this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
1170 points (98.8% liked)

Antiwork

8283 readers
1 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
yogthos@lemmy.ml
uthredii@lemmy.ml
Yayannick@lemmy.ml
sexy_peach@feddit.de
1170
Eat the rich. (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago by BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world to c/antiwork@lemmy.ml
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This demonstrably untrue otherwise there would be no reason for huge market controlling products to advertise. I don't believe in the wisdom of the markets and I'm not sure why you do.

[โ€“] scubbo@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

That's not the case. The following two statements can be simultaneously true:

  • a sufficiently-good product would sell through word-of-mouth
  • corporate executives are not satisfied with the small amount of purchases this would generate, because they want more profit.

Advertising is a way to generate morepurchases (and so more profit), but it might be increasing from a non-zero amount.

I don't think that the person you're replying to is entirely correct (some products or markets really do require advertising to make consumers aware), but they're closer to right than they are to wrong on a level playing field. But if the other side is using advertising, you basically have to do the same in order to remain competitive.