this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
1035 points (96.2% liked)

memes

15779 readers
3447 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 127 points 1 day ago (5 children)

The major premise of Capitalism is risk vs reward. We hit a tipping point though, where 99% of people do not have any capital to risk, and the people who do have the capital have enough to nullify any risk.

Tax the rich.

[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Not just having capital, but got a hostage situation where their failure would collapse the economy therefore they are not allowed to fail and must be bailed out by the government they paid (often for far less) for earlier.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 36 minutes ago

I don't buy into the "too big to fail" idea for individuals.

I really think it only applies to banks, mainly because they hold the money of common people. Anyone else should be allowed to fail. Probably the greatest financial policy fuckup of my life was bailing everybody out in 2008 and not holding anyone accountable for their actions. That gets back to risk and reward breaking down. Those companies should have been allowed to fail. The money, workers and demand for services don't disappear, they shift to more stable competitors.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 56 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sometimes I get mad about how we in practice have basic income for the rich. If you have a few million dollars, you can park it in zero or low risk investments (eg: high yield savings, bonds) and get free money. Then you can just fuck off and pursue your dreams. No risk. Lots of reward.

But if you're poor? Well you better take any job for any salary or you're just a parasite blah blah blah. All pain, some risk, little reward.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 26 points 22 hours ago

My ex gets an allowance from his grandparents every week. They also bought him a house.

He’d get a job for a couple years, fuck around and get fired. Only got through college because I did his homework.

He has a house, he has a fridge full of food, he can go to restaurants and order out and take weeks off for vacation.

I worked full time through college, often three jobs. I still have massive student loans. I work two part time jobs, because the career field I went into is collapsing, and I’m not welcome as a trans person anyway.

I have always worked; he has not. I sleep on a rug and stack of pillows; he can pick out whatever luxury furniture he wants.

Work is entirely disconnected from reward.

[–] Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world 18 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Rich people also get handed so many free things.

Put over $100,000 in the bank and they will throw free accounts, low interest credit cards, rewards, free safety deposit boxes, personal concierge services. And that’s just the start.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 12 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Oh yeah I forgot about that. One of the banks here refunds ATM fees if you have a minimum balance of $2500 (and waives the monthly fee if you have $25,000). Like, my guys, the people who don't have money need that fee waived a lot more. But the bank just wants to make money and that means appealing to rich people.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 6 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Fortunately it's not hard to find banks who have no fees for those, in the US at least.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 5 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

This one is appealing in that they refund the fee even if it's from some other bank. So you can go to the ATM at the corner shop that charges $3 to withdraw, and get that refunded at the end of the quarter. Most banks don't have fees at their own ATM, but this is no fees anywhere. For rich people.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

Ally Bank whoop! Online only bank. Used to be unlimited free ATM withdrawals, now $10/mo reimbursed. Plenty for most!

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 3 points 17 hours ago

There's a few credit unions that will do that even. (With a refund limit per month ofc)

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago

Wow, I must be banking at the wrong place.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 12 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

We hit a tipping point though, where 99% of people do not have any capital to risk

When do you think this tipping point was? Because as far as I can tell this was around the French revolution.

[–] Dogiedog64@lemmy.world 14 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

In modern economics, a massive change came about in the early 1970s. Productivity and profits decoupled from employee wages, and continued to rise while wages stayed flat. Fast forward 50 years, account for inflation and shifts in technology, and it's easy to see that employee wages HAVEN'T RISEN in meaningful amounts for 50 years. Meanwhile, companies are making more money than ever.

So, I'd say it was in the 70's.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago

Hmmm. Good question. I'm not an economist, but I'd say it was around the time Reganomics got started, maybe a little bit beforehand, since I think Reganomics was probably a consequence of the powerful having enough money to out-fund the general populace.

[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 9 points 22 hours ago

Capitalism, since its inception, has been 99% of people having no capital.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

~~Tax~~ Eat the rich.

weve tried taxing them before.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 5 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

And it went pretty well, until they bought enough politicians to change it.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

So taxing the rich is an unstable temporary solution, and more fundamental changes are required.

I propose harsher, more lethal, punishments for politicians that accept bribes

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 points 20 hours ago

this is exactly what i mean. we need systemic change to solve this, not just tax.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I'm down. I think every year, we ought to take the richest person in the country and redistribute 50% of their assets.

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago

And their body parts as well