258
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 13 May 2026
258 points (96.4% liked)
Asklemmy
54391 readers
489 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
The rich are rich because they own the businesses. They own the means of production. The problem is capitalism; it’s private ownership of the means of production.
I don't see the connection, personally. There's no problem when wealth is probably managed and distributed. Plenty of societies do that with private ownership, and there's no reason to believe that a communist society would do it better.
Then you're entirely misunderstanding all of human history. Communism has been the source of the most effective poverty alleviation programs in the history of humanity.
Absolutely not.
"Wealth" is the counter side of the coin to poverty.