cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2258784

I’ve been looking through some US and EU labor data and I have started to wonder why don’t more of the working poor join local mutual aid groups instead of staying at their likely shitty jobs or relying on charities?

This is a study on the labour distribution in the US among the working poor

On table 4 it shows that there are about 5,812,000 people that are classified as working poor ( Its says number in thousands so I multiplied the number given by 1000) and that alot of those jobs are in essential services like making food or providing support to others.

Similar diversity is show in the EU as well

So if most of these people decided to stop working at their current job and instead bring that those skills to a mutual aid network wouldn’t they still get most of the resources they need because other specialists would be there to help them and also live a generally more happy life?

Also the reason why I am saying instead of charities is because charities become less effective the more people request from them because they have limited resources to share and also mainly supported by wealthy people that can unilaterally give and take away support.

Whilst mutual aid networks can take the diversity that more people joining the network gives them and use it to offer more services to other people in that community.

This seems like a no brainer so what am I missing?

  • jerkface
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Food co-ops don’t usually require people contribute labour and don’t operate a storefront. People contribute to the co-op mainly just by purchasing through it. The co-op requires a minimum volume to be able to purchase wholesale and bulk goods. By pooling their purchases, co-op members provide mutual aid by making more goods accessible for less money.

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depends in part on where you are, probably. I’ve been part of a co-op that was deposit-based membership and workers didn’t have to pay the deposit. Other co-ops I’ve seen near me but haven’t been part of had work rosters. I suspect they all work slightly differently according to their individual contexts, it’s not like they’re franchised.