this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
1583 points (97.6% liked)

Antiwork

3648 readers
1 users here now

A community for those who want to end work, are curious about ending work, want to get the most out of a work-free life, want more information on anti-work ideas and want personal help with their own jobs/work-related struggles.

The new place for c/antiwork@lemmy.fmhy.ml

This server is no longer working, and we had to move.

Active stats from all instances

Subscribers: 2.1k

Date Created: June 21, 2023

Library copied from reddit:
The Anti-Work Library 📚
Essential Reads

Start here! These are probably the most talked-about essays on the topic.

c/Antiwork Rules

Tap or click to expand

1. Server Main Rules

The main rules of the server will be enforced stringently. https://lemmy.world/

2. No spam or reposts + limit off topic comments

Spamming posts will be removed. Reposts will be removed with the exception of a repost becoming the main hub for discussion on that topic.

Off topic comments that do not pertain to the post at hand may be removed if it is deemed they contribute nothing and/or foster hostility at users. This mostly applies to political and religious debate, but can be applied to other things at the mod’s discretion.

3. Post must have Antiwork/ Work Reform explicitly involved

Post must have Antiwork/Work Reform explicitly involved in some capacity. This can be talking about antiwork, work reform, laws, and ext.

4. Educate don’t attack

No mocking, demeaning, flamebaiting, purposeful antagonizing, trolling, hateful language, false accusation or allegation, or backseat moderating is allowed. Don’t resort to ad hominem attacks against another user or insult other people, examples of violations would be going after the person rather than the stance they take.

If we feel the comment is uncalled for we will remove it. Stay civil and there won’t be problems.

5. No Advertising

Under no circumstance are you allowed to promote or advertise any product or service

6. No factually misleading informationContent that makes claims or implications that can be proven false or misleading will be removed.

7. Headlines

If the title of the post isn’t an original title of the article then the first thing in the body of the post should be an original title written in this format “Original title: {title here}”.

8. Staff Discretion

Staff can take disciplinary action on offenses not listed in the rules when a community member's actions or general conduct creates a negative experience for another player and/or the community.

It is impossible to list every example or variation of the rules. It is also impossible to word everything perfectly. Players are expected to understand the intent of the rules and not attempt to "toe the line" or use loopholes to get around the intent of the rule.


Other Communities

c/workreform@lemmy.world


Server status for big servers http://lemmy-status.org/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org -5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I was curious, so I pulled some quick numbers about Jeff Bezos.

Bezos has what I think is the biggest yacht in the world. It cost $500 million, according to the NYT. I am not intimately familiar with yacht ownership, but from 20 seconds of Googling I found a rule of thumb saying the yearly costs can be expected to be about 10% of the purchase price.

Currently, Amazon has over 1.5 million employees. That means Bezos' yacht money could have given every employee a bonus of about $333, and the maintenance cost could give everyone a permanent raise of about $33 per year.

It's a drop in the bucket.

Of course there are other ways you could slice this. According to Amazon's own PR piece from 2018, they had about 250K employees earning their minimum wage of $15/hour. That money would go a lot further if concentrated toward the lowest-earning employees.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate this bullshit logic of "But this one person's salary would not give everyone else very much!" Bezos is not the only one that should be making less. All of the chief officers should make less. All of the regional presidents should be making less. That money would absolutely be more than simply a drop in the bucket. I do agree that it should be concentrated to the lowest paid workers.

[–] abraxas@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Just looked it up, and the regional VPs at Amazon are making an average of $190,000/yr. That's not chump-change, but it's definitely firmly in the "US" side of the "US vs THEM" equation. It also means if you cut all regional VP salaries in half, it won't amount to more than 0.1% of Bezos' typical earnings.

Even Amazon's CTO only (yeah, "only") apparently has a total comp package of about $300-500,000/yr.

Here's the list of the problem folks. And to clarify something that helps your point on the "But this one person's..." I GUARANTEE if executive compensation were capped based upon some multiple of individual compensation, they'd find the fucking money to give people raises.

If a CEO can only make 100x what workers do, that's still unreasonable, but I guarantee those guys making $20M/yr will find a way to up the average salaries of workers as close to $200k as they can manage. And if we weren't at-will employment in the US, they wouldn't be able to just do it by laying people off.

So yes, taking money from just Jeff Bezos the people in that list will have the very effect you and I want... everyone making more.

[–] medgremlin@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That yacht isn't the only unnecessary thing he owns and Amazon has plenty of other overpaid executives as well.

For sure.

I also would prefer for that money to be taxed to high heaven and put toward high-value social services, like, say, school meals.

I think my last comment came off with the wrong tone. To be clear: fuck yachts in general and Bezos in particular.

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You seem to like math how about taking the profits and seeing if they can cover all the welfare they recieve and tax breaks.

I know Walmart can cover all the welfare it's employees recieve

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think wal mart is the biggest employer of people receiving Earned Income Credit in the US. Therefore the American taxpayer is effectively subsidizing wal marts wages expense.

I point this out to people and their response many times is to kill the EIC, rather than raise minimum wages. Infuriating and frustrating beyond belief.

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Correct even if Walmart paid all the welfare they would still be profitable. So why do we not just make them pay for it

[–] Piers@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Because they have so much money from raiding there tax payers pockets that they can get away with raiding the tax payers pockets.

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

What we need is a 100% tax on profits until the cost of government subsidised labour is repaid. Because that portion of the "profits" is just raided directly from tax payers in the first place.

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

I agree there should be more tax brackets at higher rates and income levels. It's weird the personal tax rate maxes out at 37% for income around half a mil, ish. I regularly see my clients making a million, $10m, $50m+. It is hard to see that knowing we deny children lunches in school.

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

That's true but I'm talking about a tax on employers who pay their staff too little not on individuals.

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

Oh, yeah I forgot what thread this was about. Seems like it would be easier to raise minimum wage, no?

[–] Piers@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe. But there is some argument that not every employee needs the same income level so pushing minimum wage up to a level that accounts for employees that need a higher income is a harder sell than some midpoint plus support for those who need extra (single parent of multiple kids supporting their household on their income Vs rich kid working weekends for extra spending money.)

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You're not wrong but yacht is just symbolic of the wealth imbalance. It's hard to watch these billionaires cruise around on yachts while children in America are denied lunch in school because socialism is bad.

[–] Piers@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bezos is a poor example as his super yacht is relatively cheap for him compare to most yacht owning CEO's (and his company has tremendously more employees than most of those CEO's companies do.) The equivalent of a yacht for Bezos would be his space rockets.

[–] brewbellyblueberry@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't get how people can misunderstand your comment so completely. Can't people read anymore or what?

[–] GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually, I get it. It sounds like I'm arguing against the general point, which is that income inequality is fucking bullshit. And it is bullshit.

[–] brewbellyblueberry@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It really doesn't if one can read.