• Tja@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    9 months ago

    Still, there are farmers working to produce that food, using fuel, hiring mechanics, etc. Literally millions of people are involved in the research needed to make insulin so efficiently. Millions more are currently involved into making AIDS, Cancer and other diseases less fatal. And obviously homes don’t grow on trees, from raw materials to specialized geologic knowledge, lots of people have to work very hard to build (and maintain) a home that is safe and pleasant.

    That’s being said, many countries do guarantee all of that. Capitalist countries, before lemmings jump out with bullshit.

    In Germany even if you are unemployed you get your health insurance paid for, your rent covered - up to centra in surface area depending on the family size - utilities paid for, and a certain amount of cash for groceries and basic needs. The only condition is you have to be looking for a job and accept any reasonable offer - and make a good faith effort to keep it. Sometimes the government will ask you to work for them (usually unskilled laborike cleaning parks or something like that).

    • LadyAutumn
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I mean, you picked like one of the handful of socialist market economies that does that.

      Canada nominally provides you with money in the form of social assistance if you’re unemployed. It’s not enough to pay for rent on a studio apartment. Let alone food.

      The point is that being alive is not a voluntary contract. We don’t ask to be born, and we are continually told by society that suicide is unacceptable. This is fine, I think that it’s generally a good idea to promote being alive. But capitalism has actually decided that being alive is only half of it. You can’t kill yourself, but you can’t exist if you’re not useful to the capitalist system either.

      So basically if you’re mentally ill, if you’re disabled in any way, if like me you have medical conditions that make routine employment significantly harder than it is for people without these conditions - you’re just screwed. Here’s your 600$ a month social assistance check. Rent is 1000$ on the absolute most basic apartment in your area. Bare minimum groceries for a single person are close to 300 a month. You might be able to afford to live in a multi bedroom dwelling with strangers without central heating and lead plumbing that often doesn’t work. At that point, your best bet to eat is at food banks, which are overcrowded and underfunded. Every single person, company, and political group across the entire country will demonize you as being essentially worthless and openly talk about how you should be forced to output labor that you are unable to output.

      All this while like 10% of apartments sit empty, we throw out like 30% of the food we produce, and most labor in society has become about capitalist maintenance (office job, desk job, working for companies that essentially do nothing to feed or house people, that produce unnecessary goods in mass quantities for profit motives). Like capitalism has openly determined that we are worthless. We’re worth less than garbage. They’d rather throw food away than feed us. They’d rather leave perfectly functional working apartments empty than give us homes. Capitalism has no use for people who cannot produce capital. This isn’t new, and it is a fundamental aspect of the system. They call it merit. How much merit do you have? How much do you deserve to be alive and be happy?

      And I work 40 hours a week and have for years. I take medications that make that possible, and I’m very lucky that medications exist that can essentially make me compatible with the capitalist labor system. But I lived that life before, and have many friends who still do. Barely surviving because society has decided that it’s not worth it for them to live.

      Not everyone can output labor. The point of society should be to ensure that all members of society can live healthy safe and happy lives. There is no reason this cannot be the case. It has just been decided by those with majority power that it shouldn’t be the case. Suffering is legally mandated.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Seems like a Canada problem, not a capitalism problem. Germany is a capitalist country where things are kind of okay. France is a capitalist country and they banned throwing away food that’s is still edible. Many countries tax residential properties that are empty, encouraging renting or selling them and fueling supply. There are easy and straightforward solutions to all of those problems. You just need to vote for people willing to implement them.

        And those are not tax havens or microstates, BTW. I’m talking about countries with 50+ Million people, a lot of immigration, and not even a lot of natural resources. For countries with oil look what Norway is doing. Also capitalist, BTW.

        • LadyAutumn
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yeah, I specified in the first line that Germany is a socialist market economy. As are the Scandinavian countries to varying degrees. Those are not features of capitalism. Those are features of those specific countries. You could do away with market capitalism and still not throw away food, or leaving residential properties empty. Free market capitalism actually dictates that food and housing are private industries that should be controlled by private interests with little (or no) government oversight. Socialism is what says that those thing should be government regulated and that measures should be taken to ensure everyone has access to food and shelter.

          The socialist market economy is not the same thing as a capitalist free market. To be clear, I also believe that a socialist market is insufficient. Simply taking half or quarter measures to ensure people don’t starve to death and have homes isn’t enough either. A modest step in the right direction, but not what the end goal should be.

          • Tja@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            It is an economy centered around capital, so a capitalist economy.

            And nobody is talking about half homes. You get something like 50m2 for the first person and 20m2 for each subsequent family member.

            • Winter8593@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              These are not black and white capitalist or socialist systems. Each countries economy is different and more often than not a mix of economic ideologies. No pure capitalist economy exists, nor a pure socialist economy. Trying to argue that these are or are not problems with capitalism is a bit of a moot point because of that.

            • LadyAutumn
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              That is not what capitalism is lol

              I said half measure not half homes. They could just, you know, provide homeless people with homes. Taxing property owners for not renting properties is doing pretty well nothing for people who are homeless and half no income. Over half a million Germans are homeless.

              Edit: I see where the half home confusion is coming from, that was a typo meant to say “have homes”.

              • Tja@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                BTW: The government in Germany offers you a home, but it won’t force you into a home, if you want to be homeless you can be.

                • LadyAutumn
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  No, a market using currency does not make it capitalist. Capitalism is the free market. Capitalism is the economic ideology of private markets. Capitalism is the labor ideology of private ownership of the means of production. That one person can own a hundred factories and be entitled to the fruits of labor of those factories.

                  A country is more capitalist the less government control of its free market. It is more capitalist the more privatized its industries are. It is more socialist the greater the government control of its markets are, and the more nationalized its industries are.

                  Communist nations still use currency. Currency, or capital, has existed long before capitalism came into existence.

                  If you want to know more there are plenty of freely available resources online that explain it in much grater detail than I will here.

                  • Tja@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Of CAPITAL markets, no need of long winding diatribes.

                    Communism aspires to a cashless society.

    • novibe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Nothing you said changes the fact that only a small portion of humans need to work for the rest of humanity to survive. Or everyone could just work 10 hours a week and everything would still be fine. Problem is most people spend 40 hours a week doing bullshit number shifting jobs that just serve speculators to get richer. Nothing being produced. If we actually focused our productive forces into use-value instead of trade-value and completely removed financialization, we could all live lives of abundance while barely working at all. We are at that point, technologically and in the total productive forces of our species. It’s simply a matter of political will. But the ruling classes would never accept that.

      • Tja@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Right but I don’t want to survive, I want to have a smartphone, and a car, and a TV, and some steak or sushi every now and then. I even want someone to prepare the sushi for me and maybe even deliver it to my house.

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          So you and everyone else can have jobs that are actually productive for society (like producing, preparing and delivering food…), and then also work like 10-20 hours a week and have everything you described. I don’t see what’s so hard to understand.

          Or do you mean you prefer to have a useless job that adds nothing to society but allows you treats while millions of people live in abject misery?