this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2023
1537 points (98.4% liked)

Antiwork

3640 readers
1 users here now

A community for those who want to end work, are curious about ending work, want to get the most out of a work-free life, want more information on anti-work ideas and want personal help with their own jobs/work-related struggles.

The new place for c/[email protected]

This server is no longer working, and we had to move.

Active stats from all instances

Subscribers: 2.1k

Date Created: June 21, 2023

Library copied from reddit:
The Anti-Work Library 📚
Essential Reads

Start here! These are probably the most talked-about essays on the topic.

c/Antiwork Rules

Tap or click to expand

1. Server Main Rules

The main rules of the server will be enforced stringently. https://lemmy.world/

2. No spam or reposts + limit off topic comments

Spamming posts will be removed. Reposts will be removed with the exception of a repost becoming the main hub for discussion on that topic.

Off topic comments that do not pertain to the post at hand may be removed if it is deemed they contribute nothing and/or foster hostility at users. This mostly applies to political and religious debate, but can be applied to other things at the mod’s discretion.

3. Post must have Antiwork/ Work Reform explicitly involved

Post must have Antiwork/Work Reform explicitly involved in some capacity. This can be talking about antiwork, work reform, laws, and ext.

4. Educate don’t attack

No mocking, demeaning, flamebaiting, purposeful antagonizing, trolling, hateful language, false accusation or allegation, or backseat moderating is allowed. Don’t resort to ad hominem attacks against another user or insult other people, examples of violations would be going after the person rather than the stance they take.

If we feel the comment is uncalled for we will remove it. Stay civil and there won’t be problems.

5. No Advertising

Under no circumstance are you allowed to promote or advertise any product or service

6. No factually misleading informationContent that makes claims or implications that can be proven false or misleading will be removed.

7. Headlines

If the title of the post isn’t an original title of the article then the first thing in the body of the post should be an original title written in this format “Original title: {title here}”.

8. Staff Discretion

Staff can take disciplinary action on offenses not listed in the rules when a community member's actions or general conduct creates a negative experience for another player and/or the community.

It is impossible to list every example or variation of the rules. It is also impossible to word everything perfectly. Players are expected to understand the intent of the rules and not attempt to "toe the line" or use loopholes to get around the intent of the rule.


Other Communities

c/[email protected]


Server status for big servers http://lemmy-status.org/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (14 children)

In 08 they should have let the banks fail. People claim it would devastate the economy. Bs. A rich person would have picked up the scraps for cheap and kept things going. They didn’t need our tax money and no punishment.

Oil subsidies are why we have cheap gas. I’m fine getting rid to them. Just realize your gas will cost more.

[–] STRIKINGdebate2 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I never got the "economy would of been devastated if the banks weren't bailed out" argument made during the recession. The economy was in shambles anyway!

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s a tough one. Assuming nobody stepped in. Yes there would be devastation but somebody would pick up the assets in a fire sale. So no, there would have been some pain but the system would have been better long term.

We can’t avoid all pain, otherwise we end up with companies who take stupid risk since they never fail.

Let them fail and someone else will grow. Otherwise we don’t have a healthy capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (8 children)

The government could have bought out the failed banks and nationalized them.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the banks should have been seized and the owners should have lost it all and the government should have ran them for 5 years to stabilize the economy before selling them back off with conditions on their new owners and stronger regulations in general

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

They wouldn’t have had to run them. They could sell them off with restrictions. Otherwise I agree.

The regulations after 2008 are still a joke. They’re garbage. We need real regulations and consequences.

I dont care when a crime is paid millions. If they create job growth, profits, better wages, etc then they should he rewarded. They should make millions then BK the company.

[–] MindSkipperBro12 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Isn’t the banks failing how the Great Depression became significantly worse?

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

Many things caused that but it was the money run. Money is protected for most people now.

Now days with megacorps, someone would have bought them. The executives and board members were never punished and made millions. That’s the shit that has to stop and I’m a capitalist.

We need companies to fail when they fuck up

[–] majcurve 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The executives and board members were never punished and made millions.

This is capitalism working exactly as intended. These aren’t bugs, they are features.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] chiliedogg 8 points 1 year ago

Because there was no FDIC.

