[deleted]
How in the hell
Submitted 1 year ago by ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net to workreform@lemmy.world
https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/c736ba19-905c-4338-a5d3-739cf6399dde.webp
Comments
ndsvw@feddit.de 1 year ago
onceandfuturealice@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime That’s why I poop on company time
speaker_hat@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Upvoted during the act
psycho_driver@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Look at Mr. fancy pants, sleeping in until 6:30 every morning.
doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 1 year ago
Keep in mind that in 1975 the top tax rate was 48%, some sources say the effective rate on corporate was 44%. This message went out right before the largest recorded increase in USA poverty from 1980 to 1983, and the Reagan Administration gutting federal regulatory bodies and slashing the corporate tax rates down to effective 0 rates, sometimes a negative rate if they received corporate welfare.
If anything, bro really jinxed it by saying “it can’t possibly get worse, right?”
EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
if I bust my ass for a company, I deserve an equal portion of the money the company rakes in from whatever it does.
An equal portion of money as ever other employee gets. For the parasites in the excusive room, that means much less, but for the people who actually have to work in the company that means a lot more.
Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world 1 year ago
“That’s not how the market works.”
I’ve had to have this conversation so many times I feel like I’m losing my mind. Like I need to write a manifesto or blog post that I can reference instead of rewriting it every time.
Markets are not moral.
Market forces are like physical forces - we observe them and use that knowledge to predict the outcomes of situations. But by the same token we need to have a moral framework underpinning the way we use the knowledge, or else we will destroy the world.
Justifying low wages by saying “people are willing to take the job” is just saying “people would rather do this job than be homeless, starve, or be poor_er_.”
I, personally, am fundamentally not okay with an economy that is fully supported by workers essentially being coerced into working from fear of death or despair.
We look at the nuclear bomb and the damage it caused and say “that was bad, let’s not do that”. But we look at inflation, wealth accumulation, class warfare, rampant shameless greed, and don’t immediately see the cause/effect relationship.
Now the conversation about some work being harder, more unpleasant, more stressful, or more valuable than other work is an important one. But in my mind the important part is removing the coersion.
If people had their basic needs met and didn’t fear starvation or homeless, I bet employers would have to give their workers a better shake in order to keep things running.
kicksystem@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I ceinge everytime money grubbing is normalized. Bloomberg is now building an AI like chatGPT to do their forecasting. They are super proud of that, but instead they should be deeply ashamed. What value are they providing? People are just lining their pockets and other people applaud these people. This is a serious culture flaw.
EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
We look at the nuclear bomb and the damage it caused and say “that was bad, let’s not do that”.
Most people have no idea how horrible it would actually be if WW3 happens. That’s why we need to stop the fighting in ukraine and start the peace talks.
I’m not on either side of that war. I just don’t want the world to become radioactive ashes.
But everything else you said, yes. If you want people to work, you need to pay them. If no one wants to do the job, you need to offer higher pay to make people want to work there.
This is basic supply and demand. Boomers refuse to understand this because they think younger people are entitled for wanting the American dream.
Work is often hard…but the shitter the job is, the higher the pay needs to be.
ARk@lemm.ee 1 year ago
How in the hell could a man work and be asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so?
There are a lot of labor issues to discuss but putting a bunch of normal things you do anyway and sticking some face and a name on it is not it folks.
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
I think the idea is that while these are things you do anyway, you are rushed to complete them quickly, earlier in the morning than you would likely prefer, all for the benefit of someone else to profit off you.
I think someone that was in a co-op would not resent those things nearly as much, or at all.
FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I definitely would not wear a bra if I don’t need to go to the office. Hell, dressing and getting out of bed are also fairly optional, even if working from home and I don’t know anyone who commutes for the fun of it. Also I’d definitely take the full worth of my labor please.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It seems only sensible that someone would want to be paid the full value for their labor.
Yet, in so many of my conversations, someone gives a reasons to justify a share of the value being taken by executives and billionaires.
