this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
68 points (97.2% liked)
Apple
793 readers
7 users here now
There are a couple of community rules in addition to the main instance rules.
All posts must be about Apple
Anything goes as long as it’s about Apple. News about other companies and devices is allowed if it directly relates to Apple.
No NSFW content
While lemmy.zip allows NSFW content this community is intended to be a place for all to feel welcome. Any NSFW content will be removed and the user banned.
If you have any comments or suggestions please message one of the moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, yeah, they can, but they'd be much more expensive. Which wouldn't be a problem if wages matched inflation.
I mean, if iPhones went from $1,100 apiece to $7,000 apiece and minimum wage jumped to $38 an hour, then sure maybe.
But then, if we did that, your parents and grandparents can say goodbye to any concept of their retirement accounts having value enough for them to survive on without working a full-time job.
What? Clarify.
Any mid to major corporation can afford to pay their employees more. Pay the CEO, and Execs less, and don't give me "We have to pay them that much to retain the best and brightest leadership" bullshit. How about paying the employees more to retain their skills and loyalty.
When you're thinking- okay, maybe this is a me thing, but when I think about financial equality, I consider the extremes.
Taking into account what the person or family that makes $80,000 to $140,000 a year doesn't really do anything for the poor and the destitute, right?
So if iPhones suddenly become $7,000 expenditures on par with like a decent used car from 10 years ago, then it's definitely going to be the kind of thing where somebody has to make enough money to afford it.
And you can't only consider the middle class when looking at the affordability of a particular object.
So if iPhone's multiplied by 7, then the minimum wage needs to multiply by 7. And I did a little quick math in my head, I didn't get the exact pennies, right? But I know 7.25x7 is like $36 and change, right? So, yeah.
But if the minimum wage were to suddenly multiply by seven, then the value of 401Ks, which are locked in at pre-minimum wage readjustments, are taken into account, then the value of 401Ks would drop by one-seventh, enriching the poor, while taking money out of the elderly and retired people who are relying on that for their daily survival. And as minimum wage increases, the cost of goods are going to increase along with them, because retailers will know that they can sell their products at a higher price because the minimum wage has gone up.
So yeah, that's several paragraphs and 1,492 letters worth of text to describe and explain my justification for two paragraphs earlier.
See, you've bought into this Friedman economic dogma bullshit.
"If the peasants have more money, the cost of everything is going to go up, and nothing will change! Corporations will suffer, shareholder's won't get every dime they deserve, and businesses will charge more because the peasants have more!"
Also, 401K's are the absolute worst, most evil scam perpetrated on the American poor ever devised. Most employers won't let you opt out. Why wouldn't anyone let their pensions be gambled with by MBA's, no risk them? And all those delicious fees? 'Murican Capitalism! Anyone who doesn't want to get rich is a fool, and lazy!"
Guess what? You're going to die like everyone else, and money is meaningless when you're dead, and no decent person will admire your wealth.
We're done. You're obviously a Disciple of Mammon, which I find repulsive. Goodbye.
My dude.
Like, you should chill the fuck out, ok?
There's no need to go around condemning people to eternal torment and isolation from God because of a two paragraph comment.