this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
214 points (93.1% liked)

Work Reform

9994 readers
133 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 62 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Shower thought: if everyone gives a % of their labour value to the government it's called taxes and is evil communism. If everyone gives a % of their labour value to an individual it's called capitalism and is glorious. How does that mental gymnastics work?

[–] ohlaph@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago

Propaganda is a strong and prosperous machine.

[–] squid_slime@lemmy.world -4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

We are capitalist society working in feudalistic companies

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 31 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

No, we are workers exploited by capitalists.

Unless you are not selling your labour and instead living on the profit derived from the workers, you are not a capitalist.

It's a very simple system laid out in Das Kapital and still taught in economics today (at least in the UK):

Aristocrats - people with wealth by virtue of controlling land

Capitalists - people who have wealth by virtue of having wealth (i.e. they can invest/speculate)

Worker (or Proletariat) - people who have to sell their labour to capitalists or aristocrats to survive

Lumpenproletariat - an underclass that has fallen out of society and resort to the black or grey market to survive

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

To follow up, let's talk about the names of the system!

Absolute Monarchy: a system where an individual has absolute control of the means of production (often, though not always, via birth).

Feudalism: a system where the a wider, though still small, group of people, control the means of production based on land ownership (often, though not always, through an aristocratic class) (fun fact: the Magna Carta changed England from an absolute monarchy to a feudal state, it did not create any kind of democracy, as the myth often goes).

Capitalism: a system where those with money (i.e. capital) control the means of production. We are here.

Socialism: used interchangeably by both Marx and Lenin with communism (Lenin specifically states the "socialist" in USSR was aspirational, not literal). However, has now come to denote the "transition" period from Capitalism to communism where the workers control the means of production via what Lenin called a "vanguard party" or worker-controlled legislature

Communism: where the means of production are no longer controlled at all with no class divide, legislature, or private property (note: personal and private property are two different things; no one wants your toothbrush) based on the principle "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I just want to reach the dizzying heights of the proletariat.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Capitalists are the ruling class that own the means of production through private property and profit from workers' labour, or otherwise have the vast wealth needed to have decisive influence on production.

Workers are not capitalists.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 37 points 10 months ago

Making money for doing less than nothing, just like when he was CEO!

[–] AbackDeckWARLORD@sh.itjust.works 28 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It’s a sickening juxtaposition since Microsoft also laid off thousands of people this year too.

[–] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 34 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Assuming $100k salary per employee, the money Balmer didn't need could have saved ten thousand jobs. That's a disgusting amount of wealth. No sane person hordes that much money.

[–] hypnotoad__@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago

Is totally gonna trickle down, just you wait!

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago

Wealth is not money.

[–] Fleamo@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's not for doing nothing, it's for doing things he already did. He got the stock as part of his compensation plan at Microsoft.

And a dividend of $0.75 per share is 0.2% interest at the current share price, he could get more in a savings account and 20x that in a CD or something. The dividend isn't crazy high. He just had a shitload of their stock.

Executive compensation as a whole is a story, but Steve Ballmer is not doing anything particularly noteworthy.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

It’s not for doing nothing, it’s for doing things he already did.

Yeah, I'm more interested in how much Steve Jobs daughter made last year. Money gets whitewashed into the next generation like royalty.

[–] iraq_lobster@slrpnk.net -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

stock ownership need to have an expiration date. Sure he did work to reclaim the gains of these shares, but at a certain point these stocks need to be relinquished and shared among the real contributors of the company so they could also get a taste of their work. You can't keep leeching off of people like this all the time, or whats the point of having kids and procreation overall ? Even 1 billion$ isn't much to make a globe changing endeavour like space travel, but its too much that if he chose to keep having coke injected directly into his body for the rest of his life he would still have money left. The mere existence of this person is just a nuisance, like many anonymous others

[–] CrayonRosary@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Get my 401k outya mouth!

[–] boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sooo what you are saying is if I can afford to have coke injected directly into my body, I've made it to the big leagues???

[–] iraq_lobster@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

the purpose of life is to maximize happiness and euphoria. have other suggestions in mind ?

[–] boatsnhos931@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is that what you think shooting coke constantly does? My suggestions would be the exact opposite, you crazy lobster!

[–] iraq_lobster@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

haha! though i didn't bother thinking it up, still i dont mind being enlightened in that regard. I think anything that would ensure a constant supply of serotonin would be a good fit. But now you will have tolerance issues to deal with ..

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If someone introduces such bull crap you will lose your pension.

[–] iraq_lobster@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Guess what!? I work a hell of a lot harder for a hell of a lot less. isn't that strange?

[–] iraq_lobster@slrpnk.net 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

he racks such wealth because he is a shareholder who leeches off of the effort of 1000s of people like you that do actual honest work.

[–] squid_slime@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

the rich are rich as they care not for the poor

[–] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean, that is how capitalism works. This is as true for any owner as it is for Balmer.

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Doesn't make it right. And we should highlight each and everyone by name. Don't let them get away with hiding behind anonymization such as "shareholder", "owner", or "CEO".

[–] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Fine, but what do you do about it? Under the current system he’s equally entitled to receive $1 billion from his ownership as any other owner is receiving $1, he just got lucky getting his because his company just so happened to become one of the biggest in the world.

[–] astreus@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

I disagree with fatalism. Under the system of feudalism the lord had similar rights. America & France changed that in capitalist revolutions. Change is one of the only things we can say is inevitable. It takes time, determined people, and usually a catalyst event (such as rampant hunger and homelessness).

I would suggest reading "Capitalist Realism" by Sam Fisher for a good understanding that we have been led to believe that this system is the only real one, but it really isn't. And it won't be. We need to keep that in mind if we want to make a change.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago

You are a shareholder.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago

In a Justice way or in a Juicy way?

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago

Lazy guy. I bet he spends some of that on drugs or alcohol.