• ArchRecord@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s not the standard view because, in America, consumption is inherently tied to your identity.

    You are seen as more attractive if you have trendy clothing compared to “outdated” clothing. You are seen as more financially successful if you overpay for luxury” handbags. You are seen as having “made it” based on how much stuff you have.

    Corporations know they can exploit this. They play up the value of purchases to your identity in advertising, then use that to distract you from the fact that your labor is being allocated solely to fuel this seemingly endless (solely monetary) growth, while they continue to siphon off more and more of your wages because, well, they “deserve” it for being the founder of the company, or being the shareholders that are “invested in its success.”

    The only solution to this problem is degrowth. If we show corporations we don’t care about all this excess junk that nobody really needs, the available labor pool remains the same while demand craters. If everyone is working x hours a week, but demand drops to only necessities and minor luxuries, without the products advertised as “needs” holding any demand, suddenly, each individual has to work only, say, half of x hours a week to accomplish the same requirements to sustain society and individual wellbeing.

    That, and we need to give the means of production back to the workers too, of course.

    • paddirn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      Except people are getting squeezed on housing and the basic necessities now, people are having to work long hours just to live. I can’t even imagine how my young adult life would play out if I were experiencing it now, paying ridiculous rents and making the shitty wages. Sharing an apartment and affording anything else was hard enough back then, I can’t even imagine how people are making it out there nowadays. I got lucky and got into a home when prices were semi-decent, it’d be a severe strain on finances if I had to pay current rates.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, housing’s a huge issue right now. It’s almost entirely the fault of the artificial scarcity produced by landlords, and their influence on what kind of housing gets built.

        I’m not sure if this was meant to be your point by the way, but I do want to clarify that my original post was not meant to make it seem like the only reason people are struggling with work and finances is because they buy goods they don’t actually need. That’s certainly part of the equation for some people, but definitely not entirely.

        In my opinion, we can see the same effects I mentioned before happening to our necessities as well, but on the corporate decision making side of things, rather than the consumer decision making side. For instance, food is more expensive because companies throw out any produce that looks “weird,” even if it’s perfectly edible. Housing is more expensive because developers prioritize the highest paying customer class over the average working person when deciding the quality, pricing, and size of housing to build. I hope you get the idea.

        The only real solution to these issues is unions and co-ops, anti-monopoly action, the elimination of landlording as a practice, and a higher minimum wage. Basically all of this has to be advocated for at a federal level, unfortunately, since we can’t exactly implement these as independent, personal practices.