Labour is fine. Just not 40, 50 or 60 hours a week. 10-15, maybe 20 hours should be way enough to live a worryfree life. Change my mind.


Don’t het me wrong. I get your point and it makes perfect sense. But I like my job and the things I do and 40 hours sometimes isn’t enough to finish all the things I want to do in a week. A 20 hour workweek would mean that i would barely be able to do ànything meaninful.


I think that should be your choice. I just think 20h should be enough to make a living wage.


It is not about how long you work, but is the work needed shared equally. I want to work how much it is needed to work and do my fair share. Not that someone in power should dictate how much I should work, regardless on how much work is needed.


As long as we’re shooting for the moon what say you and me and the mates at work all decide together how much, and how often, and even what we produce?


and even what we produce?

We can’t even get 4 programmers to agree on how to produce something, if you really think you can get more people than that to agree on what to produce, you are really naive.


You mean like a worker co-op? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative)

Or co-determination? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-determination)

Things like Mondragon Corporation, as well as Germany’s quality of life and economic prosperity since their adoption of co-determination laws, shows us that these are not the pipe dreams that capitalists want you to believe they are.


OH! i had heard about how labor gets on the board in germany specifically but never knew the term for it. Thank you friend!


Sure thing. Make sure to tell your friends!

@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

shows us that these are not the pipe dreams that capitalists want you to believe they are.

Could you elaborate?

Also, it was interesting going through those two links and checking out the sections of different countries in the world that have them, and noticing that the United States has almost none of that. Seems like such an outlier, compared to Europe and South America.


What I mean is that the existence, and thriving of these models proves that they’re not only viable, but can provide much better economic outcomes… There is a group of people in the US who work very hard to make sure nothing like that ever gets codified here. At least at the federal level.

Indoctrinating kids into “American exceptionalism” has left us with one and a half generations of “rugged individualists” who think they “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps,” when in reality they’re no different than anyone else. But now they’ve got this warped worldview ingrained in them that makes them believe that everyone who’s ever been successful got there entirely on their own. When in reality, none of them did.

@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

A well-written reply, thank you for that.

“pulled themselves up by their bootstraps,”

When in reality, none of them did.

Granted, your painting with a broad brush, to offer a quick summarization, but I don’t think you’re completely correct.

I’m actually someone who figuratively did pulled himself up by his bootstraps (broken home, high school dropout, etc.), and at the end of my career I do have a small amount of wealth, which I earned all on my own, and was able to retire early.

I don’t want to say too much because I don’t want to dox myself accidentally, but there are those, even if it’s just a minority, who do literally work the system to success, the way it currently is.

prole, (edited )

Shit man, I had this whole thoughtful response typed out, and then my palm must have hit the touchpad on my laptop and I guess clicked a link. When I went back, it was all gone.


I guess I will try to hit the main points… I think I started like:

First, the saying to, “pull one up by their own bootstraps,” itself has actually had its meaning altered over the years into something nearly opposite the original. You see, what they’ve described is an impossible task. It is physically impossible to lift yourself up by your own bootstraps. The saying was being sardonic. A witticism. They were basically saying you were doing something absurd/impossible. So the irony there is always fun to point out (would normally get a source for this kind of thing, but literally just google the phrase).

Then I think I said something like…

With all due respect, you didn’t pull yourself up by your bootstraps. It seems as though you’ve worked very hard to get where you are, and that’s great and some may call it commendable. Others work harder for much less, and others do nothing for far more. That’s inequality at work… Regardless, even if you did literally every piece of business yourself, you still cannot claim to have (at least by the current definition) pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, there were many (literally countless) others involved in the events that led you to where you are today.

I’m going to assume you are in the US, but correct me if I’m wrong.

Surely you’ve used township/county/state/interstate roads and highways? Ever cross a bridge and not die? You make use of wastewater and drinking water infrastructure that you don’t even think about the existence of 98% of the time. The countless medications, devices, technologies, etc., that you interact with on a continuous basis, that would not exist if not for government funding. Which ultimately means paid by tax revenue.

Literally being lifted up by everyone who pays taxes in your community, state, and country.

