70
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
70 points (100.0% liked)
Environment
4016 readers
26 users here now
Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).
See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Ah the old trickle down.
How many lives would have been saved if the people working to build yachts and facilitating trips instead worked to feed the homeless or something?
Humanity has a limited pool of labour. If the billionaires spent more, it means more labour catering to billionaires, less labour catering to the rest of us.
Jobs are limited, salaries are not, technology already amplifies work output way above everyone's needs.
Trickle down would work if it wasn't for everyone undercutting everyone else: billionaires don't get charged enough, millionaires don't get charged enough, and people at the bottom keep trampling each other over minimum wage jobs.
The solution starts with people at the bottom joining forces and saying "FU" to unlivable wages, as in unions and general strikes. As long as most people keep seeing each other as a threat, those at the top can play them at will.