• pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That’s so strange. So you’re saying the entire capitalist system, that funnels value and wealth ever upward, where consolidation has been rampant, oligopolies are the order of the day and some of our “most successful” companies face charges of but then nothing is done about their monopolies, where at these same titans of industry, an even narrower funnel shovels obscene wealth to those with access to the company’s equity grants and options, while those who actually provide the work in the company get 2.3% wage increases because wage stagnation must increase until beatings improve, where these same few companies set and increase prices to enrich their own quarterly stock grants while their employees can’t get an increase that even matches inflation let alone provides value…

        You’re saying that this system somehow allows for wealth concentration? /s

        I was thinking about it today as I went by a Les Schwab where behind the front desk they proudly offer payment plans for those with good credit in an enormous banner. Why can’t Americans afford to buy car tires? Why would they need to exist in a system where interest would need to be paid to be able to fix their common mode of transportation? Why are tire companies opening finance arms to loan usuriously? Why does a mobile telephone take 2 months of salary to afford? Ask GE finance I suppose and Jack Welch.

    • Powerpoint@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      152
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t inflation. This is greed. Record profits with soul crushing wages. Governments that allow this are complicit. We need heavy windfall taxes

      • evranch@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        93
        ·
        1 year ago

        Windfall taxes are reactive and bad policy in general.

        What we need is a return to pre-Reagan tax policy. Higher upper tax brackets, corporate taxes, and the closing of loopholes that allow the rich to hide their wealth offshore.

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        74
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        saying “greed” in the context of capitalism makes no sense. the word doesn’t have meaning because the system is morally agnostic.

        edit: its a headless system optimized for profit accumulation as its sole parameter. there’s no systemic incentive for anyone to behave otherwise.

        • VenoraTheBarbarian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          ·
          1 year ago

          What word do you prefer to use to describe people who hoard more wealth than they or their children can spend in a lifetime while the vast majority of workers are on the edge of financial ruin? Why can’t they be satisfied with just having one mega yacht? One giant mansion? If not “greed” what do you call it?

        • 4am@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The system isn’t morally agnostic dumbass, it literally is greed. It was created for the purpose of greed and it continues funnel all the wealth to the greedy. Loopholes are found around all the rate limiters and speed governors that get designed into the law and federal agencies. They’re trying “company store” tactics again. Fucking child labor is back.

          “The system is morally agnostic” imagine the fucking Stockholm Syndrome (yes I’ve heard it’s not actually real stfu)

        • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          the word doesn’t have meaning because the system is morally agnostic.

          The people at the top of it swimming in their Scrooge McDuck piles of money while the rest of us struggle seem pretty fucking greedy to me.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          there is no such thing as a morally agnostic system, you either agree with or disagree with the outcome of the economic system, it is moral or immoral.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, a system whose only imperative is personal upside maximization with no consideration for anybody else is morally agnostic if you put aside the moral dimensions of having no consideration for anybody else whilst acting for personal upside maximization.

          Same as murder being morally agnostic if you put aside the moral dimensions of killing another human being.

          Consider the possibility that you’re confusing familiarity, common use in your environment and even normalization of something with it actually being devoid of a moral component: just because people around you got used to act in some way without questioning such way of acting doesn’t mean it’s morally agnostic: after all, slavery too used to be normal.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So many people seem to have mistaken what you said for a defense of capitalism.

          I think a better way to say it is that greed isn’t a useful way to explain any particular thing that happens in a capitalist system, because everything that happens in capitalism is driven by greed. Saying one particular problem is caused by greed is like a doctor saying someone’s illness is a symptom of being alive; it’s true, but it explains nothing.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those are here for the same reason…

      People act like inflation is the invisible hand of the market, this is capitalism, companies will charge whatever they want to maximize profits, and that rarely results in a lower price.

      Like, if you made thingamajigs, and if you made as many as you could (10 million) and sold as much as you could to saturate the market and end up making 10 million, that’s less profit than if you charged $5 a piece and only sold 2 million. Same income, much lower overhead.

      So you cut staffing and make 1/5th of what you can because that maximizes profit.