I am glad that you find working that way fulfilling. And that you’ve been able to make something out of it is great. But maybe that’s a similar feeling of fulfillment to what a guitarist might feel when they write a sick riff? Or when a graffiti artist makes a particularly amazing tag (and admires it for a moment before bailing)?

It sucks we live in a system where, in nearly every situation, those people are forced to do the thing that fulfills you (as in you specifically), while leaving themselves no time and/or energy to do the thing that actually fulfills them.

Ideally, in a post-rarity society where there are plenty of food and resources for everyone on the planet many times over, we should be able to do the thing that gives us that feeling; that fulfills us.

Instead, we’re born shackled to this broken system that breeds hate, bitterness, where maybe single-digit percent of people actually get to do the thing that fulfills them, while the rest of us suffer until we die.

Fun stuff. Sorry, lately the brain’s been in the mood for writing I guess.


If you want to do that, just start your own business with you and the mates.


You mean we’d be in control of the means of production? That’s an interesting idea. We should come up with a recognizable symbol for this new concept. Something simple, like two silhouettes of tools, maybe crossed.

Drivebyhaiku, (edited )

Might I suggest the warm embrace of the 80 different social democratic and economic theories stuffed in a single trenchcoat made of forms signed in triplicate as an alternative? No fancy symbol perhaps but we serve cookies at the meetings.


now just wait a goldarn minnit mister, im not talkin godless unamerican commie shit, i’m talking about returning pride to the workin man. self-determination and democracy at work! dont get it twisted now

Daft_ish, (edited )

Communism! Don’t even consider it. Don’t think about it. Those are bad thoughts, suppress them. Get angry at them. Lash out about it! Communism! It’s evil! It’s more evil than the term evil can describe!

Ok, ok. I’m done. I got to be honest, though. I don’t know very much about communism. I’m not asking to learn this very second, I just wanted to throw that out there.


Ask Jack London what he thinks about scabs.


i don’t know much about it either, friend, I’ve just read a certain manifesto, made a brief foray into das kapital, and read a long question about “what is to be done”.

All jokes aside I started reading some theory out of spite (no lie, its sadly why i do most things lol). It just seemed so clearly and thoroughly detested by established economic thinkers, politicians, and pundits that I just had to know what the big effin deal was.


You did what??? Did the government bust down your door and murder you??? Are you a terrorist now??? Have you learned other degenerate habits??? Are you somehow now gay or more gay than you were before???

Absolutey. Terrified.

They have the forbidden knowledge, y’all. You can not trust this person.


It’s incredible what a huge difference it make to one’s health/mood/etc., having a healthy work/life balance. I think the world would overall be a less angry, spiteful place, if we all worked 4-day, 35-hour work weeks.

Humans were never meant to work 60, 70 hours per week, that’s just insane and stupid. What’s worse are the people who will brag to you about it. That’s how ingrained it is into our culture.

Maybe it’s just because I don’t loathe the thought of going home to my family? It seems like a lot of those toxic work culture people are doing it for reasons like that?

@CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

It seems like a lot of those toxic work culture people are doing it for reasons like that?

Some might have ‘drank the kool-aid’, but for others it’s just that they have a strong work ethic, and they enjoy the feeling of hard work completed well, never really stopping to think that their effort is really going more towards the company instead of towards themselves, but still.

I do agree with you though, a strong work-life balance is most important. Especially when you get elderly, you really feel the mileage of all the hard work you put in overly so earlier in your life.


Im with you, but 35h a week are way too much also. At least you should get a really good wage for that much time.

@VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca avatar

I also find that most of those who are overworking have a bad relationship at home they actively avoid by working as much as possible and get home to eat and sleep nothing more, sure won’t spend time with their kids or wife.


This community is incredibly pessimistic. I know the world is in a hard place already, but I don’t want to be reminded of it every 5 posts on c/all. I have taken to block multiple communities because of it.




But we have our freedom.

Freedom to work at a selection of under paying, exploitative places that will take from you every ounce of effort, strength, and time, so that you can “earn” a living… Because nobody is going to give you a living; you’re not worth anything unless you work and earn your life.

