Originally Posted By u/HumusSapien At 2025-04-15 02:37:32 PM | Source


  • frostysauce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    They would rather set it on fire than pay people more. They want to keep everyone just barely below water. Almost no corporations are looking to hire good employees, they’re looking to hire desperate people.

    • galanthus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Why would they set it on fire? “They” are not sadists, they act out of self interest and this would not be beneficial to them in any way.

        • galanthus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          Because something might benefit the bourgeoisie as a class(God, forgive me for using Marxist concept of class), does not mean it makes sense to do individually, which is what we were talking about.

          But I would say this is exactly backwards: individually, it always makes sense to pay less if you can, but not in terms of the whole economy.

          Even if you think in terms of macroeconomics, no, poverty is not beneficial. Any economy needs a strong market to sell goods to. Unless the country is exporting somewhere else, high amounts of disposable income is needed in the population for a thriving economy. Paying workers less does not necessarily result in worse outcomes for businesses, especially in the long run, since the economy might suffer.

          So you could say that the statement “the bourgeoisie as a class benefits from poverty” is incorrect.

      • Kanda@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        They are very much sadists, they can spend money on anything except increasing wages