this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2024
747 points (98.4% liked)

memes

10417 readers
1910 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
747
Choices (slrpnk.net)
submitted 12 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

That's all neat but there's a few problems with advocating this approach as a solution to anything.

  1. The supply chain problem mentioned by the other reply to your comment.

  2. The economic viability for this approach from both the side of supply and demand.

Local, especially "ethically" produced goods are usually much more expensive, and when people are barely making ends meet.

It's also much harder to expand a business that sources their goods "ethically" and so on.

  1. This is just not a solution. It's an individualistic approach to an institutional problem.

Companies are largely not accountable, there is largely no economic democracy (vote with your dollar doesn't count), and increasingly all matters of government are once again captured by large corporations and wealthy individuals.

The solution here cannot be to just consume better, something needs to change drastically.