably to not drive their workers so hard that they attempt suicide.
It's mostly a matter of statistics. Those factories don't have a higher risk of suicide than any other job, they just employ so many people that a few suicides a year is inevitable.
We can just go ahead and put "society" at the bottom.
I might pick the evil route if I can Vince McMahon walk it, looking super smug, while "I AM GENIUS" blasts real loud. Seems like the cool thing to do.
Living Wage?
How about Animal Cage?
view more: next ›