465
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

The theory is fine, but there are several practical issues that mitigate the effect.

First, and most obvious, not everyone is participating. In fact, I'd bet that most people ignore the protest and go about their day without realizing there is a boycott. Nobody can block all the gas stations and supermarkets to keep customers away, so most stores won't actually experience a perceptible loss, at least not enough to justify closing shop for the day. A lot of people exist without buying anything some days anyway. Stores will occasionally have days with low sales due to weather, or local festivities, or bad press, or

Second, the people participating are being told to get their shopping done the day before or wait until the day after to buy what they need. The boost in sales on either side will average out the labor and heating costs for stores. Most employees are paid weekly or biweekly, and a single day of low traffic something most shops already expect every now and then.

Third, this will mean nothing at all to online sales. Unless you're Amazon or Instacart, hardly anyone does same day delivery services. Your daily overhead surplus capacity is a tiny fraction of the operating costs for the business. Online retailers measure activity in quarters, they don't care about slow days.

Lastly, it's far too diffuse to result in effective change. The loss is spread out over all commerce which means that nobody specific will be affected. What are the grievances? Who are you asking to change? What specifically are you asking them to do? If the demands for people to return to shopping are simply "wait 24 hours" then the ruling class can wait it out. The is exactly what happened with Occupy Wall Street. There was no clear endgame, so all they had to do was wait while the effort collapsed on itself. If it's a hostage negotiation, you need demands. If it's a show of force, then it needs to have more impact. If it's an effort to educate consumers on the value of consuming less, then it needs to not be described as a temporary protest.

To be meaningful, it would help to be

  • Targeted
  • Longer
  • More impactful to business
  • Accompanied with specific demands

I'll be participating because I agree with the sentiment (and I'm cash poor, so any excuse to save money), but I'm not holding my breath that it will make anyone change their behaviors.

this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2025
465 points (98.5% liked)

politics

31042 readers
99 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS