This doesn’t address the core issue of capitalism:

Owners in general (of businesses, housing, everything) get all the money, thanks to the opportunity to mercilessly take advantage of workers/renters/everyone else. And taking advantage gets you more money to take more advantage of people.

The passivest of incomes goes to the owners, the ceos are just the highest paid guard dogs of those people.

Is that ok? Passive income being much harder to earn for everyone, unless you are rich enough to start your own business, that is.

Are we not going to end up in the same situation? Isn’t it basically the same situation we’re already in?

Not dumb question at all. Very legitimate question

Nah, if this is built through the social process of “Ha dude, this would be so cool, tell me, what should I add?” I think it’s perfectly plausible.

You should also know that SLS is banned in the EU, so this post made no sense to me until I went to Google for answers…

I swear, sometimes it’s hard to fathom the little ways you got it rough over there.

A Google listicle about “7 banned substances in the EU” or some shit, straight up lied to me.

SLS (Sodium laurilsulfate) is not banned, not even particularly regulated, in medicinal products, in the EU.

“The vast majority of SLS use is in oral products (tablets and capsules) where it rarely displays any adverse reactions.”

It only is “not permitted”, as a food additive in the EU, and there is a 2017 study which argues for its regulation in skin products, because of irritation.

I was careless on the internet, and the world is more complicated than it seemed at first glance. Story as old as time.