      Which is fine until your thingamajig is something that people need like food, water, or shelter. If you’re putting profit over production, then people who can’t afford it have to go without.

      It’s literally what’s going on with insulin. This is t a hypothetical, this is what’s been happening for a long time.

      It’s just with the same few giant corporations making everything, if just one does, the other 2-4 giant corporations crunch the same numbers and come up with the same plan.

      Something that used to be called price fixing is suddenly just “internal analytics”

      • zephyreks@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So… The Chinese real estate model? Overbuild, saturate the market, and suddenly housing is no longer an issue.

        • orrk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          wait, all we have to do is make more than what the optimal profit supply/demand curve dictates, and we can get rid of homelessness? maybe do the same with food so no one has to starve?

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I could have bought a decent house alone, albeit uncomfortably. But I was happy enough in my condo. Now I have a wife and dual income, and we’d have to really stretch for a shitty house on the outskirts. And neither of our wages have changed much.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        that may be true, if you live in the magic no change in cost of living world

  • Codilingus@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    169
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The advice in that article is primo out of touch and humorous. They give statistics that people’s savings and assets are down X amount, and the first advice is save for an emergency. Running out of savings?! Just save more, five head.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      108
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am reminded of that quote along the lines of “it is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not weakness, that is life.” I did everything right, and had a more than adequate emergency fund.

      But then my house vaporized that emergency fund… and only then did COVID happen and I lost my job twice. So that’s roughly three “holy shit thank god we saved for a rainy day” events in three years.

      I’m sure I will be in “just save money” mode some day in the future. Lots of shit left to clean up right now though.

      • SuiXi3D@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        and only then did COVID happen and I lost my job twice. So that’s roughly three “holy shit thank god we saved for a rainy day” events in three years.

        You just explained the last three years of my life. I have no savings left. Period. If anything happens to the car, or either one of us loses our jobs, we’re done. That’s it.

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, you aren’t “done”. Life continues.
          Even when the state conspires against you having shelter from weather when you’re homeless. Life still goes on.
          Until it doesnt.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I love that the guy who penned that gold was one of the world’s richest people, and not that long ago called for increasing unemployment, so that the worker learns his place again.

    • Naja Kaouthia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok, yeah! I’ll just set aside the (checks notes) almost nothing I have left after food, rent, utilities, gas, and my exactly two streaming services.

  • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mitch McConnell staring off into space - Good thing Americans had those stimulus checks to live off of for the past 30 months.

    • stella@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Speaking of, where did that money come from?

      Did they just print it?

      Weird how when it comes to helping the working class, taxing the rich is never an option. But when it comes to helping the ruling class, you can tax the working class and print money.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Didn’t it just come from taxes. I know they claim there’s never any money but there’s always money, they just don’t to use any of it.

        They’re always claiming they need to raise taxes but they don’t, they just need to spend them. Also possibly maybe they shouldn’t give contracts to their chums as backhanders. Maybe then they get better deals.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But, but, but … how could big politically connected companies ever be able to be competive in the Free Market without subsidies???

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Every dollar they can save by not spending on making US citizens lives better can be used to buy another missile or drone. The Ukrainian and Israeli armies have benefitted more from our tax dollars than US citizens have in recent times, it seems.

            • rusticus@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, stop eating avocado toast and start an arms production business by the bootstraps!

          • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m all for weakening our second biggest potential enemy, who got into their current situation through an act of baseless aggression, by spending tax money supplying high tech weaponry to an ally willing to spend it’s populations lives in defense of their country and ideals. That is a win-win.

            I’m not so much ok with spending tax dollars to support a genocide.

        • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Didn’t it just come from taxes.

          No, Treasury directed the fed to issue bonds and run those loans through banks and businesses. When Congress spends money, it spends it into existence- it doesn’t have a pool of dollars that people have sent in somewhere. For that matter, when you pay your taxes, the money is used to zero out the bonds (again, in the Fed’s ledger) used to issue it. Remember, money in circulation is (from the POV of the fed) a liability on its books.

