Only half?
https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/26/map-shows-much-salary-spend-rent-different-areas-london-10072789/
London is more like 60-80%.
this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2025
584 points (96.3% liked)
memes
14426 readers
2858 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sorry but saying a 13th century high medieval peasant owned their hovel is just incorrect. Yeomen did, they owned their own land, but they didn't live in hovels. Serfs and villeins were bound to their land, owned by a lord, and had to do uncompensated labor on the lord's land for the "right" to live on the land they could not leave.
Also, saying high medieval serfs paid "1/10 annual produce" completely ignores all the other feudal duties owed to their lord. Usually, serfs owed a third of their land value in produce to their lord off the peasant's land, as well as not owning anything, while having to use the lord's flour mill which was also heavily taxed. @PugJesus@lemmy.world has it right.
Bit we have social media.now
So things are MUCH better.... right?
And no plagues!
oh wait
Keep going.
If that doesn't hit close to home.....
The commons is the one that hits hardest for me. In Washington State, you have to pay to use our state parks as well as the federal parks. They're saying that we're paying to park.
The commons is the cultural and natural resources accessible to all members of a society, including natural materials such as air, water, and a habitable Earth. These resources are held in common even when owned privately or publicly.
This was an alternative to defunding the state parks completely.
Republicans didn't want to pay for parks at all.
Requiring payment to enter the parks is a way to fund them without "taxes".
Yes, all of that is what we are complaining about.
A library card can get you free access, at least the Vancouver one can.
You know serfdom basically still exists in parts of the world. Why not go to one of those places and ask if they'd rather live there or in the USA?
One person's pain does not diminish another's.
I'm just saying the whole premise of the meme is extremely flawed. It's made to imply that modern life is in any way as bad as medieval serfdom and that is just not true. For example, did you know that most medieval peasants didn't own their own ovens and were forced to take the food they produced to someone else to cook it if they weren't eating something that could be cooked on a simple hearth? Or that they literally weren't allowed to leave the land they were assigned to without permission from their lord? Yeah things are bad today but they were way worse back then.
The meme isn't literally saying modern life is 'just as bad' as medieval serfdom - it's highlighting that despite almost unimaginable progress and development since then, economic and social conditions for the average person are becoming increasingly shit - and that the overlap in this venn diagram is a shameful rebuke of our complacency and the failings of the current system/those which are disproportionately benefiting under current uncertainty and exploitation.
In any case, suffering isn't a competition - someone who's circumstantially stuck in their shitty apartment paying off a lifetime of debt might be (more) free from the TB concerns and formal landlord permissions that medieval serfs had, but it doesn't for a second mean that people are guaranteed a healthy, happy, prosperous life - or that anybody in a developed country has the ability or the capital to do what they want or go where they please. Shit, I can't have 2 days to my fucking self without the ordained holy approval of my moron manager, in practice I'm no more free to venture or travel without affecting my livelihood when it comes to needing someone's say-so.
Amazon workers pissing in bottles to raise their children in a society which increasingly expects the individual to bear all costs of life but will gladly subsidise corporate malpractice is a crappy situation - and farmers in 12th century England having it worse doesn't diminish the shittiness of the situation for people alive today. I agree that historical literacy is important, but the meme doesn't exist to insult the serfs, it begs us to avoid their plight with infinitely more resources, having won hard-fought battles to avoid that sort of lifestyle.
I don't want to wait for the economic outlook gets even worse until we're all living in Meta/Tencent company towns and sleeping in pod hotels eating gruel for a comparison to become fully valid.
I’m just saying the whole premise of the meme is extremely flawed. It’s made to imply that modern life is in any way as bad as medieval serfdom and that is just not true.
The image is just drawing a few parallels between modern life and medieval serfdom, not implying that one is equally as bad as the other. I think the larger point that the image is trying to make is that landlording is something we should have abandoned when we got rid of serfdom.
Doesn't know how to use a Venn Diagram (twice, not in the intersection)
Elaborate if you're educated about it
Progress will never fail landlords
Well, if we go for economic contraction, shrinking population, automation and even wealth distribution, then the landlord will need to find other work.
Not even close.
Elaborate?
Many would own neither their land nor their hovel. The lucky ones would own themselves, at least; the unlucky ones would not only not own themselves nor their hovel, but also not own their own fucking children - nearly half of England's population was unfree. Of the free half, a majority of them would not have owned any land in any real sense. They lived on their lord's sufferance.
Their access to the commons was dependent on the goodwill of their local lord, and, indeed, as the 14th century comes into play, that access is stripped as soon as it becomes more profitable for the local lord to sell the rights off.
10% of their harvest would go to the Church alone - not optional. Much more would go to their local lord simply for the privilege of existing - around 25% if you were free, closer to 50% if you were unfree. And that's not getting into various other taxes, such as for anything sold, or to get permission to marry. And if you were unfree, you'd owe nearly half of your working days to your lord's needs - without any recompense, in money or produce. On top of that, many taxes levied were irregular - ie whenever your lord thought he could get away with it.
This is a bit dramatized especially with “fucking children”. I'd like to see sources to back up such emotional claims, especially the chest-thumping parts eg. “Not own their children”. Families lived together and children weren't treated like chattel. You exaggerated here. "Nearly half of your working days" is an overstatement and labor obligations were typically 2–3 days a week plus extra during harvest (boon days). So, about one-third of workdays, not half. Enclosing timing and large-scale commons stripping were much more severe in the 15th–16th centuries than the 14th. While some pressures started in the late 13th, it wasn't yet widespread. Seems like you've got a strong opinion but flimsy research to back it up. I can see why you had to be pressured to write a complete response. Have a day.
This is a bit dramatized especially with “fucking children”. I’d like to see sources to back up such emotional claims, especially the chest-thumping parts eg. “Not own their children”. Families lived together and children weren’t treated like chattel. You exaggerated here.
"They weren't chattel slaves, their children were just bound to lord and land in perpetuity"
Cool cool cool
“Nearly half of your working days” is an overstatement and labor obligations were typically 2–3 days a week plus extra during harvest (boon days).
Sunday off, at least pro forma.
Would you like to remind me what percentage 3 is of 6.
Enclosing timing and large-scale commons stripping were much more severe in the 15th–16th centuries than the 14th. While some pressures started in the late 13th, it wasn’t yet widespread.
"It was more severe later" doesn't at all modify the point.
I can see why you had to be pressured to write a complete response.
I can see why you didn't address the vast majority of my points, and why the points you did address, you did so without strong arguments.
view more: next ›