this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2026
106 points (94.9% liked)

Showerthoughts

41706 readers
1661 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

If all the money ends up in hands of billionaires and their corporations and there will be no money in hands of regular plebs...
Who do you think will have to pay the taxes? Also, the people would figure out a different way of trading or currency. And with that one getting taxed, all the billionaire's money become worthless.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

We sell our organs to death?

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 hours ago

We all learn why possession is 9/10 of the law

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 12 points 20 hours ago

We had that before. It was called feudalism and it was terrible. One day, the people got pissed off enough to cut off a few heads. A golden age ensued for a couple hundred years.

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)
[–] incompetent@programming.dev 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I've never seen it. Is it good?

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

yeah, it was actually a good movie. The big thing was that all the super rich lived in space on a halo ring while Earth went to hell for everyone else.

these days this movie hits a little too close to home for me.

[–] fisch@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

That is an ongoing process, but it looks much different from what you imagine. Even now, a large part of the economy is working for the top 10 percent, producing luxury goods and services. Wealthy customers provide the biggest margins for companies.

"Regular" customers are getting more irrelevant every day. There was a time when your role as a consumer was important for the economy. This role gave you power and influence because companies were competing for your money. This era is slowly coming to an end, something most people haven't realized yet.

[–] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 3 points 8 hours ago

Rich people can be fools, and a fool and his money are soon parted. That's why much of the economy is just everyone trying to scam everyone else.

[–] regdog@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

What do you mean "if"?

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

The majority population falls into progressively more desperate poverty. Work hours are extended for less and less personal gain and greater risk of injury, disease, and disability. Recreation, autonomy, and actualization become ever more out of reach.

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

I would imagine at some point government will start becoming creative to tax the billionaires or the corporations. Though the masses becomes entertainment for the billionaires to keep money valuable else like you said if they all have the money then it's worthless. The government by this point would be so weak since rampant corruption would be so ingrained that any idea of taxing the billionaires would be incredibly hard to pass. So I think what likely will happen is a societal collapse. If this were to happen globally end of our current civilization.

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 5 points 18 hours ago

Uhmm ... the billionaires ARE the government right now. They are engaging in fraud and crime right out in the open.

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 2 points 18 hours ago

They are getting into government because they know government must stop them.

[–] antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago

It started in 1971 and it’s still running its course. So, look around I guess. If we don’t do anything in another 20 years it won’t be possible to own a home for anybody. We will all be severely restricted on what we can eat and how we can travel. Everything you buy will be disposable garbage that makes you sick and needs replacement often.

[–] Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago

Bold of you to assume they could think that far. To be honest, they don’t think us at all. The more people are starving to death, the better for them. I’m sure they think like “eat the poor”. This world is doomed with capitalism and we should do something about it now, before it’s too late.

[–] Sirdubdee@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

They let us borrow some so that we can buy their products and pay them back more. We have to trade our labor to make up the difference between our passive income and current expenses, but they’ll only give us just enough to sustain a population of laborers.

Some take a risk and borrow wayyyy more than they can really pay back with their own labor and use that money to buy assets that they hope will be successful in integrating with the loop of money. If it’s successful, their assets buy the labor of others to generate income so they pay back the loan and do it all over again.

[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

we all rot as they continue eating steak

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Aren't we supposed to get cake, at least?

[–] architect@thelemmy.club 2 points 18 hours ago

Cake = the caked on shit at the bottom of a bread pan.

[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

bootlick them enough and you'll get a slice of synthesized cakes

[–] ExtremeDullard@piefed.social 54 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Then the plebs reach for the scythes and the machetes.

That's why the billionaires steal as much money as they can, but stop short of making a critical mass of people desperately poor: they keep most people poor enough that they try to fight for what little they have left, and between themselves for the scraps, instead of uniting and rising up against the kleptocrats who engineer their poverty.

[–] coyootje@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We're slowly getting to the point where they're get too greedy and moving past that critical mass point. I think Trumps presidency really turbo charged the idiocy.

[–] rayyy@piefed.social 17 points 1 day ago

The billionaires are so out of touch that they have no idea how desperate the masses are becoming.

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

That's the subject of the chapter on the anarchist FAQ I was reading last week. Goes something like this: governments exist to serve the billionaires. When governments do something meaningful to other people it is a tug of war to reach a compromise, always with the goal of preserving the status quo.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 35 points 1 day ago (6 children)

"All the money" assumes there's a finite amount of money. There isn't. In a fiat currency, like the Dollar, Euro or Sterling, banks create money when they lend, and the money disappears again when the loan is repaid. This is what a banking license gives you; The ability to make loans without having the existing money to back them.

Government spends by telling it's bank (The Federal Reserve, ECB or BoE) to lend money for the things it wants to buy. Taxes then repay that debt and the money doesn't exist anymore.

In an economy where huge amounts of wealth is horded, there's a problem of liquidity. All of that wealth is idle. It's not circulating and there becomes a danger of economic collapse. Therefore more money has to enter the system, either through government spending or commercial banks making loans.

Horded money is also money that isn't going back to banks to repay the lending. So the amount of money in existence goes up, driving the value of that money down. This is inflation. One dollar can no longer buy as much as it used to as it's value has gone down.

