49

A man can not remake himself without suffering for he is both the marble and the sculptor.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Juice@midwest.social 3 points 3 days ago

There's a $200 per year licensing fee and some infrastructure cost (divided up over 20-30 years or something) but Nestle takes over a million gallons of water out of the great lakes every day.

Insurance companies get money from denying claims they should approve.

When companies exploit legal loopholes that harm people or the environment, and then go to court and have to pay a fine that is usually like 1/10 or less, as a percentage, than the profits they made by breaking the law/hurting people/polluting then that's basically free money.

In 2008 the US Government paid hundreds of billions in bailouts to investors and insurance companies after they intentionally crashed the economy. The american people generally were outraged, and the bailout money went to corporate bonuses, so in that case, people made money (value) from like losing money, which is billions of dollars less than free.

I could keep going

[-] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Do you really think that phrase is meant to be understood that way or what I asked you, or is it more like "progress takes effort and effort is not easy". It's like you're here to yap for the sake of yapping. Even if you misunderstood in earnest what that handful of words meant, you could've just said so, no need to double down talking about Nestle, lol. Nobody should "umh achtually" about an inoffensive and matter of fact couple of words, but to write paragraphs on it is strange and embarrassing.

[-] Juice@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean you're the one with yappy in their username, so I'll take "yap for the sake of yapping" as a sign of you recognizing a kindred spirit, and not the semi confrontational manner in which I originally took it. Because tbh, yes I do like to contribute to discussions for the sake of those discussions.

You asked for examples, I provided some. Are the "inoffensive and matter of fact couple of words" referring to the meme? Why should I be embarrassed about writing paragraphs? I write a lot, not just in posts but for my own reference, an occasional article, etc., if its a topic I feel strongly about. So why are you trying to shame me? Can't you just engage with me in good faith? As for strange, well, I'll own up to that, proudly.

As far as the meme is concerned, I can see a good interpretation of its meaning, in a very narrow sense. But its not at all a universal, and I take issue with the way its framed. I can think of many instances where the meme is just flat out wrong. I responded to the meme with "strange and embarrassing" paragraphs. If you can tolerate them, I'd love to hear your perspective.

But I provided examples. Can you respond to them, or are you only responding to comments in bad faith? Maybe you do so because responding in bad faith is worthless, and you refuse to generate value for free. That would be consistent with what you've discussed here.

You provided examples for something, I don't know what, which belong in a different conversation with a different topic, completely unrelated to "you're the marble yadda yadda" which, for anyone that isn't entirely deranged, is a matter-of-fact statement regarding how everything worthwhile usually takes effort (unless you're extremely talented/lucky) and effort is not as comfortable as not putting it in. Idk what Nestlé has to do with anything. Just let it go already, unless even continuing a discussion employing nonsensical arguments/examples is amusing to you, I guess.

[-] Juice@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago

Can you give me examples of things that take place for free that are valuable besides, idk, life itself or random circumstance?

In was specifically providing examples where there are processes in our society that produce value for free, or where an incredible amount of value is created for no cost or extremely low cost. In that case the Nestle example is relevant, because they extract natural resources for almost no cost, and convert it into a commodity to be resold for high profits. The natural resource is, for all intents and purposes, free. The proceeds of the value created are then transferred to private hands, but value is created.

Why are you so insulting? If you don't want to continue the discussion, just don't respond. Otherwise, let's have a discussion about the topic, which is the point of a public forum like this one.

this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
49 points (78.2% liked)

Philosophy

2443 readers
9 users here now

All about Philosophy.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS