• ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because capitalism demands infinite growth, forever, which means even when we’re post-scarcity we need to keep working forever to continue growing beyond what is necessary.

  • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Temporarily embarrassed millionaire syndrome. “I can’t vote against what the rich people want, because what if I become rich some day?” Completely missing that they, in the course of their entire lives, will not make as much as what most of the rich assholes of the world make in a day/hour/minute/second.

    EAT THE RICH.

    • freebee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the spirit of your comment i agree with, but not the letter.

      Nothing should be completely free, because nothing is free. Water needs processing, electricity needs a grid, sewage needs treatment, etc.

      Basic things should be affordable for all: housing, water, electricity, internet, food etc.

      But “free” creates incentives to be careless with resources. Which is counterproductive to making sure they are available for all at affordable prices.

  • llothar@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because inequality creates incentive. The bigger the difference between the bulk of the society and the top percentages of earners the more people are willing to risk to reach the top. That’s why there are more successful startups in the US than in Scandinavia.

    It’s a global rat race and the US is “winning”.

  • OopsAllTwix@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Always remember the dishwasher and why it was invented. Then apply that to EVERYTHING man-made. It’s alway to save time, for someone who is not you.

    • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m glad that dishwashers exist though. Washing dishes fucks up my skin and I couldn’t pay someone to do it for me.

      • OpenStars@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        For-profit media sells what people will buy. Hollywood movies tend to put women in revealing outfits (men too really). A guy wearing a drab, comfortable t-shirt draws much less attention. Though Don’t Look Up was a fantastic exception:-). Still, all else being equal, the barriers are higher for the right booth than the left bc the inherent interest factor is lesser.

        • The Liver@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Ooh, nice take. Still don’t get why the bunny girl specifically. I guess for artistic style.

          • OpenStars@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Meh, it’s a Japanese thing, and therefore Japanophiles enjoy using that iconic imagry around the world. Japan only more recently started leaving behind their extremely heavy prudishness, similar to the 1960s hippy movement in most Western nations, and so this is their version of a “scantily-clad female”, dressed up specifically with the intent of causing excitement. I doubt many people ever physically wore such an outfit, although the way it looks here makes it look more like something you’d see in a Vegas-style casino (irl image, mostly SFW but still out of sensitivity I am merely linking rather than auto-displaying it here), which is an exact analogy to the more anime & video-game style.

            Also btw there is a male version - e.g. the chip & dale style. Example irl image. Notice how both the above for woman and this here uses fishnets, either as tights or in lieu of a shirt.

            The point though is that they are “dressed to impress”, and like not in a business suit kinda way, but rather to titillate and excite the audience, even if just shy of the NSFW line. Joss Whedon’s (and so many others) “lens flares” in movies or is a non-person example - something that adds little to nothing in the way of substance, and in fact somewhat even if only slightly distracts from such - and instead is purely for style. Another example would be those wing / wind-spoilery things on cars, which if you are doing city driving you will literally never get any functional benefit from whatsoever, yet they help them sell b/c it pushes an “image” to the potential purchaser.

            TLDR: one way to think about it is that comforting lies are style over substance, while unpleasant truths are substance over style. Though really that’s kind of a distracting dimension, since no matter how you package the latter people don’t tend to enjoy it, and vice versa for the former… - but still, those thoughts do often travel together.

          • OpenStars@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Lemmy has an enormous down-vote problem, far worse even than Reddit somehow imho. Somehow the old chat forum way of “this response is relevant to the subject and adds to the conversation”, as yours did, is mostly ignored in favor of “I enjoy seeing this, so I am going to click the LIKE button”. (Implicitly, the hidden third option, of simply leaving it be, is likewise passed over, in favor of what I can only presume is due to lonely people desperately seeking to have some kind of interaction with the world.)

            For me personally, I try go by the adage “don’t be a jerk”, but there are MANY people who apparently disagree with that:-D. One enormously crucial component of that is that the apparent anonymity of downvotes is an inherently unequal one - without being an administrator of an instance, I cannot easily find out who downvoted something, so they can make those kinds of hidden comments about me (or in this case you) that I can do nothing to block (short of moving to an instance that does not show downvotes of any kind whatsoever). This is why, whenever I do want to downvote someone, I always take the time to explain it in a comment, or upvote an existing explanation that does the same, so that the recipient is made aware of why people are saying that it is less relevant or should not exist. (major exception: unless it is an obvious troll - they already know, they simply don’t care, and those I most often don’t even bother to downvote, and rather simply block and move on with living my best life, free from that noise)

            This downvoting issue has several problems, one being that different people like different things (e.g., gosh if you can believe it, even non-Linux operating systems, gasp!:-P), and how we NEED diversity of cultures (and ages, genders, walks of life, etc.), but yet downvoting creates echo chambers and discourages participation. I dare say that the top criticism of the Fediverse is the overall lack of content, and therefore the downvoting issue is the top reason why more people do not share content, and therefore our stupidity is the top reason why if it dies, this is what will be that killed it. i.e., if I am going to be spit upon, perhaps I will show up the place that did that less frequently? Other people can do whatever they choose… yet so too can I.

            So my advice is: (1) read the cargo cult of the ennui engine, then (2) feel pity for all the people who can only accept precise clones of themselves and cannot enjoy or even simply leave alone someone else saying something that they do not 100% agree with, but feel compelled to respond, almost like it is themselves that they are arguing with inside their own heads rather than you.

            TLDR: Karens are going to Karen, and until alternatives to Lemmy are developed (Sublinks and Piefed are both coming!!), there’s nothing anyone seems willing do about it.

            img

  • UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    at this point in time… All hunger, all deprivation, all poverty

    Is because SOMEONE wants it so. Not because circumstances make it so

  • Zoboomafoo@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Because old people aren’t looking at tweets like this.

    It’s just our generation that has this as a standard view, and now we’re reaching the point where our generation will take over.

    And there’s going to be some changes, let me tell you.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Clearly it’s because of all those immigrants stealing your share of the crumbs.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Without (real or artificial) scarcity profits would go down, and if profits go down stop growing the-best-possible-system© just collapses.

  • RecallMadness@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Because every man-hour freed by automation is a man-hour of opportunity to exploit and profit elsewhere.

  • bazmatazable@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Many great reasons raised to explain why the current system persists so its clear to me that there isn’t just a single roadblock. One reason, in my mind, is the challenge of reaching consensus. Even in small groups this can be problematic and more so for an entire population. It frustrates me no end that often small disagreements in the details of an idea is enough to prevent any positive change, even though at a macro scale the idea is good and universally supported.