Freedom to choose from a number of ways to live, how to travel from place to place, either by buying an overpriced automobile, and paying for every interaction any professional repair person has with it… Or you can choose to pay to ride transit, where you have to conform to their schedule and if you’re late, you’re left behind… And you get to pay for the privilege. Or you could, IDK, walk? But wait, it’s MILES away from your home, because it’s in a commercial zone and you live in a residential zone. We couldn’t possibly mix commercial and residential. Tsk tsk. That’s just not okay.

You can also choose to buy food at the grocery store where the lowest prices are not in the shareholders best interest, so we’ll do everything we can to convince you that you’re getting the best deals by offering lower prices on your food, as the quality slips away, and products are shrunken down to the point where it’s almost not worth buying it anymore.

But because you have been given a choice, you are “free” and not a slave. Clearly.

… Late stage capitalism is just slavery with extra steps. They’re making the slaves figure their own shit out, rather than give them food and a place to sleep… Just, here’s your barter (pay) for today, go figure out where to sleep and what to eat on your own fucking time.


Best explanation I’ve heard yet. Every time I try to counter everyone I always get Capitalizm=/=Slavery and it’s like just because it’s not racist doesn’t mean it’s not doing more damage to hard workers and slavery was never racist just because a short history recently was. Capitalizm=Slavery doesn’t really say how bad capitalizm is and that’s not denoting how horrible slavery is.


As far as I can tell, the only significant benefit that modern “slaves of capitalism” (if you will), have is that, compared to actual slaves, we can’t be beaten, sold, or outright murdered on a whim.

The physical abuses are no longer allowed.

Mental and emotional abuse is fine though, as long as it’s filtered through a thin coat of “corpo-speak” so that HR can rubber stamp it.

Chakravanti, (edited )

You’re missing starvation, homeless, oh and, the fact that police do all that shit you deny being done…


You have choices, just a lack of imagination


Why should I have to need imagination to survive, while the rich get richer by default?



  • Loading...
  • olivebranch,

    I should just die because I just want to do the work necessary and not go above and beyond to make some rich people richer for no reason or interest of my own?


    That and the whining.


    Can’t complain either? I guess you neither believe in free speech nor in right to choose not to make rich people richer against your own will. These fascistic ideas hurt everyone and saying that someone should die for simply saying them always causes more problems.


    If you had any imagination


    We are slaves. We just don’t like in a big plantation. No. We live anywhere where there are “jobs”. No jobs means we become homeless eventually. And who has these “jobs”? The rich assholes do. Just like we were forced to work for their forefathers in plantations, now we work for them in “jobs”. The job is basically a metaphorical plantation.


    I understand your sentiment, but I wouldn’t liken working a fast food or retail job 40 hours a week to working the fields every day in the hot sun and under the crack of a whip.


    Some people are still forced to work under the sun. But yeah, crack of a whips was worse. They are a bit nicer to slaves nowadays.


    This is actually a batshit insane comparison. You’re fucking crazy, man.



    Similarities between wage labor and slavery were noted as early as Cicero in Ancient Rome, such as in De Officiis. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, thinkers such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Karl Marx elaborated the comparison between wage labor and slavery, and engaged in critique of work while Luddites emphasized the dehumanization brought about by machines. The introduction of wage labor in 18th-century Britain was met with resistance, giving rise to the principles of syndicalism and anarchism.

    stembolts, (edited )

    In my view, crazy is a dismissive word used to avoid making an attempt to understand. A lazy word, and I think most who think about it realize this and stop using it.

    I can see your perspective, but I believe you’ve made minimal effort to understand the “crazy” ideas you are being presented.


    Lazy and offensive is comparing people as property to what we have now. I do understand the hyperbole but it’s so fucking wrong I can’t even respond any other way. Actual property that can be done with whatever the owner chooses, versus the struggles of today. Get out of here with being an apologist on this.

    @AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world avatar
    @charonn0@startrek.website avatar

    While I agree with the sentiment, saying that it’s been hundreds of years in the making is just wrong. If anything, labor rights are at historic highs, and that’s been centuries in the making.


