• AShadyRaven@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    4 months ago

    i just want a small property with a yard and a couple trees and room to grow some plants and tinker on projects

    if only i didn’t spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on avocado toast in my 20s

    • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      I just don’t want to be homeless when I am old. That’s all I want. Having food and housing. A two room apartment for me and my husband would be nice. If I can use the public transport on top of that, I’m all set. A three room apartment would be a luxury and being able to go out every once in a while would be absolutely astronomical.

      (I also want to have healthcare but I am in Germany so I got that going for me which is nice. )

    • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Modest home. Stone fruit trees. Nice big pole barn for projects.

      My wife and I have been searching for community and reasonable housing costs. My data analyst self began mad research of all sorts for about a year. Then, we moved into a vehicle and explored for eight months.

      Boots on the ground, we learned that everything is much, much better if you’re at least 40 minutes from the closest Walmart. This is harder than it seems. It’ll likely be an hour+ commute to a workplace with decent pay. But, it’s been consistently true wherever we’ve traveled (US): No Walmart nearby means a solid community and cheap land.

      We found a place we like. My wife accepted a job offer today. We bought a 14’ enclosed utility trailer and will build a temporary home in the two weeks before we leave, avoiding rent and mortgage until we find the perfect piece of land.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      4 months ago

      No more billionaires, but everyone can be a millionaire.

      The shortest path to equality is to greatly reduce taxes on the middle class and increase them on the wealthy.

      It puzzles me why leftist parties don’t all embrace lower taxes for the middle class.

      • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It puzzles me why leftist parties don’t all embrace lower taxes for the middle class.

        They all do. My best guess as to why you’d say this is that you’re including Democrats.

        edit: Or, I could be a self-centered American that didn’t consider others. I’ll do better.

        At risk of a strawman…

        The shortest path to equality is to greatly reduce taxes on the middle class and increase them on the wealthy.

        That’s what’s best for equality and for economic growth. Does this mean Democrats are horribly incompetent? Perhaps it’s that equality and economic growth aren’t their goals.

          • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            4 months ago

            Fuck. I’m being a self-centered American, again. I’ll do better in the future. Thanks for the help.

        • maccentric@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Considering the strains currently on the environment, finding a way forward that doesn’t require continual growth is likely a necessity for our long term survival (possibly short term too)

          • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            But, muh’ capitalism!

            If it doesn’t work then we’ve killed all these socialists and communist for nothing.

            (Do I need a /s here? Is it obvious? Should be obvious.)

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 months ago

        It puzzles me why leftist parties don’t all embrace lower taxes for the middle class.

        Functionally, we don’t have one. The closest is the Green Party, but they’re so powerless that they may as well not exist.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        A lot of leftist view taxes as a good thing, when taken from those who can afford them

        • classic@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          Taxes have never been the issue. How they are used is. But that gets obfuscated so that the 99% shoot ourselves in the foot

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Taxes are DEFINITELY an issue when I pay more taxes than many billion dollar corporations.

            • classic@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              Yes. You (and I, and most of us) are experiencing the end result of the American people being played with a deceiving narrative. “No taxes” is a con game to get us to this type of situation

    • Chakravanti@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You’re wrong. It doesn’t require no money. It requires that you have rejected the sucker for money.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 months ago

    If you live in a society where you work a 40 hour week and you STILL can’t afford basic things like shelter, food, utilities and healthcare, then the rich are stealing too goddamn much from you.

      • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        It also doesn’t account for corporate price gouging or the fact that the only reason people go hungry in the world is because letting them starve is more profitable than feeding them even the leftovers and about-to-go-off.

        As well as what you said, theres also no reason not the presume the number could be much lower too.

    • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Man if I had forty million bands i’d do it. Just rip off the bandaid. The world would be a better place.

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        4 months ago

        Right now, as we live and die, there’s enough food to keep every human fed, with plenty of enjoyable meals included (not just boiled chicken and broccoli).

        It’s about distribution, which is a corporate problem.

        • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Distribution is the problem. Authoritarians left and right are the problem. I work for a nonprofit that feeds the poor and temporarily under resourced and the government is our biggest obstacle.

          • sparkle@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            Cymraeg
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            What specific problems does the government cause for this non-profit, exactly? What “authoritarian” policies is this “left” you speak of enacting which harms the needy?

            • LeFantome@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              “Left and right”’in this context probably means everywhere, not “liberal” and “conservative”.

              So what you asking about just the “left” probably makes no sense.

              “What specific problems does the government cause”? is a great question. I hope we get an answer.

