The Democracy of the founding fathers was Greek Democracy, predicated upon a slave society, and restricted to only the elite. This is the society we live in today, even with our reforms towards direct representation. The system is inherently biased towards the election of elites and against the representation of the masses. Hamilton called it “faction” when the working class got together and demanded better conditions, and mechanisms were built in (which still exist to this day) that serve to ensure the continued dominance of the elite over the masses. The suffering of the many is intentional. The opulence of the wealthy is also. This is the intended outcome.

        • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Profit is revenues after wages and expenses. PAYING SOMEONE WAGES ISNT PROFIT. Jesus fucking Christ. At least read the rest of the thread where this has already been addressed. Or just google the definition of profit.

            • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              That they engage in tactics such as mass slaughter and burial of pigs and destruction of food in order to ensure prices maintain a level that is profitable for them.

              That they prioritize crops that ensure good returns rather than prioritizing crops to ensure healthy diets.

              That profit driven agriculture is the primary reason for mass industrial monocultures, which are inherently destructive to the environment.

              And that profit driven agriculture relies on massive infusions of petroleum products in order to maintain production levels and prevent crop failures due to depleted soil. Issues which regenerative and sustainable permaculture do not have.

              Small farmers typically don’t really profit per se. They make enough to maintain their farms through federal subsidies because the federal government at least recognizes the importance of having a steady food supply, regardless of market prices. It just doesn’t take the logical next step and recognize the importance of everyone having adequate nutrition, and so we’re in the situation we are now, where 25% of US children don’t have access to adequate nutrition.

              • kleenbhole@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                So you’re telling me work as hard as a farmer my whole life and I don’t get to retire with millions in the bank account?

                Pass

                • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s already how it happens, unless the farmer sells the land, which usually actually happens when he dies, because their kids don’t want to be farmers. Most farmers aren’t rich Lmao, corporate industrial farms make big bucks, but Billy’s Lima Bean Farm isn’t raking in millions in profit. Millions in revenue, maybe, but margins for individual food producers are pretty damn low already.

                  Even those who retire and have savings to live off aren’t necessarily profiting. Ensuring the ability to retire is part of a living wage.

                  I don’t give a damn if you become a farmer or not. It’s not like we have a shortage of people already working on these farms for exploitative and sometimes even slave wages and living in plantation style housing on the farm. Those people wouldn’t say no to a living wage, they’re already doing all the actual hard work on the farm, they might as well be entitled to the full value of the products. Cutting out the billionaires and rent seekers in the middle, they’d be able to raise their wages to sustainable levels.

        • Mousedigits@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, yeah. They’re farmers, they provide a necessary service. Their labor should be rewarded. That’s not mutually exclusive with food being provided to citizens for “free” (I.e. Paid for with taxes).

      • kleenbhole@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        So let’s make ANY chance of profit, what, illegal?

        How about we don’t base policy on propaganda cartoona

        • FaeDrifter
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          How about we spread out the work and spread out the profit among people who do the work.

            • FaeDrifter
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh so rewarding people the profit of their own labor is “commie shit”?

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Individual Farmers often don’t profit. They survive through subsidy. The grocers who hold monopoly on supply chains and corporate industrialized farms with near-slave immigrant laborers make the majority of the profit. Also, paying yourself a wage isn’t profit. They can pay themselves a living wage that allows them to thrive, no one is calling for enslavement lmao.

      • kleenbhole@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        What if I told you all of nature was a system where if you lack resources you die.

        hierarchies and competition and the weak dying off while the strong oppress them…thats all a feature not a bug

        • Milady@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Am I reading this correctly by interpreting this as “Poor people should die because in nature the weak die ?”.

          Also, you know that’s a point of view that automatically places yourself in the strong, right ? Like, you’re not going to place yourself as a “weak” individual. You think you’ll “oppress” the weaker than you, and succeed. Were you not raised with empathy ?

          Imagine this. You’re working at some firm, you make quite a bit of money, your significant other is waiting at your home every day and you love each other tenderly. You even have kids.

          One day, they all get in a car crash (not unlikely at all, is it?) and die. All of them. You are alone. The thoughts, the pain, the wanting to kill yourself, the anger, you can’t cope. You’re a mess. Your whole family, gone. You break down doing minor tasks. You can’t work.

          Because of that, you get fired. You’re without a job now, and you just want to kill yourself but you don’t. You tell yourself you’re weak. Without a job, how will you pay for the family house ? You sell your car. Life is spiraling down faster and faster and you can’t seem to make the pain stop. You’re homeless, jobless. Nothing makes sense anymore. You’ve come to terms with their death, but how do you even get back after going so low ?

          Now, you would tell me, face to face, that you deserve to die for being weak.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            They’re basically saying life’s tough, not that the weak deserve to perish. You absolute weirdo.

          • kleenbhole@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No such thing as “deserve”. You get what you can.

            Also, yeah man, every weak animal gets preyed upon. It’s not a tragedy. I say grind up the homeless and feed them to vegans.