this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
27 points (80.0% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6190 readers
142 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Of course it would need to be more of a process than a booth. A business with a storefront, a 7-30 day waiting period, a minimum age, etc. That said, why isn't there an opt out? Why must one break the law, risk severe pain and possible survival with disability to opt out?

I'm American for context. We clearly don't value human life here, at all. Empty rhetoric, sure. But never in practice. This would be a win all around given our practiced values.

It could be a business that charges a fee that could be reasonably saved for even in poverty. So the capitalists could get their profit, the only thing our society does value, and the malcontents could get the painless "no thanks" opt out they desperately desire.

Bonus for the glorious job creators: probably most of the people they consider "lazy, lennonist, socialist, marxist commies" would no longer be a nuisance to them. They could count their shillings in peace, without converting new ones.

Really the only reason I can think of that a good capitalist would be against this is that it might reduce the homeless population, our massive tent cities are a purposeful way to scare the workforce into continuing to show up for their jobs.

Do our tent cities of capitalism scarecrows really generate more profit through fear than for profit suicide would through the closest thing to mercy (for profit) a capitalist could approve of?

I think this would be one of those things some in our society fears beforehand, like marijuana dispensaries, but comes to appreciate the presence of once available. A core tenant of claimed capitalist values is that participation is supposedly "voluntary," after all.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ourladyofrats@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

In the US, we have an aging population that is more aware of what we may face as we have more extra years of failing health. I would predict that offering the option after a certain age should become more socially acceptable. My husband and I would like to eventually go out together, but right now we'd have to go to Switzerland to do so. I wish I'd see more people discussing this, but I haven't.