this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
779 points (99.4% liked)

/r/50501 Mirror

850 readers
1407 users here now


Mirrored /r/50501 Popular Posts


founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
 

Originally Posted By u/HumusSapien At 2025-04-15 02:37:32 PM | Source


you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] frostysauce@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It is beneficial to them to keep workers poor, desperate, and with few options.

[โ€“] galanthus@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Because something might benefit the bourgeoisie as a class(God, forgive me for using Marxist concept of class), does not mean it makes sense to do individually, which is what we were talking about.

But I would say this is exactly backwards: individually, it always makes sense to pay less if you can, but not in terms of the whole economy.

Even if you think in terms of macroeconomics, no, poverty is not beneficial. Any economy needs a strong market to sell goods to. Unless the country is exporting somewhere else, high amounts of disposable income is needed in the population for a thriving economy. Paying workers less does not necessarily result in worse outcomes for businesses, especially in the long run, since the economy might suffer.

So you could say that the statement "the bourgeoisie as a class benefits from poverty" is incorrect.