this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
2265 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

60041 readers
1902 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Tech's broken promises: Streaming is now just as expensive and confusing as cable. Ubers cost as much as taxis. And the cloud is no longer cheap::Some tech is getting pricier and looking a lot like the older services it was supposed to beat. From video streaming to ride-hailing and cloud computing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Remember that every invention discovered and improvement made before capitalism, happened before capitalism.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Remember that even in a system in which workers own companies, those workers still want to make more money

A profit motive is not unique to nor a product of capitalism.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not making any profit does not imply running for losses.

Many companies can run for minimal margins, ensuring they can pay staff, stock and services.

Profit is what is left on the table after every expense is paid, including salaries, which usually doesn't reach the workers pockets.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No but companies raising prices to make more money is absolutely related to making profit, and a worker-owned company still has a profit motive.

Companies being able to run at a loss is a feature of capitalism, not a bug. Most small businesses do not turn a profit for two to three years.

[–] qyron@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If a company sets its mark at not making profit, it does not mean it runs at a loss.

Was I unclear?

Profit is what is left after all expenses are paid, including salaries, and a company can run with a non profit objective and still create jobs with fair salaries.

Profit is the end goal for the so called investors that have no real involvement in the day to day operations of companies and demand quarterly reports with ever increasing revenue.

If a company makes enough money to pay salaries, replenish stocks and/or provide ita services and pay its daily and monthly expenses it is not running on a loss. Profit is not a requirement for a business.

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

I am aware that non-profits exist as a concept, but that's irrelevant to what we are discussing which is how profitability and viability are not necessarily linked

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those workers still want to live. The money is the means- controlled by those with the most money.

Capitalism and democracy as exclusive concepts.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

None of this makes any sense, both on its face and as a response to my comment

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Bold deconstruction of the argument. Capitalism didn't invent iPhones, workers did. There are economic systems other than capitalism, that can do better, without the unilateral domination of capital.

[–] msbeta1421@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You act like capitalism is something that was invented. Market economies have existed since the dawn of time.

Think of it more like a spectrum where free market and unregulated capitalism is on one end and economies under total state control are at the other.

There is clear evidence that one side of that spectrum favors innovation more than the other.

I guess you could argue that one end of the spectrum is more “moral” than the other, but I would counter that the opposite end is amoral rather than immoral.

[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
  1. You mean capitalism is inherent in the matrix of the space-time continuum as opposed to invented?

  2. Market economies have not all been capitalistic.

  3. Innovation is not the singular motivation of mankind. Survival, comfort, stability, peace, equality are more important.

  4. An amoral society is no better than an immoral society.