(and why conservatives hate public schools, ofc)
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2025
1057 points (99.2% liked)
solarpunk memes
4280 readers
422 users here now
For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel you are making a good point, in a free market people will choose, it is literally in their best interest to choose, and if someone produces a sub par or even poisonous product, the people will choose not to use the product and basically self regulate. Our country had this sudden boom of Shein clothing, they were cheaper so of course they dominated. The government tried exercising control by confiscating the clothes or adding extra tariffs on the clothes and it really was ineffective, our ports are basically so corrupt anything gets through. But now two to three years later even the newspapers are picking up on the growing textile industry thanks to everyone buying locally made clothes that are higher quality that lasts more than 5 washes. Yes there was a market disruption but the market is regulating itself, and cheap clothes from China or Pakistan will have there place, they will only have enough space the market decides for itself.
Here is an opinion piece regarding the recent shifts, https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2025-07-07-after-the-bell-shopping-sucks-but-sa-is-stitching-a-comeback/
Ah yes, the blessed "self-regulating market". So when will we finally reach it? It's been some time after all, like hundreds of years now. We went through slavery, robber barons, gilded age, we're going through deregulation, enshittification, rise of fascism, rush for recession. Oh man, we're getting there, the bubble is about to burst and we're about to witness the American dream for everyone!
They also ignore that companies will cheerfully skimp on safety to save a buck and then spend far more than they saved fighting legal battles against the government to prevent or delay relevant regulations, against their own customers (or their next of kin) who have been harmed by their products, and against any kind of criminal prosecution. They'll also spend millions on marketing to minimize awareness or the severity of the problem and to actively increase sales of the dangerous product. It's not exactly an environment designed for fair and informed decision making.
Speaking of unfair, the history of monopolies, market collusion, and the race to the bottom have given us plenty of examples of companies removing that choice of product quality from the board entirely. If the people making the unsafe or unethical thing buy out all the competition and eliminate or cheapen the former competition's products until the have the same problems, there's no choice. If the competition look at the market and realize they can also take unsafe shortcuts and remain competitive, there's no choice.
There's a long history of rich people framing exploitation as the freedom to choose to accept a dangerous product or job or place to live. After all, if people are poor and desperate and propagandized enough there'll always be someone to make that choice. And the lower they drive the quality of life, the more people will have to choose the same. But it's not about saving you money. They're not doing you a favor. It's about saving money for themselves and framing things so you thank them for it.
I wish that were true, but man, it sure seems like the assholes doing this never seem to come away with less profits.
Ok I hear you, the free market is not perfect, in fact it is free for exploration due to its open-ness. I give you that. There have been many abuses and will be. But I just listed a way the free market can regulate itself passively eventually without external influence, it is in individuals best interests to choose a better product and let the inferior fail (if there is no external influence). In a controlled market where the decision is made that the food can be adulterated by let's say 10% saw dust, this was chosen because the people on top realised that it won't have detrimental effects and will provide 10% extra rations. What passive correcting method which individuals can exercise is there?
It's to peoples' best interest to choose a better product if they:
Asking regular people, many of whom are perpetually overworked and exhausted, to extensively research every product that's made it to market (and to overcome marketing, illegal concealment of hazards, and collusion) strikes me as a kind of Just World Falicy thing, where the 'opportunity' to simply buy a better product becomes a chance to blame people for the bad things that happen to them. They should simply have bought a test kit and figured out that there was lead contamination in their baby formula. They should have studied auto accident statistics from the last five years to notice that that particular model routinely explodes in a fireball with the doors jammed. What did they expect buying something without doing their own research?
I still feel you attacked the open market idea, instead of answering the question I asked where a controlled market decides to give a sub par product, what individualistic avenue is there then to correct the 10% saw dust in my food?
Fair enough. Personally I'm skeptical that there is a "passive corrective method" for individuals to fix problems in either system (maybe a socialist can identify one for us). There aren't many passive solutions at all.
The way to fix these problems in either system is through regulation, governance, and collective action. People just buying other products hasn't worked to correct the flaws in capitalism, regulation has, so you might as well go straight to that either way.
I will be honest, I identify as a libertarian, but that does not mean I have blind faith, and I do see benefits of other system. I do not think there really is a one size fits all solution. I am coming from South Africa. The post apartheid government I think even describes themselves as Socialist. I won't lie they did great work from 1994-2008, amazing even. But unfortunately their way led to what I can describe as a self enrichment drive, really hollowed out our beautiful state. I think that's why I identify as libertarian, Hayek's road to serfdom really felt like he was explaining exactly what we are experiencing the last 15 years.
But apart from whose economic model is right, I think the most important thing in a functioning society is participating, like we are doing, coming up with dialog, arguing in good faith. But basically keep those in power on their toes, ensure their power isn't entrenched, they are there to serve the people in however little or how much they try to govern us, and the people should participate to ensure they are kept accountable.
I think all of us want the same thing, a better world for us and a better place for future generations. Don't let the elite tell us our differences should cause us to fight, like I said that is the beauty of this conversation, we can differ, thank you for having a different view so that I am not in an echo chamber, let's argue in good faith, have freedom to explore each other's viewpoints, you really did make amazing argument with entrenched monopolies for example.
Sorry rambling here, but love you internet stranger, thank you for our argument and challenging our own ideas so that we can grow