Hatred often makes you want to hurt people, but people hurt peope in the name of greed more often, and not only with less potential for guilt, but is often the cause of delusional accolades and reassurance both from within oneself and from others.

Hypothetical:

A CEO lays off 10,000 employees that helped that company succeed, solely to increase earnings and not because the company is hurting, not only seriously hurting 9,997 people, but causing 3 to commit suicide.

A bumpkin gets in a fight with someone he hates the melanin of because he’s a moron and kills them.

Who did more damage to humanity that day? They’re both, I want to say evil but evil is subjective, they’re both highly antisocial, knowingly harmful behaviors, yet one correctly sends you to prison for a long time if not forever, while the other, far more premeditated and quite literally calculated act, is literally rewarded and partied about. Jim Kramer gives you a shout out on tv, good fucking times amirite!

Edit: and this felt relevant to post after someone tried to lecture me about equating layoffs to murder.

“Coca-Cola killed trade unionists in Latin America. General Motors built vehicles known to catch fire. Tobacco companies suppressed cancer research. And Boeing knew that its planes were dangerous. Corporations don’t care if they kill people — as long as it’s profitable.”

https://jacobin.com/2020/01/corporations-profit-values-murder-culture-boeing

  • MinekPo1 [She/Her]
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    The human population is not doubling in size every three years. For profits to increase at this rate, at some point human consumption needs to increase, which is then inherently unsustainable, no matter what you are using to produce packages.

    Besides, you are hired explicitly because you produce more value than you are paid, via wages and benefits. Though I admit, an argument can be made that this is not an inherently bad thing.

    • @SCB
      link
      -21 year ago

      I am aware of why I am hired. It is not a bad thing whatsoever.

      You’re thinking growth=consumption of resources and that is false. Growth of the service industry, for instance, is not tied to physical resources at all. My industry actually reduces net consumption when it grows.

      • MinekPo1 [She/Her]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Even if consumption does not increase, chasing after infinite growth, on a finite planet, is not sustainable, which is my point.

        • @SCB
          link
          -11 year ago

          I just showed you how this is a stupid argument.

          It’s one of those things that sounds reasonable, but is nonsense. It’s like saying “we’re not a democracy, we’re a Republic” or some other “gotcha.”

          Don’t build your worldview off of memes.