              • sparkle@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                Cymraeg
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I somehow don’t think we will, considering the original commenter is seemingly pretending that they didn’t see the comment. I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt, but it’s hard to believe that they’re actually telling the truth about any part of what they said considering they apparently think Trump is the best candidate we have. American centrist and right wing policies are pretty anti-poor.

                He uses “left” to refer to Democrats in his comments so I just assumed he meant it here too.

                My only guess is that they mean “a for-profit church” when they say “a nonprofit that feeds the poor and temporarily under resourced”. But I dunno, maybe they’re telling the truth.

        • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Distribution is a problem but trucking food from one country to a poor country is not the fix to end world hunger forever. Food aid is fine as a temporary solution but moving food from one country with a surplus to a poor country as a long term solution will just destroy the local agricultural industry which would keep these nations dependent on other countries for food. This happened with the clothing industry in many African nations. The West dumped so much clothing into many African nations as charity that local clothing shops and tailors have to compete with free clothing, thus the clothing industry is unable to flourish. The best solution is to help these nations improve their local food productivity and grow their economy.

            • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              I never said we shouldn’t feed people. Just that fixing the distribution problem alone isn’t the end all fix to end world hunger. And this isn’t about capitalism since even in a socialist country where all the workers own the means of production, you know like farmers, there is an economy that can collapse. Yes we should feed hungry people by giving them food but we should also help them increase their food productivity so that their economy doesn’t collapse because of the influx of food. Since most poor countries are agricultural economies.

              Keeping poor nations poor and dependent on aid isn’t good either.

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    4 months ago

    I want wealth to be an indicator of a well-rounded member of society, instead of its current role as a proxy for sociopathy.

    Also, how about relabelling excessive financial accumulation as something along the lines of ‘financial obesity’.

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Obesity used to be a sign of wealth, and confer higher social status. So oligarchs would be introduced as “the biggest, the fattest, the most corpulent of them all, Richie Apartheington!”

  • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    4 months ago

    Nah I definitely want both. My current hobbies are expensive. My dream hobby of getting a pilots license and a small plane would be really expensive.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      What if you used that plane every so often to fly others around? Or perhaps you share it with others like a time share?

      It feels like there’s an answer here. I’m just spit balling, though. I’m not even fully against capitalism, I’m just kind of tired of… Well… All the billionaires and dramatic wealth inequality.

  • sircac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 months ago

    Trying to get rich is the selfish version of “every man for himself”, building a more equal society is the empathetic one: in a fair society there are no threats to seek your own life.

    • PmMeFrogMemes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      lol literally. like yes… that’s the point of being rich. unless you have literal scrouge mcduck fantasies of diving into an ocean of momey

    • Chakravanti@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It is shallow, sure. That doesn’t, however mean that it isn’t deep. Money is literally both and that’s because it eats your shoe sole and your soul. Don’t believe me? Good. Don’t believe anything at all. I don’t. I know what I know because I listen to “God” the Devil and the Dead. Six one way half a dozen the other. Heaven is what they don’t explain.

      Hold on. I need to thrown the fuck up. Lets deconstruct the evil here. I know exactly what the Devil is saying and why Heath Ledger was murdered by the CIA.

        • jawa21@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Seemed fairly clear to me.

          In 1884,  meridian time personnel met in Washington to change Earth time. First words said was that only 1 day could be used on Earth to not change the 1 day bible. So they applied the 1 day  and  ignored  the  other  3 days.

        • rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          theres companies making money off of prison labor, if u want a not very subtle example. in the US, prisons are also for-profit institutions, making it even more insidious.

          then ur typical capitalist labor situation ofc. ur boss makes more off of their workers labor than their workers get paid. this “surplus value” is how bosses get richer than the ppl who work for them; all without having to do any actual work of their own.

          ow also landlords who rent housing to ppl for a price, often providing very little or even no maintenance at all for that building. this exploits peoples need of shelter for the landlords personal gain, as landlords squeeze as much money out of ppl as they can get away with (also for example, keeping security deposits for no good reason).

        • rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          i mean, thats great! but the moneys gotta come from somewhere, and in most cases someone else is being exploited.

          most non-profits actually suffer from this issue where getting funding is the number one priority.

          the organization has to bend its methods to what will look good on paper vs what would actually be best for their cause

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    Not sure what your point is old man, but I can’t get the freedom that the rich enjoy without being rich.

    Deluding myself into a state of bliss when the mortgage is due doesn’t help anyone, especially me.

  • BleakBluets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s interesting how this scene was constructed. The blacksmiths and their table never appear outside except when guiding the one lost blacksmith back home. The old man is usually sleeping in the bar mumbling about his lost son (flute boy) until the pre-credits end sequence where they are reunited in the forest. The text boxes normally have a transparent background, but here it’s a darkened floor tile from Sahasrahla’s hut.