• Yllych [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    9 months ago

    The same person can be a customer at Walmart, a worker at Walmart, and a shareholder/owner at Walmart. Class as a Marxist concept maybe made sense when you could only be a worker or an owner. But it doesn’t work in a world where you can seamlessly switch between categories, or be all of them at the same time.

    Marxists when the Walmart greeter shows them his penny stocks (he is bourgeois now) walter-breakdown

    • Kaplya@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The same person can be a customer at Walmart, a worker at Walmart, and a shareholder/owner at Walmart.

      You laugh but this is literally the foundational model of microeconomics: dynamic stochastic general equilibrium that they have been teaching to every econ students for the past few decades.

      The economists around the world advising their governments have all been indoctrinated to some degree of this neoclassical belief.

    • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      9 months ago

      As a literal former Walmart greeter who got a few thousand in the Employee Stock Program, fuck this guy (and double fuck Walmart)

      Getting fired by Walmart and making their Wikipedia page for it is the crowning achievement of my career.