5 ms·

All the excess you cite is a result of this (albeit flawed) capitalist system we live with. I believe there will come a time where it is no longer necessary, bu

by c22 3y ago

All the excess you cite is a result of this (albeit flawed) capitalist system we live with. I believe there will come a time where it is no longer necessary, but this will require levels of cooperation, education, and coordination that we are not nearly prepared to handle as a species. For what it's worth, I worked for a while at a fast food joint that did allow employees to take food home, or to make extra of it and just consume it on premises during lunch break. Leftover food was frozen and donated to a shelter twice a week. This place is still in business and as far as I know still operating with these policies. Cynacism aside, I don't even think the place is that unique. If you look around you will find lots of groups motivated by something more than just the mighty dollar, perhaps even most enterprise. This despite the corrosive effects of capitalism you're fretting over.

phatskat 3y ago
I may be fretting over capitalism, but I think I do so with justification. I can’t say which system would be better, but I see the one destroying the planet and creating an arbitrary system of haves and have nots where two of the largest factors in whether you have a comfortable life are who your parents are and where your born - it’s a crapshoot. > All the excess you cite is a result of this (albeit flawed) capitalist system we live with. My original point was responding to the bemoaning that we don’t have enough resources for everyone. Well we do, they just get wasted. We’d still have those resources or at least the ability to create them under any other system.
- c22 3y ago
  I appreciate your viewpoint. I spent many decades believing similarly, that money isn't real and money has no inherent value or purpose, only muddying the waters of production. Over the years, however, I've developed a more nuanced take on the matter. (And on a personal note, in retrospect it was this belief that kept me in poverty, not the children of the wealthy.) I completely agree that we have "enough" for everyone at this point in time and many of our ills reduce to a distribution problem. I very much do not agree that just any other system could have brought us to this point. Intuitively if we could snap our fingers and make all money disappear tomorrow life would go on without a hiccup or any noticible change so long as everyone just keeps doing what they're doing now. But that's the rub, would everyone keep doing what they're doing? Our economic system is the system attempting to solve this distribution problem. The optimist in me still believes we can create a better system, but I have spent years trying to understand what that system looks like and I have yet to find it. (I am still eager to hear your proposal.) I am increasingly convinced the solution will ultimately need to leverage our modern and novel digital communications networks as well as other recent and perhaps future innovations, so I don't agree that such a system could have just arisen at any point in the past and carried us here. As an addendum, I believe any system that effectively solves this problem while delivering the same or higher level of resources for humanity will run into the issue of destroying the planet. This is an orthogonal problem that the optimist in me also believes we will eventually find a solution for, but if we don't the discussion will become somewhat moot.
wildrhythms 3y ago
I think you reiterated the above commenter's point: we shouldn't have to rely on such excess and benevolence to make sure every last person is being fed. That should be a baseline human right. The existence of charity itself is an outcome of inequality.

by c22 3y ago

phatskat 3y ago

I may be fretting over capitalism, but I think I do so with justification. I can’t say which system would be better, but I see the one destroying the planet and creating an arbitrary system of haves and have nots where two of the largest factors in whether you have a comfortable life are who your parents are and where your born - it’s a crapshoot. > All the excess you cite is a result of this (albeit flawed) capitalist system we live with. My original point was responding to the bemoaning that we don’t have enough resources for everyone. Well we do, they just get wasted. We’d still have those resources or at least the ability to create them under any other system.

c22 3y ago
I appreciate your viewpoint. I spent many decades believing similarly, that money isn't real and money has no inherent value or purpose, only muddying the waters of production. Over the years, however, I've developed a more nuanced take on the matter. (And on a personal note, in retrospect it was this belief that kept me in poverty, not the children of the wealthy.) I completely agree that we have "enough" for everyone at this point in time and many of our ills reduce to a distribution problem. I very much do not agree that just any other system could have brought us to this point. Intuitively if we could snap our fingers and make all money disappear tomorrow life would go on without a hiccup or any noticible change so long as everyone just keeps doing what they're doing now. But that's the rub, would everyone keep doing what they're doing? Our economic system is the system attempting to solve this distribution problem. The optimist in me still believes we can create a better system, but I have spent years trying to understand what that system looks like and I have yet to find it. (I am still eager to hear your proposal.) I am increasingly convinced the solution will ultimately need to leverage our modern and novel digital communications networks as well as other recent and perhaps future innovations, so I don't agree that such a system could have just arisen at any point in the past and carried us here. As an addendum, I believe any system that effectively solves this problem while delivering the same or higher level of resources for humanity will run into the issue of destroying the planet. This is an orthogonal problem that the optimist in me also believes we will eventually find a solution for, but if we don't the discussion will become somewhat moot.

wildrhythms 3y ago

I think you reiterated the above commenter's point: we shouldn't have to rely on such excess and benevolence to make sure every last person is being fed. That should be a baseline human right. The existence of charity itself is an outcome of inequality.