• livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    These days I see it as a shorthand, a metaphor for dismantling the system of resource hoarding so that we can more equitably distribute it - let the world consume what the elite have hoarded.

    It’s also sort of a joke that reduces them to use value.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m all in on wealth redistribution. But it’s not a simple as, “spread it all around”. We’d still be broke, just with bigger bank account numbers and a loaf of bread would be astronomical.

      Old friend of mine was appalled when he found out that the US burns worn out currency. (Mike wasn’t that bright.) Said the government should hand that back out.

      Allright Mike, can we agree that the government could give all of us a million dollars, like, today?

      Of course they could!

      Agreed. You know I charge $20 to mow a lawn? (this was early 90’s) What if I suddenly had a million dollars? Hell I want with $20?! Nah. Now I want $20,000 to mow your yard.

      Mike honestly didn’t get it. To him, a cheeseburger would always cost $.85 and $15 would get you an 1/8th bag, no matter what.

      Reality is, we could skim some hella money off these fuckers. And I don’t just mean billionaires, and I don’t just mean the 1%. We could hit the .01% and the .001% for serious social good. But we can’t take it all and splat it around.

      Dad used to say, “If making money was easy, everybody would do it.” And then it wouldn’t be money anymore. (I’m sad I had to follow up with that last sentence, but some people here aren’t going to get it.)

      While I’m ranting (sorry OP, you gave me a jumping off point), Robert Heinlein had a great collection of essays, in addition to his science fiction. Him and his wife Virginia decided to travel the world. But they didn’t want the northern hemisphere tourist crap, they went all in on the southern bits.

      One way he gauged local economies was, “How long does a laborer have to work to earn a loaf of bread?” Think on that. Very eye opening. His take on the Soviet Union was wild as well!

      One of my favorite stories in those essays was when they went to Ecuador (70s? 80s?). He would always ask the cab driver to take them to the poorest part of town, really gauge how the economy was working. They end up in a nice little neighborhood. Tiny, tiny houses, but very neat and clean, flower boxes in all the windows, nice streets, all that.

      Heinlein got a little bent. “I asked you to take us to the poorest part of town!” Cabbie, “Oh no senior, these are the poorest people! They are on government assistance and are very ashamed.”

      Imagine that.

      /drunk_rant

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Notice I didn’t say money, I said resources. And I’m thinking in global terms.

        I’m not saying, say, American government take cash of American billionaires and give it to different Americans.

        I’m saying, who controls water, who controls oil, who controls farmland. Who pressures nations with threats if they try to be food self sufficient. Who steals. Who orders and finances killings. There is enough here on terra for everyone, but it’s being misused and hoarded.