An FDIC bailout would have been cheaper than TARP given the amount of money in most people's bank accounts.

For people with individual accounts worth over a quarter million? Tough titties. If you have so much cash it isn't worth your time to use multiple accounts in case of FDIC bailouts, you clearly don't need it.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

When companies maximize profits they call it smart and good business. When employees try to increase their wages they call it greedy and bad business.

I wouldn't even call unions socialist, I think they're more like a capitalist tool for workers, so those that are already rich get to benefit from capitalism and socialism while workers benefit from neither.

[–] neanderthal 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder if calling unions socialist is a deliberate union busting tactic since socialism is a dirty word in the US.

[–] bravesirrbn 14 points 1 year ago

Why wonder? It's obviously true

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It really isn’t socialism. It’s just a way to regulate capitalism by the workers.

I fully support the right for workers to unionize but I don’t ever see joining a union myself. It doesn’t make sense for what I do.

Right now it’s too easy for unions to get screwed by the companies. We need quicker enforcement of the laws we have in place. Often it takes years by then the union is busted or diminished.

We need enforcement in days. Not months or years.

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

unions are absolutely socialist (specifically syndicalist) and that's why they are based

[–] Transcriptionist 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Image Transcription:

X/Twitter post by user Justin Kanew @Kanew reading:

'They didn't call the trillion-dollar Wall St. bailouts "socialism"

They don't call nearly $1 Trillion in oil & gas subsidies "socialism"

They don't call the billions in farmer bailouts "socialism"

But health care, wages, food for poor people? "SOCIALISM."'

[I am a human, if I’ve made a mistake please let me know. Please consider providing alt-text for ease of use. Thank you. 💜]

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Transcriptionist 9 points 1 year ago

Thank you, fellow human 🤖

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001 24 points 1 year ago

Socialism for me rugged individualist capitalism for thee!

[–] Mawks 20 points 1 year ago

I've been with conservatives all my life it's easy to understand their faulty logic, their logic is: poor people are poor because they are lazy so they don't deserve help. Part of the money = intelligence / success stupid mentality

[–] Water1053 18 points 1 year ago

They want privatized gains and socialized losses.

[–] Finnish_nationalisti 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Bailouts aren't socialism, nor are subsidies or healthcare for that matter.

[–] CitizenKong 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Talking as someone who lived in an actual socialism as a kid, most "socialism" in US political discourse is just the bare minimum of social measures that most Western democracies are already doing matter-of-factly (not only out of the goods of their hearts but also because it is generally known to pay itself off in the long run).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

America is socialist if you're a billionaire, can't have billionaires losing any money buying things. only they poor should pay for things. America is run by mentally healthy people. /s I fucking hate this country so much

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sebinspace 6 points 1 year ago

BUT DEY MAEK ER JERBS!!

[–] bouh 4 points 1 year ago

Well, they are right somehow: socialism is when you also give money to the poor, and they want none of this shit! All the money must go the rich because they "deserve" it.

[–] aidan 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Actually a ton of people did call all of those things socialism.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RIP_Cheems 2 points 1 year ago

"You will be receiving health care by FORCE.."

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

Liberals need to get it through their heads that socialism for the rich is just capitalism. That's how it has always been. That's what capitalism actually is, the free market is propaganda that they feed to liberals to keep you from realizing capitalism is inherently bad.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

its why people say "fascism is capitalism in decline", germany and italy saw massive government involvement in businesses: not to control or regulate them, but to bail them out.

i just started listening to blackshirts and reds so i wanted to butt in lol

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

It blows my mind that theres an anti work sub on lemmyworld. Are they just larping as socislists?

[–] phthalocyanin 4 points 1 year ago

antiwork no longer means the abolition of the oppressive relationship with the capital owning class in which we sell our labor as a commodity.

it's been completely co-opted as a place for milquetoast reform (capitalism will work if we put the right people in charge and call it socialism), and low-effort outrage-porn.

[–] just_change_it 2 points 1 year ago

Aren't "bailouts" usually just loans? 2008 housing crisis springs to front of mind.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›