231
I can see nothing wrong with this.
(lemmy.nz)
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
I think if we decrease productivity, it will cause problems.
but it's not going to decrease. it's just not going to be spent on unnecessary stuff like toiling for corporate profits
Corporate profits ARE old people's retirement. Over 55s own 52% of the entire US economy. Boomers own 8 times more than billionaires. It's similar in all western countries though perhaps not all are as bad. Billionaires are leeches but old people in general are the bigger drain on an aging society.
So productivity as measured today is only going to decrease by the amount corresponding to corporate profits? How do you figure? What is that amount - do you have an estimate?
As the other reply points out, profits are probably not what you care about anyway, because profits often just become the savings of ordinary people. So you want the proportion of profits that go to the already wealthy, plus the salaries of the mega wealthy.
But regardless, that figure is some finite number and you're saying it's more than the productivity we're going to lose due to an ageing population: how do you know? Actual estimates for how much we could free up by getting rid of profits and CEOs are highly uncertain and often negative.