    Capitalism is just feudalism with a glow up


    Capitalism is supposed to put the worker at the top

    It doesn’t because the people with capital make decisions

    Christianity straight up opposes wealth, but it doesn’t play out that way because people with wealth make the decisions

    It’s the same for every system/ideology because a power vacuum will always be filled


    You are assuming someone always has to be in power over someone else. Historically most communities where run without anyone in charge, but with direct democracies. It just became harder with bigger cities, because it was harder to communicate with everyone else. Perhaps we can change that with the Internet.

    ILikeBoobies, (edited )

    Historically you are incorrect

    If you don’t put power over someone else then someone comes in and puts it over you

    The vehicle for change was just how easily that other person can get to you

    You can go back to bronze age kings to demonstrate how what you said was false in all of recorded history


    There is a good yt channel talking about egalitarian societies in prehistory called What is Politics


    If you want to go far enough back that we use theory

    Then we can say prehistoric nomadic humans still had fights with other clans and territorial disputes because our genetic ancestors (chimps/monkeys/apes) also have those

    And if you were there with a gun, would you be able to dominate them? If so then you are able to put power over people without a power structure


    Territorial disputes where only common after agriculture in humans, because territory wasn’t as important before as mutual aid.


    You can point to territorial disputes between non-agrarian humans to suggest otherwise

    Hunting grounds and shelter were more important than mutual aid

    You don’t even need to use humans, you can use other primates


    it is not just farming land that is valuable, sometimes there are good fishing spots and etc in scarce regions. However those are far rarer situations and usually there is plenty of food for everyone, but hard times also happen and then most animals and humans practice mutual aid. There is a good book about it, by Kropotkin, called Mutual aid. It isn’t long, I listened to the audio book.


    Most animals practice mutual aid?


    Yes, there is a good book about it, called “Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution”.

    @hark@lemmy.world avatar

    Capitalism is supposed to put the worker at the top

    No it isn’t. It’s supposed to put capital at the top. It’s right in the name!


    It’s supposed to take money away from the owning class (lords) and give it to the working class (craftsmen)

    The idea is that no matter what you do, you are paid based on hours put into it

    @hark@lemmy.world avatar

    So then billionaires are just simply putting in more hours than everyone else, is that it?


    Refer to my first comment for why that’s not the case

    Drivebyhaiku, (edited )

    Technically feudalism is a separate system of resource extraction. Someone who owns the land basically just takes a percentage cut of your goods or earnings for being on their space and leaves you to do whatever you want as long as you survive .

    So arguably being something like a content creator on a platform or working for uber is closer to feudalism than capitalism.

    Capitalism is more the complicated system of landholders wanting to profit from selling, holding, leasing and developing land for profit as an investment good forcing people to perpetually earn to afford to live as individual family units.

    It’s a subtle distinction.

    @naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    both are correct. As long as their has been expropriation of labour there has been struggle for liberation, also enclosure and forced market participation has been a project of centuries.

    As in all things it’s push and pull. If you want to learn more read about enclosure of the Commons and at least the bits of Debt: the first 5000 years that deal with imposing currency.


    I often think of this famous line to remember that there’s been a whole lot of improvement: “he must a king, he doesn’t have shit all over him.”



    @Shadywack@lemmy.world avatar

    Speaking of eat the rich, I’d like a rich market. A market for the rich we can transfer the wealth from and impoverish them.

    @MacNCheezus@lemmy.today avatar

    Whole Foods already exists. But of course it’s owned by Bezos so it only transfers wealth from the rich to the super rich.


    Costco is employee owned

    CosmicCleric, (edited )
    @CosmicCleric@lemmy.world avatar

    Costco is the best. They’ve saved me thousands of dollars in the past, by looking out for their customers over the companies of the products that they sell.


    While I agree that wages, employee treatment and benefits stand to be much better, Im having trouble understanding the argument. At the end of the day someone needs to do work to get anything


    The exchange is for that labour is extremely disproportionate to the value produced, especially in our modern environment of record breaking profits and runaway wealth gaps.


