Work Reform

10030 readers

389 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

1657

Make no mistake, the owning class is actively working against your interests (i.redd.it)

submitted 9 months ago by ooli@lemmy.world to c/workreform@lemmy.world

221 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I see what you're saying but I don't think you've closed any gaps. If leanfire is bourgeoisie at $300k, then people with the same amount of money who are working instead of retiring are choosing to work, just like Musk.

I get that it shouldn't be a net worth calculation, but that's really a stand-in for the conundrum that occurs when someone could retire but isn't, and who gets to define what "could retire" means. Is someone staying one extra year in the coal mines to pay for their granddaughter's college in the bourgeoisie for that year? Does it matter what the goal is? What about staying multiple years? What if the goal is making enough money to launch a mission to Mars? I'm back on Musk.

You're either setting the definition at literal need, in which case you're making a pretty huge bourgeoisie of whom a large percentage work for a living, or it's just fuzzy because you need to know interests and intentions and internal thoughts and feelings.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

Leanfire requires setting up and actively living in a manner that has you living off the labor of others by virtue of your own ownership.

Being able to retire, yet getting your money via labor does not make one bourgeois.

Again, think in shared class interests. What does the coal miner do to get their money? At most, they would be petite bourgeoisie.

Have you read Marx? I do think Marxism can help you out a bit. Classes are described as aggregates, it isn't fuzzy but it also isn't binary, and most of all relying on net worth defeats the purpose of class analysis as they share no class interests.