31 points

“Vote with your wallet” means more money gets you more votes.

Some users leaving Reddit/instagram/twitter is not a problem, especially considering network effects, but some advertisers leaving is a crisis.

permalink
report
reply
17 points

I think you misinterpreted the phrase. “Vote with your wallet” means that if you’re unhappy with a product/service, you stop using/paying for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

So long as the capital markets were willing to continue funding loss-making future monopolists, your neighbors were going to make the choice to shop “the wrong way.” As small, local businesses lost those customers, the costs they had to charge to make up the difference would go up, making it harder and harder for you to afford to shop “the right way.”

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/12/give-me-convenience/

Food for your thought.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Again, I think you are misinterpreting the phrase. The quote you provided proves it. If you’re not happy about the “right way” of buying things you can buy elsewhere, aka “vote with a wallet”. The phrase means that you pay for a product/service you are comfortable with. For example, if Amazon offers a great deal on something you’d like like to buy and the price is, let’s say, 30% lower than a regular retail price, voting with a wallet would mean that you ignore the Amazon’s deal and buy directly from a merchant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

“Vote with your wallet” means more money gets you more votes.

This is the basic idea of capitalism. The more capital you have, the more say you have in directing the meas of production.

Some people have so much capital, they can singlehandedly decide that thousands of people are going to work on some space launch company, for example.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Capitalism

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Did OP ask an LLM for the “most Lemmy question to ask”?

permalink
report
reply
19 points

Owning more than one home

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

There’s nothing wrong with that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Today I heard Meta has laid off workers because they brought their own food for lunch instead of buying it from the company cafeteria.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Well yes, but also no. Meta fired those folks because they were using their lunch stipend provided by meta for things other than lunch. Petty, given how much they were paying the employees, but almost certainly a breach of contract on the employee’s part.

Meta is probably trying to do layoffs without paying layoff costs or taking the stock hit layoffs can cause. Which is still capitalist AF by any measure, lol. For fans of watching what kind of shit the oligarchy is trying now, Meta is definitely one to keep an eye on. Mark Zuckerberg has been moving very conservative very quickly lately.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

You see, I at least buy food from my lunch stipend, although it’s usually my grocery trip and not necessarily my lunch of the day. And I only get about 7€ lunch stipend per day, not >40€.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.1K

    Posts

  • 286K

    Comments