    That’s not an inherent trait of the concept of labor though. That’s a direct result of exploitation. The solution isn’t to ban hiring a person for a wage; it’s labor regulation and unions.


    The inherent trait that distinguishes labor from other factors of production is that the actions of persons (labor) come with responsibility for their results. The services of things (capital and land) no matter how effective in increasing output can't be responsible for anything. They merely conduct responsibility back to their human users.

    The solution is to have legal and de facto responsibility match. Consequently, all firms should be structured as democratic worker coops @microblogmemes

    jlou, (edited )

    If we look at the whole result of production instead of its value, the situation is more disproportionate. The employer owns 100% of the produced outputs and holds 100% of the liabilities for the used-up inputs while workers as employees receive 0% ownership claim on the produced outputs and 0% liability for the used-up inputs. Capitalism is based on someone else getting what workers produce


    The alternative is to abolish the employer-employee relationship and have everyone be either individually or jointly self-employed as in a democratic worker coop. On top of that, since land and natural resources are not the fruits of anyone's labor, there is no fruits of labor based claim to it. As a result, land and natural resources can be subject to collective ownership arrangements with revenue from this collective ownership as a UBI


    Correct. And if we were paid proportional to the generated value, we would have a lot more middle-class people… working… providing value…

    But instead, we work, sometimes one, two, three jobs, and still can’t afford to see a doctor, or do anything besides exist, go to work, pay rent, sleep from exhaustion.

    This is prison.


    someone needs to do work to get anything

    The issue isn’t that someone needs to do work, it’s that some people are forced to do more than their share of work so that other people can do less. There’s a class of people who get money without having to lift a finger just for owning stuff (land, residential buildings, companies, etc.). When there are people who get money without having to earn it through work, that means there must be other people elsewhere in the system who are paid less than their work is worth. And there’s not a damn thing they can do about it, because the owner class can simply refuse to pay them more, so the workers’ choice is between being exploited or starving. The workers can’t just go and find some land to claim as their own, it’s all owned already.


    There exist people at the top who are obscenely wealthy, despite doing zero work. In contrast, workers who produce everything of value are badly underpaid, entirely due to the fact that all the surplus value goes to the few fabulously wealthy.

    The proposal is that of all the unnecessary, overpaid, worthless positions in society, there are none more worthy of elimination across the entire market than CEOs, executives, and shareholders. There is no reason for a scant few to gorge themselves upon all the resources and money. Instead, we ought to make all businesses the equal and collective property of the people who work there, with management positions promoted and removed by worker elections only, with term limits. One worker, one vote.

    @ICastFist@programming.dev avatar

    Not only that, before we can even “freely” sell ourselves, we, or someone, has to pay for our preparation/education, because why pay for a slave’s training when you can charge them?


    Not saying op is wrong but why is there so much negativity on Lemmy? I agree capitalism is not a great system but I feel like this horse has been dead for a while and we are still beating it.

    Lemmy kinda bums me out tbh.


    I think it is just a lack of a popular alternative platform we can talk about important things in the society without being censored or quietly diprioritized by the algorithm.

    @Grayox@lemmy.ml avatar

    Be the change you want to see in the Fediverse and start posting funny memes instead of complaining.


    wait till AI helps them to control us by learning our habits from social media


    Already did.


    If you want peace and safety, you need to participate in society. That means paying taxes and voting in elections. Too many people only did the paying taxes bit, and now our society’s fucked.


    I don’t think that lack of voting was the problem, it was lack of direct action. You always get voting choices that both make things worse, so you have to fight outside of the voting booth. And for taxes, I shouldn’t have to give my money to the powerful rich that are running the state, but should be able to take tax from the rich that have more then others and make them share with everybody.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • microblogmemes@lemmy.world
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • ethstaker
  • Durango
  • everett
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • osvaldo12
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • tacticalgear
  • cubers
  • rosin
  • mdbf
  • HellsKitchen
  • thenastyranch
  • cisconetworking
  • lostlight
  • Leos
  • GTA5RPClips
  • tester
  • modclub
  • khanakhh
  • relationshipadvice
  • anitta
  • normalnudes
  • bokunoheroacademia
  • sketchdaily
  • All magazines