6 ms·

I don’t understand how access to food is not a globally solved problem. We have such high levels of food waste and access to so many resources for other things

I don’t understand how access to food is not a globally solved problem. We have such high levels of food waste and access to so many resources for other things like militaries and space programs, yet people in quite wealthy countries are still struggling to put food on the table. Growing up my parents would sometimes skip meals to make sure my sibling and I had enough to eat, and thinking about it now in the context of both a housing crisis and increases in low income families cutting back on ‘discretionary’ spending such as food, I’m left quite dissatisfied in the modern world that it cannot provide a basic level of sustenance to the people. Oh well, someone needs to own several mega-yachts so some level of starving is required I guess /s.

slibhb 4y ago
The idea that hunger is the result of "people owning mega-yachts" is populist nonsense.
- officialchicken 4y ago
  “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche” -Marie Antoinette
  - leereeves 4y ago
    -Not Marie Antoinette. Rousseau wrote the anecdote about an anonymous princess who said that in 1765; Marie Antoinette didn't arrive in France until 1771.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Only if those people made their money from paying low wages would it make sense. edit: maybe years of tax subsidy and/or tax avoidance might add additional culpability.
- darth_avocado 4y ago
  It is not entirely untrue. EBT is essentially subsidizing businesses using tax dollars. If a business cannot survive without paying people liveable wages, it should not survive. Yet they exist because the government shares the burden of those wages. There is absolutely no reason why someone who works for Amazon or Uber or all the fancy tech companies where the upper management takes millions should not earn liveable wages and rely on food stamps to supplement their income.
  - slibhb 4y ago
    Why do you get to decide which businesses should survive? The market decides, just like it sets wages. Your argument is that, if we get rid of welfare, companies will raise wages. So welfare is just taxpayers subsidizing companies. You've constructed an argument to get rid of welfare!
    - toomuchtodo 4y ago
      Government allows the market to exist in a form agreed to via policy. Wages, for example, are set via wage floors.
      - slibhb 4y ago
        Oh okay, then let's set the minimum wage to 100K per year. Then everyone can own two cars and a home.
        toomuchtodo 4y ago
        Minimum wage in Australia is $21/hr and their economy is very much functional (besides all of the housing stock soaked up by Chinese investors). I’m not going to argue excessively with someone who’s ideologically driven and putting forth hyperbole (no one is advocating for $100k/year minimum wages), but there is clearly room to arrive at a living wage from where the US is currently at due to a lack of inflation adjustment, via policy.
        slibhb 4y ago
        So it's a good thing for the government to set a minimum wage of $21/hr but a bad thing for the government to set a minimum wage of $50/hr (100k/year). Where is the cut off exactly?
        paranoidrobot 4y ago
        It's not a single fixed number. It is, or should be, a living wage[1]. Someone in full employment should be able to meet their basic needs and that of any dependants. This includes things like healthcare, housing, food, transport, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  I bet Somali Pirates could feed their families for a long time off of looting one.
- maerF0x0 4y ago
  Correct. In fact if a billionaire spends money on a mega yacht, that's much better than something rent seeking like lobbying, and for those who care about share of the economy going to the top (vs the total picture of the pie) at least they're not buying up more productive assets. Also yachts employe people. To build them, to man them, to repair them, to fuel them etc.
- gruez 4y ago
  Can you elaborate?
SamReidHughes 4y ago
The housing crisis exists because the majority voted to have a housing crisis.
flask_manager 4y ago
Its Malthusian, low income families grow until they run out of resources... Its a pattern we only briefly stepped away from in the industrial revolution, supported by the rapid growth in the amount of real goods able to be produced by each worker. In the modern world most advancements take the form of less workers required for the same amount of production, however because we have largely reached "peak arable land", the efficiency goes up, but you can only get so many crops out of each hectare. The only real "solution" is to limit population growth; or start looking for ways to optimize for calorie efficient crops, with more centralized and industrial scale food production for the proles.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  Population growth is largely a solved problem, as is food production. The hard part is logistics; distributing the food to people. Especially in situations where the market fails to provide enough for everyone.

slibhb 4y ago

The idea that hunger is the result of "people owning mega-yachts" is populist nonsense.

officialchicken 4y ago
“Qu’ils mangent de la brioche” -Marie Antoinette
- leereeves 4y ago
  -Not Marie Antoinette. Rousseau wrote the anecdote about an anonymous princess who said that in 1765; Marie Antoinette didn't arrive in France until 1771.
pessimizer 4y ago
Only if those people made their money from paying low wages would it make sense. edit: maybe years of tax subsidy and/or tax avoidance might add additional culpability.
darth_avocado 4y ago
It is not entirely untrue. EBT is essentially subsidizing businesses using tax dollars. If a business cannot survive without paying people liveable wages, it should not survive. Yet they exist because the government shares the burden of those wages. There is absolutely no reason why someone who works for Amazon or Uber or all the fancy tech companies where the upper management takes millions should not earn liveable wages and rely on food stamps to supplement their income.
- slibhb 4y ago
  Why do you get to decide which businesses should survive? The market decides, just like it sets wages. Your argument is that, if we get rid of welfare, companies will raise wages. So welfare is just taxpayers subsidizing companies. You've constructed an argument to get rid of welfare!
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    Government allows the market to exist in a form agreed to via policy. Wages, for example, are set via wage floors.
    - slibhb 4y ago
      Oh okay, then let's set the minimum wage to 100K per year. Then everyone can own two cars and a home.
      - toomuchtodo 4y ago
        Minimum wage in Australia is $21/hr and their economy is very much functional (besides all of the housing stock soaked up by Chinese investors). I’m not going to argue excessively with someone who’s ideologically driven and putting forth hyperbole (no one is advocating for $100k/year minimum wages), but there is clearly room to arrive at a living wage from where the US is currently at due to a lack of inflation adjustment, via policy.
        slibhb 4y ago
        So it's a good thing for the government to set a minimum wage of $21/hr but a bad thing for the government to set a minimum wage of $50/hr (100k/year). Where is the cut off exactly?
        paranoidrobot 4y ago
        It's not a single fixed number. It is, or should be, a living wage[1]. Someone in full employment should be able to meet their basic needs and that of any dependants. This includes things like healthcare, housing, food, transport, etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage
hotpotamus 4y ago
I bet Somali Pirates could feed their families for a long time off of looting one.
maerF0x0 4y ago
Correct. In fact if a billionaire spends money on a mega yacht, that's much better than something rent seeking like lobbying, and for those who care about share of the economy going to the top (vs the total picture of the pie) at least they're not buying up more productive assets. Also yachts employe people. To build them, to man them, to repair them, to fuel them etc.
gruez 4y ago
Can you elaborate?

SamReidHughes 4y ago

The housing crisis exists because the majority voted to have a housing crisis.

flask_manager 4y ago

Its Malthusian, low income families grow until they run out of resources... Its a pattern we only briefly stepped away from in the industrial revolution, supported by the rapid growth in the amount of real goods able to be produced by each worker. In the modern world most advancements take the form of less workers required for the same amount of production, however because we have largely reached "peak arable land", the efficiency goes up, but you can only get so many crops out of each hectare. The only real "solution" is to limit population growth; or start looking for ways to optimize for calorie efficient crops, with more centralized and industrial scale food production for the proles.

jltsiren 4y ago
Population growth is largely a solved problem, as is food production. The hard part is logistics; distributing the food to people. Especially in situations where the market fails to provide enough for everyone.