996
The Homeless (lemmy.ca)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ceenote@lemmy.world 185 points 5 days ago

Full-time jobs that don't pay a living wage should be illegal. No matter how "beneath" you the job feels, if we need someone to do it "full-time" then anything less than a full living is a rip off, and you have to either advocate for taxpayers to subsidize the employer's greed or that they overwork to make a living.

[-] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 92 points 5 days ago

It blew mi mind today when i read that people work at Walmart AND collect food stamp. What is even the point of working if you can't afford to live?

[-] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 60 points 5 days ago

That's been known and publicly stated for what feels like a decade or more. Good to know NOTHING has been done about it.

[-] Aneb@lemmy.world 47 points 5 days ago

I'm pretty sure its in Walmart's on-boarding process to instruct new employees to apply to welfare programs. If your multibillion dollar corporation is pushing their employees onto government assistance than what the fuck is the point of working. You know that nothing you do will get you a better salary because they aren't just doing this to you but thousands, maybe millions, across the US and globally. And the c-suite is raking in billions in profit that they squeeze from their employees. But don't worry Walmart had a college repayment program so they are giving back /s

[-] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 27 points 5 days ago

Their on boarding process 10 years ago also implicitly told you that they would fire you if you attempted to unionize, and even explicitly told you to report your coworkers to management if they talked about a union.

It's extremely illegal, but I've never heard of them getting in trouble for it.

[-] Test_Tickles@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

They have shut down entire stores that were trying to unionize.

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

Like Starbux, in its hometown.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 9 points 4 days ago

That's because we gained workers rights by force and ever since: the elite have been driving us (the working class) apart from each other to make us isolated and powerless.

[-] Icytrees@sh.itjust.works 14 points 5 days ago

Low wages and poor labour laws actually make it so big corporations can indirectly profit off social programs:

https://www.motherjones.com/food/2020/11/which-companies-have-the-highest-number-of-workers-on-medicaid-and-food-stamps/

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago

This has been happening for like 30 years now, you just read about tris today?

[-] leMe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 5 days ago
[-] spankinspinach@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 days ago

One of the most utilitarian xkcds i know of. 10/10

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 33 points 5 days ago

If you are not paying living wages for a full-time job, that means you are getting subsidized employees from the government.

[-] glitchdx@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago

part of walmarts onboarding process is how to apply for government assistance like snap

[-] Strider@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Not only that, the other side is also that owning buildings as investments should also be illegal.

[-] squaresinger@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

In my country buildings and flats appreciate at a rate of 6% year-on-year on average. Rent is only 3% of the value of that property per year, on average. So a landlord can take 9% and have to deal with renters, their demands and the risk of them breaking things, or take 6% and do nothing at all. Keeping properties empty and off the market is enriching themselves on the suffering of people who now don't have a place to live.

So in my opinion there should be a vacancy tax that exactly matches the value appreciation rate of the property. Then landlords have the choice between 0% (=loss of money due to inflation) or 9%. And if they still don't want to rent the place out, they can still sell it to someone who wants to live there.

That proposal would still keep renting out property as a profitable way to go, while also helping people who want to buy property to live there, and the only people who would get harmed by this are people who purposely take property off the market to create scarcity to enrich themselves.

[-] Eq0@literature.cafe 3 points 4 days ago

I would add strict rend regulations. A one bedroom apartment should not be rented for more than 1/4 of minimum wage…

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 93 points 5 days ago
[-] ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

Thats more of an SEP field

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MisterNeon@lemmy.world 94 points 5 days ago

I'm very worried I may appear in this comic soon. I hate being an American.

[-] ignotum@lemmy.world 70 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Land of the free, free to die on the streets

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 62 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

"But not these streets, we want people to come through here and spend money. Wouldn't want to risk them seeing you and giving you that money instead."

[-] AlecSadler 18 points 5 days ago

In some areas of the country, being homeless is a crime.

[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 13 points 5 days ago

"The Homeless have to move out, IMMEDIATELY"

POTUS

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] j4k3@lemmy.world 60 points 5 days ago

Commodity housing is a crime against humanity.

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 25 points 5 days ago

Buying homes to use as gambling chips is a crime against humanity

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 days ago

IMHO the problem is systemic. There are very few ways to save for retirement without economic rent. Landlords suck, and so does the macroeconomic policy that encourages becoming a landlord instead of just saving money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 51 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Feels like the problem is systemic and tied to the high price of real estate relative to the low price of wages.

Would be nice to get some kind of public officials involved. People genuinely interested in building public housing or, at least, implementing a citywide rent freeze until supply is released to match demand.

Millions of Homes Still Being Kept Vacant as Housing Costs Surge, Report Finds

[-] falseWhite@lemmy.world 31 points 5 days ago

The current system is broken fundamentally and cannot be fixed, because it was actually designed this way and is working as intended by all billionaires.

We are way past simple changes like that and relying on bureaucrats to do anything is just giving them time to make things even worse.

What we need is to send all the billionaires straight to giloutine, take their wealth, redistribute it and build a new system where no single person can have so much power to affect millions of other people.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago

And all to have a few thousand extra billionaires.

[-] Kornblumenratte@feddit.org 12 points 4 days ago

You vastly overestimate the billionaire cast. As of April 2025, there seem to be 902 billionaires in the US. (I can't access the original Forbes article, sorry).

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

Always love a good pedant.

But the exact number really doesn't matter and isn't the point.

[-] loonsun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 days ago

Well it kind of does. Less than 1k people is a lot easier to grasp than thousands for people.

[-] Kornblumenratte@feddit.org 3 points 4 days ago

Thank you.

I think the exact magnitude of the billionaire caste illustrates the magnitude of the point.

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

Yeah, but maybe someday I'll be one of those billionaires!

[-] tetris11@feddit.uk 4 points 4 days ago

Then that'll show someone like me!

[-] plyth@feddit.org 19 points 5 days ago

770,000

It's an entire city.

[-] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 16 points 5 days ago
[-] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 17 points 5 days ago

His Wikipedia page is interesting. He's largely got left leaning positions but doesn't believe in man made climate change and endorsed Donald Trump in 2015.

Wonder how he feels nowadays

[-] drcobaltjedi@programming.dev 7 points 5 days ago

On transgender people, McMillan says "When you see a guy walk down the street and he's got a little skirt on, and he's so happy. Why shouldn't you be happy? This is America, it's beautiful to watch someone different."

Based-ish? He's clearly happy to see trans folk be happy, but still adresses them by their former gender. His heart feels like its in the right place.

[-] Eq0@literature.cafe 4 points 4 days ago

It’s much easier to change a pronoun than acknowledge that “those people” are people (whoever “those” stands for). Yeah, a small update would be nice, but it’s a good starting point

[-] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 8 points 5 days ago

The manager of the 7/11 down the street from me was homeless. She'd finish her shift and go spend the night at a "pod village" the city had set up.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
996 points (100.0% liked)

Comic Strips

20059 readers
2211 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS