Oh dear, someone destroyed the value of price fixed blood diamonds, how sad.
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
241 points (99.6% liked)
Anti-Corporate Movement
413 readers
1 users here now
This community is the first one on lemmy of its kind. It sits between the idea of anarchism/anti-capitalism and left leaning economic policy.
Our goal is to make people aware of the dangers of corporate control, its influence on governments and people as well as the small but steady abrasion of empathy around the world indirectly caused by it.
Current topics this includes but is not limited to:
- Meta's entry into the fediverse
- Game companies putting gambling mechanics in childrens games
- Embracer groups buyout and closing of smaller game studios
- IP trolls destroying small companies and keeping progress back for profit
Feel free to debate this but beware, corporate rhetoric is not welcome here. If you have arguments, bring them on. If its rhetoric trying to defend the evil actions of corporations, we will know and you will go.
Our declared goal so far is to have all companies and individuals worldwide capped at 999 mil USD in all assets, including ownership of other companies, sister companies and marital assets. The reason for this is that companies (and individuals) are not supposed to resemble small(?) countries with a single leader(-board) and shareholder primacy. Thats why we feel like they must be kept in check indefinitely.
But companies will just wander off The argument that large companies will just wander off is valid, which we embrace. We dont need microsoft, apple, google, amazon and other trillion dollar companies. There are small competitors being kept small and driven into brankruptcy by anti competitive behavior of these giants or simply bought up and closed. If starbucks left tomorrow, we would not have an issue with this.
But then we have x little microsofts that all belong to the same person(s) If in fact nobody was allowed to accumulate more than 999 mil in assets, they would not be able to own all these. And like defending agains burglary, it is not about complete defence but time and effort. You only have to keep the thief occupied long enough for them to be caught, give up or make a mistake.
But these giants have tons of IP which would then limit our growth Thats another topic we must touch on. We will (only this one time) take a page out of russias playbook and demand that IP of non complying companies (assets over 999 mil USD) will be declared invalid, which opens them up to be copied.
But then they will "live" in one country that doesnt accept this Correct, and they should be taken into custody the moment they enter the airspace of a country that supports this act.
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
It was millennials. I know this because I've read hundreds of articles blaming them for it.
Right? Its so sad.
Just wait until the value is in how bloody your diamond is.
Moissanite is gorgeous and no one has to participate in slavery or murder to put them on me.
Awwwh but then ya don’t get that sweet sweet blood flavor with it.
Oh no!
Anyway...
it would be great if we could get debeers to pay for new job training for all the labor they've used that's now obsolete.
but either way, obsoleting the diamond trade is a win.
The phrase you are looking for is 'social transition'.
Unlikely to happen, though since DeBeers was dropped like a sack of potatoes by Anglo American who had an 85% stake in the company. The other 15% is the government of Botswana
ah ty for the insight
Per the article the price only went down like 5%, and it's only down 30% from it's high in 2022, so doesn't sound like they're really going to stop being ridiculously priced.
Also, this part: "Additionally, the case for buying diamonds as an investment has dwindled, Daga said. Diamonds were seen as an asset and inflation hedge over the last 50 years, he elaborated. But that investment rationale has largely faded as prices plunge."
I don't think diamonds have ever been an investment? You buy a wedding ring and if you wanted to turn around and sell it you might get (completely guestimating here) 40% of what you paid for it.
I don't think diamonds have ever been an investment?
Maybe not a ring, but loose gem stones definitely were an investment due to their rarity.
Diamonds and other gem stones are going the way of aluminum. Aluminum used to be a rare metal until industrial smelting techniques were developed in the 19th century.
Diamonds have never been rare in modern times. They are controlled by cartels and kept in massive warehouses to keep the supply low artificially. Not rare enough to justify the absurd costs anyway.
De Beers maintained a monopolistic hold over the diamond market for several decades, controlling 75-85% of the diamond rough supply. They carefully released only enough rough diamonds to satisfy then-current demand, while continually adjusting the degree of rough diamond availability. Of course, this made prices escalate and reinforced the perception of diamond's rarity. De Beers actually mined considerably more rough diamonds than they sold. They maintained a large warehouse of uncut diamonds in London. As a result, they weren't allowed to do business in the United States and a few other countries.
- international gem society
Diamonds may be forever, but carbon is not exactly valuable, objectively speaking.
Oh well.