• Corroded@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    158
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    How taxes are dealt with in North America. Just send me how much I owe. Don’t have me go through a service to figure it out

    • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Likewise, the IRS already knows everything about me. If I qualify for, say, food stamps, just have the IRS send me the food stamps. Don’t make me jump through hoops when I’m already destitute, come on.

      This would make tens of thousands of jobs redundant and make many social programs much more efficient.

      • AOCapitulator [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And save trillions of dollars, especially if we extended this to Medicare for all

        But using resources efficiently isn’t the goal, suffering is!

        • raven [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If Democrats actually wanted to win every election from now until forever, this would do it for them. Imagine worrying how you’re going to feed your kids and then the mail arrives “BTW you’ve qualified for food stamps for the last 18 months, here they are” instant loyal voter.

          But they won’t

          • Washburn [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Materially improving people’s lives is authoritarianism sweaty it needs to be balanced against legalizing violence against marginalized people

    • krische@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      But that’s only really makes sense in like the simplest of cases. The government doesn’t know if you had a kid this year, or maybe you bought an EV, or maybe you started renting out a room in your home.

      If all you have is a single W2 income; then by all means go to your local library, grab a 1040-EZ form, fill it out, and drop it in the mail. Will probably only take you 10 minutes or less.

      • degrix@lemmy.hqueue.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In all but the most niche cases, they do in fact know that you had a kid. That being said, most things they have a pretty good idea about (or could) and they could easily adopt the system that they do in a lot of other countries where the government sends to a tax form all filled out that says, “we think you owe this much.” Then you just provide the exemptions you listed.
        This would save a considerable amount of time when I file my taxes by just being able to double check they got cost basis correct on stocks sold and applied appropriate credits for mortgage interest and what not.

      • Pinklink@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        HAHAHA yah, they don’t know those things about you……sure……

        • Stumblinbear@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Okay but RIGHT NOW they don’t know. Sure it’s possible for them to track it, but they do not, and the infrastructure isn’t set up to do that.

    • Corroded@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I feel like that’s a hard one. Whenever I argue against tipping with coworkers (we don’t currently work in the service industry) they will mention how they are all for it and mention how during peak times they made double their usual amount. I feel like it’s really been drilled in that it’s good for the workers

      • fubo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That element of it — when the restaurant is doing well, the windfall is shared with the waitstaff — could be preserved by simply giving the staff a percentage of the price of each meal they work on. Structure it as a bonus, the way salaried professionals can receive a bonus when the company is doing well.

        It may be worth noting that worker-owned restaurants, like Cheese Board Pizza here in Berkeley, typically do not solicit tips. (Well, except for the live musicians, who are not worker-owners.) If tipping was really all that great for the workers, then places where the workers literally control company policy would encourage it.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            It is not illegal for owners or managers to receive tips for work they perform. If the manager is waiting a table, they can receive that table’s tips.

            Where the restaurant is owned by the workers, an individual worker-owner will still collect the tips for the work they perform. An owner who is not working that day has no claim to tips earned that day.

            • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are you sure? Even when I’ve been at places where the owner works, those owners haven’t taken tips, instead splitting any they receive among the other staff.

              • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                Employers, managers, and supervisors may not keep any portion of the employee’s tips, and may not participate in a tip pool. But yes, they can certainly accept their own tips.

                Consider a small, mom-and-pop diner. Pop cooks, mom serves. They co-own the diner. They can certainly accept tips.

                Hiring a part-time busboy as a worker doesn’t mean that he automatically earns all tips received during his shift. Mom still gets to collect tips for serving, pop still gets to collect tips for cooking. They don’t get to receive tips in their managerial capacity, only in their capacity as workers.

                It is important to note: A traditional owner/manager only performs managerial work. This is the kind of scenario we are usually talking about when we hear about scummy managers stealing tips, but it is not the kind of scenario we are talking about here.

                We are considering a restaurant that is owned by the workers. We are talking about a mom-and-pop diner with a whole lot of moms and pops doing the work.

                • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Important distinction! All the places I worked where the owners also worked were pool houses, and as you said, owners can’t take from a pool.

                  One of the best guys I ever worked for used to say, “Those are your tips. When the restaurant does well, that’s my tip.”.

      • MJBrune@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Absolutely, those who get high tips stay in the industry. Those who get low tips are fired. Places don’t keep those who aren’t tipped well because it means they have to pay more out of the budget. If you aren’t getting high tips you are seen as lazy or not doing enough as a waiter. In reality tipping has more to do with who you get as customers (and what they find attractive) than quality of service. https://scroll.in/article/860274/does-tipping-really-ensure-better-service-probably-not

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tipping isn’t an issue if it’s a bonus from satisfied customers. The American system of it making up your minimum wage is nonsense.

    • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      In Norway, restaurants started to implement applications or websites to order at the restaurant. Scan a QR code or download an app (yuck) to order the food and preemptively pay for it. While that might be fine, I find it really strange when I’m asked about tipping when I place my order. I have literally not seen a waiter, I have just sat down and looked through a website, and now I’m asked if I want to tip? Why? What for?

      Luckily, 0% tip is very common in all services in Norway, so it’s not considered rude to refrain from tipping.

  • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Over-reliance on proprietary, closed-source products and services from megacorporations.

    For instance, it’s really absurd that people in many parts of the world cannot function without WhatsApp, they can’t even imagine a life without it. It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can’t do anything about it.

    Also the people who base their entire careers on say Adobe or Microsoft products, they’re literally having their lives dictated by one giant corporation, which is very depressing and dystopian.

      • bagend [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        At least WeChat is firmly under the state’s thumb. It’s basically a public service at this point. They should just nationalize it.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Talk to some older folks about what it was like when there was only one phone company and the alternative was snail mail.

      • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was there. It was fine. You didn’t need phones to be able to function in a society. Phones were something like an optional convenience that you had only at fixed places, like your home or office. If you were out and about, you typically didn’t have access to a phone, unless you were in the vicinity of a payphone, so you weren’t expected to be available on phone. Whereas in the countries where Meta has monopoly over, everyone expects you to be on WhatsApp, and you don’t really get a choice in the matter.

        • duffman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Whatsapp is just a text service that gained popularity because it bypassed expensive text messaging rates, and it’s superior to SMS in most ways anyways. If meta starts charging people will go somewhere else. It’s odd to hear this take that people are somehow dependant on it. It’s more replaceable than a pair of shoes.

          • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That may be the case where you and I live perhaps, but these countries that I speak of, have an entire ecosystem built around WhatsApp. Many companies there no longer provide a customer support number that you can call for instance, they expect you to interact with a bot run on WhatsApp, which can further lead to chatting with an actual agent speaking to them, but that’s all done via WhatsApp. Also many teachers in schools and universities share lecture notes and study material via WhatsApp groups. Doctors and medical labs may share electronic copies of your reports via it. Some restaurants accept reservation requests solely via WhatsApp. It can even handle payments now, and besides using it as a means to send money to someone, some companies have even built entire e-commerce platforms around it, using interactive bots and the payment features. So for you and I, WhatsApp may be just another messaging service, but in these countries WhatsApp is quickly turning into an “everything” platform, and it’s not trivial for someone to just replace it, unless they want to go live in a cave and cut themselves off from modern society.

      • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is an issue with the bourgeois character of American society and government. Monopolies are not a problem if workers control them.

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can’t do anything about it.

      I don’t get this sentiment. If anything happens to WhatsApp, they’ll just switch to another IM. WhatsApp wasn’t the first to come along, and won’t be the last. How exactly does Meta have them by the balls?

      • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        In some of those countries, it’s not really a choice. Like, WhatsApp is the only way of contacting a company’s customer care (via chat bots that run on it), colleges and universities may have study groups on it and teachers may hand out notes etc in those groups, also apparently it’s also the only way to contact even some government agencies.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know, I’m from those countries. Like I said, we used other IM apps before WhatsApp came along, and if something changes we can use a new app. WhatsApp currently leads the market due to the network effect, but it doesn’t have us ‘by the balls’.

          (Though the most likely successor would be WeChat, which is arguably much much worse in many ways)

          • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Do you require WhatsApp to contact certain government agencies? Do you require WhatsApp to get access to customer support? Do you require WhatsApp to get access to lecture notes? No? Then you’re not from one of those countries.

              • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Which means you can’t really switch to other apps then, which means Meta has you by the balls.

                • wahming@monyet.cc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I suppose that depends on your definition of by the balls. Like I said, it’s not difficult for everybody to switch if they piss everyone off. On average people here have 2-3 IMs installed.

      • DJDarren@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I remember listening to a podcast that talked of how in the Philippines (I think it was), Facebook is the internet, because Meta/FB effectively subsidised the carriers into allowing FB access to not use up any data allowance. As a result, if all you do is go on FB, you don’t pay a penny. If WhatsApp is included in this, then yeah, you’re locked in with no real alternative.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh right. Not quite nowadays, they get subsidised from multiple companies, including Google (YouTube) and such. I hate to say this, but WeChat would probably be happy to jump in and grab some market share if Meta does something egregiously dumb

      • PlexSheep@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        So many people use it, that the barrier to change to another application is high. They would need to fuck up on very large scale.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, they currently have the market share, and network effect keeps them there. Nevertheless, my point was it’s not a monopoly, so how does Meta have everybody 'by the balls"?

          • tehmics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Network effect might as well be a monopoly until the network kills itself.

            I take issue with the concept of one company owning an entire communications network in the first place. Federation is a step in the right direction but it’s not enough yet.

      • tehmics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s an issue of userbase.

        WhatsApp can and will get away with a lot before it drives users to a mass exodus, when messaging should have just been an open protocol from the start.

    • tehmics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are plenty of free and open source messaging alternatives, they just don’t have the branding money to make sure a user base appears. To some degree the people using the apps are choosing the proprietary option.

      We collectively need to be doing more to support and promote free open source software to avoid this issue. Secure peer to peer communication protocols should be more more ubiquitous than even http.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can happily live with any IM software, just happens that WA got on the market earlier and everyone else uses it. Me taking a stand by only using telegram does no good if I have no one to talk to.

  • Whimsical@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Once got in a conversation about nuclear power that hit the point of “Yes nuclear is safer and more efficient but what about the jobs of the coal employees? Do you want them all to starve?”

    Took a while to digest because there’s a lot of normalization surrounding it, but after a while I realized what I had been told was:

    “We have to intentionally gimp our efficiency in both energy production and pollution generation in order to preserve a harder, more costly industry, because otherwise people wouldn’t have a task that they need to do in order to feed themselves.”

    Kinda disillusioned me with the underpinnings of capitalism, just how backwards it was to have to think this way. We can’t justify letting people live unless they’re necessary to society in some way - which might’ve made solid sense in older, very very different times in human history, but now means that so much of our culture is tied up in finding more excuses to make people do work that isn’t really necessary at all.

    New innovations happen, and tasks are made easier, and that doesn’t actually save anyone any work, because everyone still has to put in 40 hours a week. New tech lets you do it in 10 hours? Whoops, actually that means that you’re out of a job, replaced with an intern or something. Making “life” easier makes individual lives harder, what the fuck? That isn’t how things should be at all!

    Not exactly an easy situation to crack, but to circle back to the point of the thread - I hate how normal it is to argue on the basis that we need to create jobs, everywhere, all the time. I wish we’d have a situation where people can brag for political clout about destroying jobs instead, about reducing the amount of work people need to do to live and live comfortably, instead of trying to enforce this system where efficiency means making people obsolete means making people starve.

