Giving money to Amazon, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Google .etc

It’s like, you can’t have an argument for price gouging, when you’re enabling them by spending. If people were smart, they’d stop giving them money 10 - 15 years ago and they’d be right now, trying to reconstruct so they can be more economically friendly than how they are now.

  • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    You’re not getting cashback on your credit cards yous daft cunts 😂 You’re paying it in advance

  • Mesa@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Thinking that they have the “one simple trick” for everything when most matters are actually a complex network of issues where there isn’t one answer.

  • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Stop driving (pollution, deaths, cost of living etc) and remodel cities and town around PT and AT , restricted gun ownership

    • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 minutes ago

      How do people living with no PT or AT options stop driving?

      Also, the working masses must remain armed to prevent even further class slavery.

  • MrSebSin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    They would understand that socialism is not communism. Also you can have capitalism and socialism at the same time, you just have to give and take a little.

  • Vanth@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I’m doing better now, but 15 years ago Walmart was the only option I had for food. Local/regional grocery stores were more expensive and I was living paycheck to paycheck with growing debt.

    “If people were smart they would stop buying the most cost-efficient option” is really not feasible.

    “If people were smart” they would read and stop putting oligarchs in power.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      “If people were smart they would stop buying the most cost-efficient option” is really not feasible.

      In fact, more and more people don’t have the luxury of buying more expensive options.

      Of course, stealing is an option, and I think ‘If people were smart’ they would accept that stealing from Walmart is not an ethical or pragmatic problem, but it’s a risky behavior so I wouldn’t criticize people for not stealing. [edit: see Fubarberry’s reply]

      • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Stealing from walmart also isn’t sustainable if many people are doing it. For example there were a ton of walmarts and other stores in the Chicago area that recently closed due to high theft at those locations. Now whole communities there are left without convenient shopping options, which can be a big problem for people with limited transportation options.

        • mke_geek@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Stealing isn’t right.

          The Walmart near me closed due to high theft. There were actually people stealing from the construction site when the store was being built, so it really was a ticking clock as to how long the store itself would even last.

          Some people are just awful.

        • comfy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Good point. If there aren’t other local stores remaining to fill the gaps, then that would be a critical problem.

          • SinAdjetivos@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 minutes ago

            Walmart, Kroger, etc.'s entire business model is to undercut other local stores to drive them out and become local monopolies. If they exist in a location there likely aren’t many, if any, local stores remaining…

          • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            You can look up videos of some of the stores that were closed, they were basically being straight up looted.

            I remember seeing the videos, and thinking to myself how I didn’t understand how they could afford to stay in business like that. So when they announced they were closing those stores for theft, I didn’t really think the given reason was ever in doubt.

            • Didros@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 day ago

              "“The decision to close a store is never easy,” company officials said in a statement. “The simplest explanation is that collectively our Chicago stores have not been profitable since we opened the first one nearly 17 years ago.”

              The stores lose tens of millions of dollars a year, according to the company, a figure that nearly doubled in the last five years despite numerous strategies to boost performance, including building smaller stores, offering local products and building a Walmart Academy training center."

              https://news.wttw.com/2023/04/12/walmart-closing-4-chicago-stores-company-says-losses-have-doubled-last-5-years

              Doesn’t sound like theft was ever the problem here according to them?

    • NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      But you’ll notice that the price comparison is narrowing and Wal-Mart is slowly not looking better off than the competition. It’s almost like shopping at Dollar Tree is more feasible, it’s what some of us are going to be forced to be doing if not now. Just shopping Dollar Tree almost regularly.

      • finderscult@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Entirely depends on region. Walmarts strategy is to take a loss in an area until all local competitors are out of business then crank back up until that area is profitable enough to subsidize new areas. In my area Walmart is cheaper than pretty much everyone except dollar stores, and dollar stores treat their employees even worse while having even worse quality food for barely any cheaper.

  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ignoring the fact that alternative voting systems exist and there can be more then two political parties.

  • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Drinking alcohol. Lots of people drink way too much and make life ruining decisions.

  • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 day ago

    Thinking that “being smart” means shit. We need to realize that the people who run things aren’t necessarily smart. Presidents aren’t necessarily smart. Professors aren’t necessarily smart.

    And being smart doesn’t mean you’re good. Evil smart is a nightmare, because destroying is so much easier than building.

    What would we do if we were good? Now that’s a question.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Processed food and high sugar diets are killing us.

    These foods are addictive, and ubiquitous. A well informed and smart american would still have a problem switching over to whole food only. (Where the ingredient label only says one thing).

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 day ago

    The obvious answer is fossil fuels, right? Few people want to cook the climate, they just can’t quite fathom something that abstract and slow-moving, so they do it anyway.

    Less obviously, feeding all our most sensitive data to random websites and apps. Again, the threat just doesn’t look enough like a sabre-tooth tiger.

    • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Fossil fuels is kinda a prisoner’s dilemma issue. Everyone cooperating to save the planet is obviously ideal, but realistically there are always going to be companies/countries that won’t. And as long as it’s cheaper to not be environmentally friendly, there’s always going to be someone taking that option.

      For example, lets say country A passes new regulations on manufacturing to be more environmentally friendly. The new regulations take the country’s manufacturing from low pollution to very low pollution. However the increase in cost causes many companies to stop manufacturing locally, and instead outsource their manufacturing to country B with low regulation and moderate pollution during manufacturing. The end result is more money leaving the local economy of country A, and increased global pollution.

      It’s a similar prisoner’s dilemma for the individual companies involved. If your competitor is able to make their product for cheaper because their process is less environmentally friendly, then they can undercut you and put you out of business.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        The tragedy of the commons is definitely part of it, but until recently there was a sort of global consensus anyway. Domestically climate change action - real action - is unpopular.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Few people want to cook the climate, they just can’t quite fathom something that abstract and slow-moving, so they do it anyway.

      I don’t think the problem is that people are unaware. Even people who believe they are against cooking the environment have other rationalisations, like “the economy isn’t able to shut down all the coal plants yet, it’ll collapse”. Propaganda is a hell of a drug.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        No, it’s not that people are unaware, or even don’t believe it, it’s that they can’t reason about it strategically

        It’s spending now to save later. If that’s about military spending or emergency services everyone gets paying taxes for it, but words are as far as most will go to stop nonspecific far future weather. Even when people talk about the situation with climate change, you hear them frame it in moral terms instead of practical terms.

        Case in point: Canada has a carbon tax, and a majority want to get rid of it. Denialism is not a prominent part of the campaign, just the fact that it costs something. And not even much, and it’s all given back in refunds - doesn’t matter, the extra gas cost people will bear is zero.