this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
2360 points (97.4% liked)

Work Reform

10040 readers
696 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 95 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I vote for wrecking the rich's yachts. There's even a great capitalist reason to do it: the companies that build them might make new sales! Win-win!

[–] clanginator@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago (41 children)

When you think about it, at that point at least the rich are spending their money again in order to buy another yacht, actually putting money into the economy.

It's like trickle down economics, but we gotta shoot some holes in the water tower to make it trickle down.

[–] Qwertzwertz@lemmynsfw.com 37 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Building a super yacht means that dozens or hundreds of people work for the benefit of one person. As craftsmen, they could have improved the lives of tens of thousands in their community instead. As engineers, they could have built products serving millions.

Not to mention the natural resources used for one person's benefit.

There's nothing positive about super yachts (and mansions, private jets,...) being built. Don't let the flow of money confuse you.

[–] starclaude@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

the problem is actually how the rich keep buying the houses and making the prices increase for inorganic reason making people who really needs house cant afford it while at the same time the rich keep the house they bought empty

[–] clanginator@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

To be clear my comment was intended purely as satire. I definitely don't view the construction of yachts as positive in any way.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is actually an example in The Wealth of Nations; Adam Smith considers whether a hooligan smashing a window is a benefit to society because it creates work for the glazier.

Smith concluded that no, it isn't a net benefit because the glazier could have made a new window instead.

However, given that megayachts are net negative to society, I'm not sure how he'd view this case.

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 1 year ago

Money goes from the billionaires to the millionaires that owns the yacht companies 😅

[–] unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The argument is sloppy.

The working class makes gains when our work helps us as a class, not when we are forced to serve.

If the wealthy are able to support the creation of wasteful luxuries for their own vanity, then they must be able to support activities that help the working class.

The difference is that the latter may require some encouragement.

[–] clanginator@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

My comment was satire. Stop arguing with the wind.

load more comments (37 replies)
[–] TwoGems@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Better yet, train orcas to attack yachts!

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Buddy, youre not gonna believe this...

[–] ours@lemmy.film 20 points 1 year ago

Gibraltar Orcas: "Way ahead of you there buddy"

[–] Piemanding@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Do a new Boston Tea Party except this time we launch barrels of tea at yachts.

[–] FrostbyteIX@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I need a couple of their yachts to drag over some sturdy icebergs. Re-enact a much more expensive Titanic.

[–] emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks to them you'll be hard pressed to find any sturdy icebergs anymore.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Protecting their yachts was their plan all along!