  • rodbiren@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    To some degree literally all of it. My monkey brain was designed to handle at most 150 people, wandering around all day searching for food, unprocessed food, using my body, having a close community I trust, relationship with nature, extreme knowledge of a small amount of things, and an uninterrupted sleep cycle powered by the son.

    My humanity is a poor fit for the world I am in.

  • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Americans generally being unaware of how far their country has fallen behind the rest of the world in virtually every respect (except sucking). Despite increasingly obvious problems that intensify every day, large numbers of Americans believe that American “democracy” is the end of history and as good as it gets. If you criticize their country, they will blame the other major political party (even if both major parties have indistinguishable far-right policy outcomes since they are both owned entirely by the bourgeoisie) or say that other countries also have problems, ignorant of the fact that those problems are either less severe or caused by the USA. Either that, or Americans will assume that you are a paid shill or insane, since no one on Earth could possibly have a legitimate reason to despise America. American ignorance is profound and purposeful even among highly educated Americans. Americans believe the shittiness and backwardness of their country, the half lives even the happiest and most successful among them live, to be humanity’s permanent and ideal state.

    • nik282000@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Canada is right behind the USA in this respect. Our politicians are transparently corrupt, our health care is only good when compared to the US and we have an assbackwards vocal right who would vote Trump if only they were given the chance.

      • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not disagreeing with you but do just want to note that as an American, when I travel into Canada, the instant I cross the border, it’s like a weight being lifted from my shoulders. Everything about it just seems less frantic and insane. Canada is also an imperialist settler-colonial dictatorship (a few mining companies in a trench coat), but one which does indeed do a better job of providing for its people.

  • grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Work to live.

    Edit: we have built a world where we measure success by money. This has meant we are all in pursuit of it all the time, even if we don’t want to be. The rich get richer by driving us to do more with less, which marginalizes those who cannot be a productive part of that. We supress our compassion because it isn’t making money. People suffer. Those of us who can contribute subject ourselves to a different kind of stress so we can enjoy a few hours of leisure here and there but we never really are free of the shackles of our employer. If you advance to a management position you are forced to evaluate and possibly fire people you could be friends with. When hiring you are evaluating how well people bend the knee. It’s not a great world we’ve made for ourselves.

    • The Bard in Green@lemmy.starlightkel.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me it’s that for a culture that fetishizes “freedom” we sure are fucking willing to accept a reality where we have to give it up for most of our waking life just to be able to live and provide for our families. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

    • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is that an absurdity? Humans have needed to work ever since we evolved from other species.

  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lawns, specifically, the western preoccupation with having little plots of land that should not have viable ecosystems or edible food grown on them, just rectangles of chemical-soaked and constantly-mowed fuzzy green conformity. grillman

  • tehmics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Religion is a collective delusion and college graduation shocks me by how ritualistic it still is

  • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have another one: Countries.

    Some oppressors (indirectly, but essentially) started drawing lines one day and agreed that they would each get to farm the humans in their own territory. Modern governments run under the same framework, with pretty much the same expectations. Much of the oppression has been internalized and normalized, and the cattle now tell themselves they don’t want to be free because their rancher told them about fictional wolves that conveniently exist everywhere past the imaginary line that serves as a fence.

    The end effect is that governments today almost always extract more their populations than they give back. Government is the system that establishes a stable funnel to redirect wealth and comfort from the bottom to the top. And it’s doubly abusive because the government monopolizes power, then leaves a power vacuum whenever it fails which screws over the masses a second time.

    We all basically live under mafias running racketeering operations, and we are also expected to give our lives and passions to protect those those operations. If you try to break up the racket, some pawns will come and throw you in jail or shoot you.

    Alternate systems of societal organization exist, but we have no interest in pursuing them. We’re happy just dealing with the problems that we choose to make for ourselves.

    • dubyakay@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      A government could be good. In theory:

      • one year terms for elected individuals in public offices
      • no second term
      • getting elected is a random draw (akin to jury duty) based on the individuals’ capabilities
      • authority limited in scope within city states

      I’m sure there’s other ideas regarding this.

    • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some oppressors (indirectly, but essentially) started drawing lines one day and agreed that they would each get to farm the humans in their own territory.

      Control goes back further than just territories to tribes. The tribe identity is only later tied to specific locations. Tribes formed because pooling resources burdens and learning was more efficient than doing it all yourself. From there, the tribes expanded and joined together and eventually settled into one location. So I disagree that oppressors just decided one day.

      • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did say it was indirect…

        Tribal structures have minimal power differentials, it wasn’t until agriculture (and the first ‘countries’) that this kind of systemic exploitation became so practical. Much has been written on how the advent of agriculture revolutionized the pooling of resources, also enabling their unequal distribution and the hierarchy that establishes which serves to propagate increasing disparity over generations. These types of material conditions are notably absent in the pre-agricultural record. I would agree though that the instincts used to abuse most likely evolved in a hunter-gatherer social intelligence context.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This was the case before countries existed. The territories used to be limited to how far the human cattle could walk, be productive and walk back home in day.

      Freedom is only possible where the possibility of encountering other humans is negligible.

      Whenever humans aglomerate, non productive humans require handouts to live. If they do not receive then they die. If they don’t want to die, they will steal. If the other humans resist, there will be a struggle and whoever wins becomes the state.

      I think keeping population below 1 per square kilometer and spread out is the best solution to the state predation problem.

          • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            And I appreciate how you took the disagreement. I would have preferred to engage with your ideas directly, I think that would have been more respectful, but it’s been a stressful day and I ran out of time/energy.

      • bermuda@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        1 per square kilometer is physically impossible unless you plan on finding a way to kill 7.9 billion people.

        Earth has 146 million square kilometers of land.

        It’s a neat idea but I think “the largest genocide in the history of humanity” kinda outweighs your solution.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          About 64 million square km is habitable. Everyone stop having babies until we reach this number. That’s how we can have a stateless borderless utopia.

          • bermuda@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You won’t see it in your lifetime. About 150,000 people die a day assuming no natural disasters or disease. 7.9 billion / 150,000 = 52,666 days. About 144 years for your dream.

      • nik282000@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whenever humans aglomerate, non productive humans require handouts to live. If they do not receive then they die. If they don’t want to die, they will steal.

        Yeah, we know, politicians.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the cattle now tell themselves they don’t want to be free because their rancher told them about fictional wolves that conveniently exist everywhere past the imaginary line that serves as a fence.

      The Chinese who took over Hong Kong don’t seem very fictional.

  • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Throwing away food to maintain profits while people starve, but since I’m not the first to think this I’ll let my man Steinbeck explain it:

    The works of the roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price, and this is the saddest, bitterest thing of all. Carloads of oranges dumped on the ground. The people came for miles to take the fruit, but this could not be. How would they buy oranges at twenty cents a dozen if they could drive out and pick them up? And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth.

    There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must fill in the certificate- died of malnutrition- because the food must rot, must be forced to rot. The people come with nets to fish for potatoes in the river, and the guards hold them back; they come in rattling cars to get the dumped oranges, but the kerosene is sprayed. And they stand still and watch the potatoes float by, listen to the screaming pigs being killed in a ditch and covered with quick-lime, watch the mountains of oranges slop down to a putrefying ooze; and in the eyes of the people there is the failure; and in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I worked at a bakery in a large chain grocery store and when throwing out the baked goods that weren’t bought each week I was told I either throw it away or buy one. I was not allowed to eat what was going to be thrown away anyway unless I gave them money… Ffs.

      I ate some anyway. Fuck that lol

      • ghost_of_faso2@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        when I worked in a kitchen as a chef they wouldnt let us take home the soon to expire steaks and insist we bin them instead so we dont ‘normalize stealing’

        I just wrapped them up tight in a seperate bin bag, took the trash out myself, hid the bag in a corner and went and got it when my shift ended lmao