• Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    It was in response to my saying that you cannot support a large population via hunting and gathering. You need to work harder than that. It is only more food per hour of work if you are talking about a small population. There is a point of diminishing returns and then it gets harder and harder to feed a growing population via hunting and gathering.

    • jorp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Nobody is proposing we switch to hunter-gatherer jobs, we’re saying that the jobs we’re currently doing are producing extreme excess and that excess is either wasted (fast fashion landfills, dramatic food waste) or just hoarded by the capitalist class.

      We can support our current population with our current technology and work a lot less.

      Anyone that is unemployed could be taking some of your work hours. Many of our jobs are redundant. A different economy can be created where we all work way less than we do while retaining our quality of life.

      To say we can’t is to buy into the propaganda that we need Musks and Bezos’ or we’d be subsistence farming. There are other things in between.

        • jorp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          This is a bad faith argument or complete misunderstanding of the point and in either case the conversation can’t continue productively.

          The point is that a democratic economy where workers own the value of their production would NECESSARILY improve wealth for those workers. Nobody is employed as a charitable act, you’re employed if and only if you produce more value than it takes to hire you.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            And my point is that farming is hard work even if it’s only 20 hours a week and why would enough people choose to do hard work when they can do something less physically taxing for the same amount of pay?

            • jorp@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 months ago

              I fail to see how that same thing doesn’t apply today? Why do farmers work more than 20 hours instead with the same lack of benefit?

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Because people need jobs to survive and in a lot of places those are the jobs available for people with no education. What a strange question.

            • jorp@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              I’ve lost your point here but frankly I don’t care to find it. You’re like the final boss of capitalist realism in this whole thread. You can’t seem to imagine any other way.

              A cooperative economy is better than a competitive economy is my assertion and I’ll leave it at that.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Or… I think there is a huge gulf in between what you want and the capitalist society of today and it doesn’t have to be either/or.

                So many people seem to think we live in a black and white world…