      • rusticus@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fun fact: more money was printed during the pandemic than in the history of the US. And 80+% of it went to the top 1%.

  • Cap@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I canceled all our streaming services and Amazon prime. I canceled my phone service and opted for a $15/month plan (Mint). I buy a cheap phone, about $70 bucks. I asked my wife to stop buying me snack foods at the grocery store to save ~$50/week. All told I think we are not spending ~$300/month that I can now put towards our cars that are starting to break down. Someone said something about savings but I only cultivate dust and stones there.

    • stella@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t feel like you have to do without just because you’re smart enough not to subscribe!

      You can stream pretty much anything for free here: https://fmoviesz.to/

      Just make sure you have uBlock Origin installed.

    • KptnAutismus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      if your cars are totaled one day, definetely buy a toyota made around 2000-2015. those things are modern but still indestructible. (but definetely don’t cheap out on maintenance, oil is especially important)

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Especially with the war on work from home that seems to be going on at the moment.

          Can’t you guys just apply to work for European companies remotely wouldn’t that be a workaround? I know my company has a few remote American employees and they’re not totally useless.

          • Patches@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Most companies would rather not perform the hassle of hiring international workers. Taxes are… Complicated. The only reason it makes sense is to save a shit ton of money - see India.

            • wesley@yall.theatl.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The other time would be for high demand skills that they can’t staff locally which only applies to certain industries like tech, etc. Even then it usually only makes sense if they’re getting top quality talent in those industries.

              I consider myself to be a decent software engineer which is fairly in demand (even with recent layoffs imo), but even then I think I’d have a hard time finding a remote European job.

              Oh and let’s not forget that for most engineering positions the salaries are usually lower in European companies. Unless they’d be willing to pay relative to where I live, it would probably mean a pay cut. And I doubt even the benefits would make it worth it given I’d still be living in the US with our private health insurance system, terrible/expensive transportation, etc.

              If it offered relocation then that could make it worth it but that’s probably even more difficult to get hired for and has obvious downsides

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same. Huge promotion, way more responsibility and stress, annnnnnd I’m just treading water financially.

    • time_fo_that@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I got a second degree in computer science to try and get ahead and instead entered the market just in time for hundreds of thousands of layoffs so now I’m stuck making less than I did at my last job meanwhile inflation and rent have increased the cost of living by like 50%.

      Edit: oh and suddenly WFH = evil according to every CEO because of their billions of dollars of real-estate investments

  • Melkath@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not surprising at all.

    Corporations made BANK and all the CEOs put it directly into their pockets.

    • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why stop at their wealth?

      As someone pointed out to me, round them all up. Throw in them into an island penal colony and let them all go Lord of the Flies on each other.

      My suggestion for improvement, was every once awhile, lob some artillery shells at the island. Can’t let those billionaires get comfortable.

      • stella@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think the worst punishment for the ruling class is to make them part of the working class.

        I guarantee you, most of them would rather kill themselves or others than live like us.

        • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree, I was pretty pro-guillotine till that was pointed out to me. Redistribute their wealth and tell them where it’s all going too.

          “Congratulations Jeff Bezos, you donated $1.3 billion to various labor organizations.” “Congratulations Richard Branson, you donated $1.21 billion to climate change initiatives.” “Congratulations Warren Buffet, you donated $1.14 billion to support low income people.”

          Knowing where their money is going to support society in general will fucking kill them. Each of these shit bags all think that they are needed for civilization. Let’s watch them put that delusion to the test on an island penal colony that gets bombarded with artillery shells every once and awhile.

  • buzz86us@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, let’s raise rent 40% just as people are financially disadvantaged… That is sustainable.

  • rchive@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Increasing the money supply didn’t help the poor and instead helped the rich just like every other time we’ve tried that?! I can’t believe it!

    • tswiftchair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Increasing the money supply would have been fine if it had gone into working people’s pockets, infrastructure, jobs, housing, and other productive uses. But yeah, when it’s just pumped into the stock market or funneled through business via PPP then, go figure, the rich get richer while everyone else suffers.