this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
400 points (98.8% liked)

Antiwork

3567 readers
3 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/antiwork@lemmy.fmhy.ml

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/workreform@lemmy.world


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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, it meant I knew how to manage risk and run a business. When they took their full value, they ran it right into the ground.

Of course they wouldn't lose their house or car in your fantasy world. They never had one to start with. Communism has always provided a lower standard of living for the people living under it. There is reason they have to build walls to keep the people in.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

You are not understanding.

The risk is artificial.

Those who have the most wealth, the most capital, are not facing risk, compared to everyone else. Someone who has $10 billion in assets and loses $2 billions has not lost in the same way as a poor person who loses a car. The billionaire is completely insulated from the precarity faced by most of the population, because the billionaire privately controls the vast wealth of society. The losses suffered by the billionaire owe to the instability of the business and the business cycle, not to the trials of life.

Those who are most wealthy face the least risk, and in fact impose the genuine risk on everyone else.

If control over capital were shared, then no one would be precarious, nor need to use a home as collateral for a loan.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No I understand just fine. Unless you want to cite something, stop saying I don't understand something when you clearly don't understand.

The risk is not artificial. That is one of the strangest things I have every heard. Small business is a large part of the economy.

There are 33.2 million small businesses in America, which combined account for 99.9% of all U.S. businesses. Small businesses are credited with just under two-thirds (63%) of the new jobs created from 1995 to 2021. In 2021, a record breaking 5.4 million new business applications were filed in the U.S.

You have some weird fascination with billionaires when the average company or employer is a small business that has nothing to do with billionaires.

The average person takes out a loan, uses their cash, put their car or home as collateral to start a business. These are not billionaires, and they're the heart of our economy. Yet you are babbling about billionaires which I am not nor are most people who run a company.

https://www.uschamber.com/small-business/state-of-small-business-now

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You are being incredibly dishonest.

You mentioned Elon Musk.

I simply observed that most of the capital is owned by a tiny cohort of society. Small businesses, especially businesses worth approximately the same as a house, comprise a relatively small valuation of capital (which is not the same as the number of businesses, or the number of jobs).

There is no reason why economic activity needs to be tied to someone risking becoming homeless. Such a relationship is a consequence of the system, the way that wealth is hoarded by the few and made available to the rest only under conditions that serve the private interest of the wealthy. A different system would not need to carry the same feature.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No, it isn't. I just proved to you otherwise. Every day people fund most. That is how most companies get started and most companies are risky ventures. Most large corporations are heavily leveraged as well. People hear profit and they think the company is swimming in cash when they have billions in debt.

Now I agree it shouldn't be this hard to start a business. People should not have to risk all their savings, house, etc and that is something that could be easily solved. We need better incubator loans from the SBA. No collateral, no risk to your credit but heavily supervised. I would fully support that. I would like to see most of the megacorps fail and instead of a Starbucks on every corner, a small coffee co-op or a small co-op chain of restaurants.

I will take a wild swing but your best meal has never been at a McDonalds.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How did you prove that ownership of capital in terms of its valuation is not extremely heavily concentrated?

You only gave the statistics relating to the count of small business and jobs in them.

One business can be worth more than a thousand others.

I suggest you review statistics on wealth distribution in various countries. Learn how much wealth as a share of the total is owned by various cohorts, and investigate questions such as how many individuals own half the wealth.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Wealth distribution is something people who don't understand wealth bring up. Elon has a lot of wealth. That doesn't stop me from having lots of wealth.

People need to stop worrying about the billionaires and focus more on their own journey. I don't use reddit, facebook, Twitter or any of that crap. If everyone stopped using them, a lot of the billionaires would vanish since it's funny money.

Yes, the wealthy have more wealthy but that doesn't stop you from having wealth. This is about as far as I get into any social media platform as I don't want to give people like Zucker money.

[–] bane_killgrind@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Elon has a lot of wealth. That doesn’t stop me from having lots of wealth.

Economies of scale mean that Walmart out-competes local small business general supply stores, and the corporate profits are then taken out of the community instead of being spent locally. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/walmart-effect.asp#:~:text=Walmart's%20insistence%20on%20procuring%20products,choose%20to%20sell%20through%20Walmart.

So one party having a lot of wealth absolutely impedes other parties accruing wealth.

You are being evasive and dishonest.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Indeed. The narrative being presented is that people are shopping regularly, and obtaining most goods and services, at small businesses whose owners have listed their homes as collateral, in order to contribute generously to their communities.

It is a fantasy.

Neither the owners of big box retailers, or the owners of banks that are giving loans to new businesses, are "taking all the risk".

Life is good if have hoarded capital, and the reason is because everyone else depends on it to survive.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Your are being evasive and dishonest.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I am not evasive at all. You're not poor because Elon has billions. That is a tough cookie for some people to swallow.

If you want to end people like Zucker, stop using facebook. If enough people stop using it then he will lose billions.

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

When claims you previously made become challenged, instead of engaging the challenge, you dismiss the relevance of your own claims, by hurling meaningless and derisive assumptions.

You must feel quite strongly about your convictions, if you cannot defend them more effectively than by insultation.

[–] wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee -1 points 11 months ago

I have defended them well. I even cited which is something you’ve yet to do.

Your answer is billionaires are why you are poor which is incorrect.