People are struggling to survive, but they act like their survival is less important than wealth being further accumulated by someone who already has enough wealth for countless lifetimes.
feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I don’t really enjoy anything anymore. Might as well spend my time doing something.
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
If you have a local DSA chapter, you could give it a visit and see if it’s something you’d be into. They tend to have a good amount of genuinely nice friendly people, and they help people with mutual aid and other activities you may enjoy. Just an idea ^^
feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Not based in the USA but I expect I’d find them helpful if I was, thank you.
mandolrain@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Stealing this
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
No one enjoys it. That’s why it’s not called “going to fun”.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Some of us concede as inevitable that work should be miserable.
Yet, some cast shame on those who emphasize the misery it causes.
Meanwhile, among those who describe wok as miserable, it is common to assume the reason as being that work involves effort, rather than that work, at least as most of us engage in it, requires being subordinated.
EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Many concede as inevitable that work should be miserable.
There are some jobs that suck, but they’re essential. Like maintaining sewers in big cities. It’s a miserable job, but if no one does it you’re going to have huge problems really fast.
Supply and demand. There’s a high demand for workers of all sorts, but no employers want to pay the high price for having a worker on staff.
It’s not that no one wants to work anymore, it’s that no employers want to pay people enough to live and people don’t want to be forced to work 90% of their week to still not make enough money to live.
Business owners that don’t understand that are entitled and stupid.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
I understand and agree but memes like this and the whole “anti-work movement” are doing irreparable damage to any progress you could hope to make in “work reform”.
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
It doesn’t really have to be that way, though.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
Of course it does. No one enjoys cleaning sewer drains.
WuTang@lemmy.ninja 11 months ago
I don’t mind working for someone as I get my due. I am more annoyed by my taxes being thrown to the toilet or given to Ukraine/Israel support (to follow actualities) than working 8+ hours for my employer. I am totally OK that my taxes serve to pay school, hospital, infrastructure, agriculture but these fat and senile representatives, nope!
boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Thank you, I’m not crazy after all
Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Debt mainly.
mekwall@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Money is created from debt and there will always be more debt than money.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I feel it is somewhat confused to compare the debt implicated in money creation with the debt imposed on ordinary workers simply to live.
BearWolf@lemmings.world 1 year ago
Wow even more Russian Soviet KGB dezinformatsiya. Capitalism is the best system the planet has ever seen. It ensures freedom and a just division of resources. Or would you rather than your sustenance depends on some commisar? Better make sure to magnify and sanctify the holy name of Stalin – or else!
In the US, you are free (it’s called right to work, sweaty!) to join and leave any company at any time. Whereas if comrade Stalin had his way, you’d be shipped off to Siberia to work a in a munitions factory while starving.
Nahlej@lemmy.world 1 year ago
By “just division of resources” are you referring to the monstrous and ever growing wage and wealth inequality gap? I’m not sure how you consider that to be a “just” system.
BearWolf@lemmings.world 1 year ago
Everyone gets according to their contribution. That’s something communism and capitalism actually have in common. However capitalism takes into account uniqueness, results, and innovation. In communism you get rewarded just for doing something. No matter how shitty the thing is, no matter how lazy you are.
In capitalism you get according to how critical and innovative your thing is. So yeah, most people aren’t very critical or innovative. So why would they get much?
Oh, you can scan groceries or flip burgers — you should be able to buy an apartment in a large urban city. Doesn’t that strike you as a bit silly?
Also, we need wealth gaps so that people would be motivated to invest and grind and strive.
danque@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You’re missing the point.
BearWolf@lemmings.world 1 year ago
Go back your Russian Soviet KGB troll hole! Capitalism is the best! I am a capitalist every day!
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on worker owned cooperatives within a capitalist society?
Bruno_Myers@lemmy.world 1 year ago
i don’t think he knows how to spell cooperative, let alone what it is
BearWolf@lemmings.world 1 year ago
If it worked, we’d see more of it. But I have nothing against it why would I? Anyone can be an owner in capitalism.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Your representation of historical associations is obviously being deeply corrupted in order for you to construct a distorted narrative.
TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id 1 year ago
You obviously know nothing about Bukowski. Whatever Lemmy may think of it, the above quote wasn’t intended as a political statement.
BearWolf@lemmings.world 1 year ago
I know he was a Russsian Soviet KGB dezinformatsiya and provokatsiya agent. I mean it’s right there in the name. You’re not fooling anyone “Charles.”
WuTang@lemmy.ninja 11 months ago
start your company and maybe you’ll understand where is your place
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 11 months ago
What do you mean by that?
WuTang@lemmy.ninja 11 months ago
That managing a company is maybe not for you. Calm down, it is not for me either, I am in the middle of closing mine. Even though I am not bankrupt and have treasury, I will be in debt when closing it.
Devouring@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Didn’t people do this for centuries to farm and have enough food?
Who said that the goal of humanity is happiness and hedonism? Why not make responsibility your goal?
I can even contend that true happiness is reached through responsibility.
Floey@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Would you tell a slave to just focus on responsibility? Why would you tell someone working for a wage something similar? It doesn’t seem hedonistic to me to want to enjoy the fruits of your own labour, or see your community made better by the work you did. Instead a lot of the value of your labour is siphoned off by people you will never meet and only have negative feelings for.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It seems as though you and I read two completely different posts.
Did you intend to put your comment elsewhere?
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 11 months ago
I think different humans have different goals, and as long as those goals don’t infringe on others, that’s perfectly fine. So you wanting to take on responsibility (in whatever way that means for you) is totally chill.
The issue with the current system is that the goals of business owners (the ruling class), infringe upon others, and those other people would prefer to have a system that doesn’t do that, so that everyone can more freely try to achieve their goals without being exploited by others.
Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 months ago
to farm and have enough food?
Farming is literally seasonal work. Meaning no, you don’t do it every day. The main events are planting and harvesting.
true happiness is reached through responsibility.
Your main point could just as easily be used to defend capitalism - ie. Paying your bills. Can you get more specific about how I can use responsibility to create happiness in my life?
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
It’s less of a pain when the work you do is fun and interesting, but ironically when that’s the case you’re usually making even more money for someone else.
MxM111@kbin.social 1 year ago
Nothing wrong in making money for someone else, IF you get yourself decent salary and have interesting work.
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I dunno, working in construction contracting has taught me that time in man hours is the ultimate pricing value point. Someone who gives up their time should reap the most benefits. Someone who owns a business and pays others to work should be heavily taxed.
Earning a bit more does help make it more palatable, but it still isn’t fair.
MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
You make money for someone else in exchange for the safety of a consistent paycheck. Its like the old feudal system, in theory you are being protected in exchange for your labour.
If course in practise you are at the mercy of the company, and in the feudal system the protection you were afforded meant you needed to pay for your own armour and fight to the death to protect your owner.
Scrof@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
If you’re one of the lucky few sure. But you’re kinda part of the problem. The vast, overwhelming majority of people on the planet work jobs they don’t really like just to keep a roof above their heads.
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Eh, I’d argue that can make it more palatable, but honestly I do think, at least in most cases (I can think of outliers), it’s generally pretty exploitative to profit off of someone else’s labor that they themselves are not actually wanting to do themselves, like it’s not really fair in the grand scheme of things.
A simple way to fix that I guess would be if every company was a co-op. Since then everyone is profiting equally, and no one’s labor is being exploited for the exclusive benefit of another.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
Quite the opposite. Work that’s “fun and interesting” tends to pay less because there’s a surplus of demand and limited supply (artists, cooks, etc).
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Are you sure? Whenever I feel gloomy, I seek a band of corporate lawyers. It is hard not to be lifted quickly by their distinctive spectacles of mirth and cheer.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Walking barefoot on gravel is less painful than walking barefoot on nails.
The greater difference is in being free.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
yes but a factotum is a person who does general, menial jobs, and Bukowski was writing about his (assumed true) experience finding work after being rejected for thr WW1 draft.
12345678@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It was WWII, and I don’t know if he actually got rejected, the end of Ham on Rye implies he just didn’t register.