this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
792 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3223 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Emmie@lemm.ee 21 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

It’s nice however let’s assume that it is the main consumer model. Then everything becomes possibly 20 times more expensive as companies need to keep same profit (shareholders) and now 20 people pool money to share the thing. It’s not a solution to capitalism, however it would work wonders for environment.

Yet it is us doing all the work for the environment while companies don’t lift a finger and get all the profit. Not a viable long term solution to a fundamental problem of wealth.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

The companies who have 20x the mark up necessary to survive will quickly see new businesses occupy the space to undercut them.

[–] Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Yeah, this is the one piece a lot of people miss: in any decently competitive market, individual firms have effectively zero power to set prices; they must instead accept the prices determined by the market.

Knowing that, the solution to that sort of corporate BS, then, is to ensure markets are competitive by busting monopolies, lowering barriers to entry, and getting money out of politics to reduce the effect of lobbying.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Hmmm I wouldn't be so sure... It depends on their position in the market and how well they lobby the government

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not really, not every business is in bed with the politicians. This was a worse case scenario where rentals became the main method of purchasing, so everyone would be on level ground. Those making 20 times profit margins are not everyday businesses, they ae luxury brands who would still thrive on their branding alone.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 1 points 6 months ago

Which business isn't? I honestly want to know to restore a semblance of hope in humanity

AFAIK, a business that is not in bed with corrupt politicians is because they have ready been beaten or they can't afford it

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

It's not a solution by itself, but a library economy can form part of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOYa3YzVtyk

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=NOYa3YzVtyk

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 6 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=NOYa3YzVtyk

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.