So, billionaires cause:

  • Large amounts of commercial debt to inject replacement money into the economy. That is, personal debt or corporate debt.
  • Inflation caused by that cash injection

Sound familiar?

Now a government could choose to raise its spending so that it injects the required money into its economy, rather commercial banks doing it. The advantage of that is that they can balance that with raised taxes, so inflation doesn't get out of control. They can also choose who to tax and protect areas of the economy.

Most governments don't see it this way, arguing that they can only spend what they take in taxes (The "government spending is like a household budget" argument). This has been false ever since they all came off the gold standard. They can spend what they want and they can tax what they want. The difference will drive inflation, so has to be kept reasonable, but if they don't spend enough the commercial banks take over and will absolutely drive inflation.

[–] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

That's the best and most straightforward explanation I've ever seen about this, well done

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

money represents power and whoever has power will have the money.

i think you're looking at this from a very "everyday" perspective - you think of money as something that is passed around and goes from A to B. the system at large does not work that way. just like the earth is flat if you look at any small patch of it but is round when you look at it globally, the economy works very differently whether you look at it at an everyday scale or at a global scale.

on a global scale, things are determined by geopolitical considerations, not by whatever companies or buyers/sellers do. like, that china exports so-and-so many tons of steel and imports so-and-so many tons of pork meat has very little to do with companies working hard to produce these products. it's mostly some globalist philosophy to determine what happens on a global scale. for example, tariffs might completely change the game, if only there is the political will for that. as do free-trade agreements.

again, the same is true for any big country. "money" on a country-level is a fiction. it was invented by banks for complex reasons (mostly to simplify trade) and can be modified as long as it's meaningful to the state's politics. like, the state can just print more money through the federal reserve bank. in fact, it does that all the time. that cannot be explained by simple "trade transactions" as you're imagining them rn. there's abstract and complex and completely non-trivial maths involved in this game. "what happens when the billionaires own everything" only makes sense as a question when you consider that the concept of "owning" stuff is fundamental - which it is not. "Ownership" is a legal construct because the state deems it useful. with a different philosophy, the very concept of "ownership" might lose traction and become meaningless. The question therefore is: What is the political will at a state level?

[–] agent_nycto@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is why I think they are all into crypto, because they see it as the next big currency and want to be the person controlling it

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I recommend the episode of Recess where they use monstickers as currency. In this episode, TJ finds ways to amass all the monstickers and make everyone else destitute. It occurred to me while watching the episode that all the other kids have to do is stop requiring each other to pay for stuff with monstickers, since nobody has them anymore. And then it occurred to me, why can't we do that in real life? Why can't society just collectively realize this whole money thing doesn't work if a few people are hoarding it all and just come up with a new system? Instead people are being deprived of basic needs because of this stupid imaginary system

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because the people with the money also control the physical goods, how are you going to acquire food and shelter without money? and then while you may accept small amounts of bartering you will need some amount of money to continue purchasing food and shelter

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's a tad worse than that. They also control all the debt. You can't invent a new currency and use it to pay a mortgage, car payment, student loans, credit cards, etc.

Well, at least not before it develops value that those institutions will recognize. I can't say that Bitcoin made that leap, but it can be readily exchanged for other currencies these days so maybe there's hope.

[–] Test_Tickles@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

Don't forget the part where they also own the people who create the laws and therefore the people who enforce the laws.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Usually happens coincidentally to them being in charge. Pray you can offer value to them, is normal advice (given by the oligarchy).

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

on the flip side, it usually happens just before the aristocracy is strung up in the streets and flayed open to send a message.

that message?

"do not forget there are more of us than there are of you."

[–] hesh@quokk.au 13 points 1 day ago

It basically already did

this is what people mean when they talk about the contradictions of capitalism.

[–] e0qdk@reddthat.com 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The economy collapses and you get a revolution, mass emigration, and/or other major societal upheavals -- probably as soon as a lot of people start going hungry...

mass emigration

to where?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] elephantium@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Depends on how you look at it. Technically, it'll never happen. The megacorps still need employees to do some tasks. They'll still have some pocket money.

OTOH, you could say that it's already happened. The plebs are broke, the middle class is basically gone, and the tax structure can't support everything that the government wants to do. Eventually, borrowing runs out, and we get a crisis that makes the current economic troubles look mild.

I don't relish this path.

[–] Carrotwurst@programming.dev 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

The "plebs" will develop a new currency of their own. And by this I basically mean anything from bottle caps to IOU notes etc. Monopoly money, whatever. Arguably they could use something actually valuable too but using an IOU-type thing kinda secures it against theft. Point is that it starts with small communities with some degree of trust of course. Alternatively, trade work for food and goods - but we're primed to use money so I think we're likely to just create a new currency since we already know it's simpler to just trade 5 bottle caps for a carrot than it is to wash dishes for... oh i dunno, 3 carrots or whatever.

This kinda is what we should be getting to do anyway at this point. The 1% should be regarded as a force of nature. You can't win against them anymore you can win against a volcano. Best you can do is work around them (instead of trying to beat them at their own game which they are constantly rigging in their favor anyway).

Money itself only has as much value as we give it.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›