this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
326 points (97.9% liked)

Antiwork

8271 readers
4 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yayannick@lemmy.ml
uthredii@lemmy.ml
sexy_peach@feddit.de
yogthos@lemmy.ml
326
The Secret History of How the Super-Rich Have Kept the Working Class Out of Work (theintercept.com)
submitted 1 year ago by webdoodle@lemmy.ml to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Tim Gurner, the viral Australian multimillionaire who wants more workers to be unemployed, was debunked by an economist in 1943.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spamfajitas@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you think 5% unemployment is considered "full" employment?

I've sometimes seen it written as 3%, but generally that's included to provide a more accurate estimate of overall employment. It represents the people who are currently between jobs and are actively searching for a new one. I probably would have been included in that stat when I left an abusive employer and searched until I found my current one.

It isn't some kind of capitalist conspiracy.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's just market dynamics. In order for there to be a healthy capitalist economy there must be people between jobs i.e. people without jobs i.e. the reserve army of labor. Structural unemployment is built in to the system, there isn't a literal cabal of people that actually enforces it (although the Fed is trying to boost unemployment with tight fiscal policy, so its not the market is natural and exists on its own without human manipulation)

[–] SoylentBlake@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

---there isn't a literal cabal of people that actually enforces it (although the Fed is trying to boost unemployment with tight fiscal policy, so its not the market is natural and exists on its own without human manipulation)

You say there isn't while describing the one that is.

Regardless, those at the top meet annually in Davos. They all know each other, they sit on various boards with each other. They don't need to even make phone calls to spread any word or idea, just spread it in a board meeting and by the end of the week it'll be global

With power in the hands of so few, there doesn't need to be a singular voice in control. all their interests already align

So "market dynamics" really just means the explicit interests of robberbarons and landleaches.

Consolidated wealth has a profound effect on the human psyche, not one bit of which offers anything beneficial.

Philanthropy isn't charity, it's PR.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago

You say there isn’t while describing the one that is.

Yes, because it's not a secret and it's not illegal. Those are actually hallmarks of conspiracies. These people openly do this stuff lol