I think it was Mark Twain who said that in order for a man to be moral he needs to be well-fed first.
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
304 points (93.2% liked)
Showerthoughts
34383 readers
633 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I guess? But it's also morally just to reuse disposables, repair instead of replace, conserve and reduce waste, and delay new purchases as long as possible. I'm doing environmental conservationism just by being poor!
The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. ... A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. ... But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socio-economic unfairness. (Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms)
The rich will throw away their perfectly fine boots after a few years because they aren't in style anymore.
This is the single greatest example I have seen highlighting the problem.
The poor cannot afford to have things that last, things that allow them to think of the future, and hence are stuck in a cycle of debt in the present to near future time periods.
However what I don't understand is how the rich get so short sighted when they have both the motivation and resources to plan for long term outcomes. Doesn't make sense.
Underpaying workers leads to worse productivity and apathy towards your superiors.
Does the world really have so few resources that the only way to keep number go up is to exploit the less fortunate? When will feudalism truly end?
It’s called capitalism, not feudalism
The rich man's boots vs. The poor man's boots. Terry died too damn young.
My interpretation of this might be different, but I agree wholeheartedly with my interpretation.
Being morally just doesn't just mean "not causing harm" directly. It means striving to not cause harm both directly and indirectly. As someone who lives in the USA, our entire society is built off of exploitation. The less expensive something is, the more heavy the exploitation likely is. The cheapest manufacturing is done in countries where labor is exploited or even enslaved, where the manufacturing process can pollute and poison the area with little consequence (to the manufacturer), and where the powerful can force deals on the government to let them extract valuable resources and pay a fraction of its value - depriving the locals and nation prosperity. Even when buying US food products, the food industry mostly relies on extremely poor conditions for the animals it keeps, taking advantage of farmers it buys from or employs, and may even employ migrant children for dangerous slaughterhouse labor.
Avoiding these kinds of practices throughout most supply chains is sometimes impossible and usually more expensive the more thoroughly you manage to avoid the practices. Even then someone has to check in and constantly verify that the practices are legitimately avoided and not just greenwashing or fraudulent.
It's really quite depressing.
Yep that's totally true.
~~Worth noting as well that even if you can dish out for higher cost goods that alone doesn't mean you escape these labor practices. Not only do you need the wealth to buy conscientiously, but you need the time and energy to investigate the supplier and their supply chain.~~ i failed to read your whole post, blame the app 😅
The choice is often false, and that's a systemic affect. The idea that the less well off are judged for making such decisions isn't about ethics, it's about class.
According to Lemmy poor people who have done not harm to others have the same morals that poor people that hurt others.
I personally know a homeless person that have never steal or hurt. And several poor people with homes but small income that have stab and stolen other people, probably justifying their shit behavior in being poor.
According to some out of touch lemmings those two people are morally equivalent.
Being poor doesn't justify being a shit person. And defending that is insulting to honest and moral poor people.
I guess you can always find "some" people that can fit with your strawman, doesn't really make it a valid argument.
"Some people" on Lemmy think the earth is flat. "Some" are pedophiles. "Some" are even Republicans. That doesn't mean they are correct or common.
Oh no! You put republicans in my showerthoughts. Oh, that's a strange mix.
I think I'm gonna puke.
What are you implying is the strawman?
The millions of honest and dishonest poor and rich people that prove that morals are not related to money? Or the statically significant lemmings that agree with "all poor are good because they are poor" ?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Honestly, rich people are pretty shitty themselves.
But not for lack of choice, that's the point here.
I understand where you're coming from, because many societies are being structured in ways that make it feel like you are only hurting yourself by not being just and moral. It's truly horrible when trying to live a life following "the good" puts you in the path of pain all the time, working jobs you don't want to afford not to be put out on the street (and God forbid you want to have kids if you're in a high cost of living area).
With all that being said: I'd fear becoming an evil person more than dying poor. I hope that we can work together to make a world that isn't run by greedy, bad people.
view more: next ›