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?
We call those cooperatives / co-ops where I am. There are a few food co-ops scattered around the city, but most of them rely on a “you work a couple of days a month at the shopfront” basis because land is obviously not something the urban poor can generally afford, and the produce has to come from somewhere. There are also a few DIY and repair co-ops and community centre sessions, but you have to be lucky enough to live near one or own/rent a car to really make use of them.
There are fewer formal food ones in rural areas though because of the tyranny of distance, it’s more just a few neighbours sharing excess of their own crops. Transport is expensive or inaccessible so the rural poor don’t get much selection of produce either, making it not overly helpful in comparison to charities. If everyone around you is only growing wheat because that’s what the land grows best, you’re not getting much non-wheat nutrition.
There’s also the problem of accessibility. People with disabilities are frequently the ones experiencing the most severe poverty, and they may be unable to practically contribute because of existing barriers. Which leaves the eternal dilemma of “if they don’t contribute is it no longer mutual aid?”.
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.
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.