We operate under the depression-era assumption that per-capita GDP is some kinda gold-standard metric for evaluating how well a country is doing economically. In reality per-capita GDP is just tracking the trash changing hands. We also overemphasize transactionality because of this. It’s somehow much better from an “economic perspective” to have everyone buying new shirts every week even if it’s the same people buying and then tossing the same fast fashion junk in the trash.
When you consider other metrics we could be judged by such as the OP is kinda pointing at here, our country looks way fucking worse on the leaderboard.
We ought to use the measures of the material conditions of our population to drive policy rather than how much currency has changed hands and how many worthless transactions have occurred.
Yeah that’s how Canada is pretending it’s not been in a recession for years. Out of control housing market has inflated the GDP on paper, when everyone else can basically go fuck themselves I guess according to the government
This concept has a name. Artificial Scarcity.
Yeah, scarcity is created artificially by people who don’t want to give their stuff for free to complete strangers.
or maybe by not taxing people who have made much more than they can consume (and deserve) in 10 lifetimes?
Ah, so it’s not that people should willingly give up their belongings. It’s that people with guns don’t forcefully seize their belongings from them.
We don’t have a resource problem, we have a distribution problem.
Resources are constantly being wasted to accelerate the wealth transfer up the chain.
The first thing you say is absolutely correct but I have no idea what you mean by the second
Food being wasted instead of given out. Clothing slashed and tossed away. Housing boarded up and left vacant in the name of investing.
All in the name of maximizing sales and profit. Resources hoarded and wasted.
30% of the worlds resources would be sufficient to meet everyone’s needs if properly distributed.
But it’s not because corporations see a homeless man taking a sandwich out of the trash as a lost sale.
The problem is even if you do give away excess food, next growing cycle, you’ll still adjust to grow less. And there won’t be excess. So donating food is good, but it’s not a long term solution to the distribution problem. Same with houses and clothes and whatnot
Or in a resource based economy, production would be decided by the needs of the community at various scales and not driven by sales or profits.
I think the ideal is a system that provides UBI, Nutritious food distribution, needs based housing, universal healthcare, and job services that provide aptitude testing, training and placement.
If 30% can meet our needs, the other 70% should be sufficient to provide the system and framework and enough left over for consumption, luxury and still have room for meritocracy advancement.
What’s the current wealth distribution? 10% holding 85% leaving the rest of us 15% only half of the 30 we need.
CONSOOOOOOOM
OBEY CONFORM SUBMIT
REDUSTRIBUUUUTE
It is true that there will never be enough to satisfy the greediest among us. Unless there’s some kind of global revolution this will continue until the end
Wow, I didn’t like billionaires very much, but if the alternative is a global revolution, then I guess I can put up with billionaires.
deleted by creator
Shout-out to too good to go - an app that aims to minimize food waste by letting restaurants and grocery stores sell “surprise bags” of food at 1/3 to 1/2 off!
Good mythical morning has a few episodes featuring these!
My colleague brought us doughnuts from here today. She got them last night but they were still plenty fresh.
That’s capitalism baybe. The expectation of infinite growth in a finite system based around the infinite sales of infinite products that have a price because they say they are finite.
We all lie to ourselves in various ways - like thinking we need a supercomputer in our pocket so we can see what’s trending while we sit on the toilet.
“The problem with the American economy is too many pocket computers”, I say while sitting on the toilet in the Bigger Bombs factory at Raytheon.
Yeah if somebody actually said that it would be dumb, and so is pretending they did.
Brings to mind the barbecue speech
How many men ever went to a barbecue and would let one man take off the table what’s intended for 9/10ths of the people to eat. The only way you’ll ever be able to feed the balance of the people is to make that man come back and bring back some of that grub he ain’t got no business with.
man this man that. If I lived in the time people were all referred to as men I would probably go crazy and blow up the world.
american rhetoric: okay, imagine you have 10 steaks right?
There’s a house on my way to work that’s vacant. I saw an ambulance there about two years ago; I’m betting that the owner died, because it’s now entirely overgrown, with weeds and grass completely overtaking the yard and driveway.
How many of the ‘empty houses’ are places that were abandoned and are in such disrepair that they’re not safe for habitation, and how many of them are places that are second houses and/or bank-owned rentals?
For reference, the house I live in right now was repo’d around 2010, and my partner and I bought it in 2018; it had been vacant for almost a decade, and required a lot of work, almost as much as it cost, to get it safe. And it still needs work; I need to shore up the floor that’s sagging, and the exterior walls need to be opened up from the inside and be fully sealed b/c I can feel breezes inside when it’s windy outside.
There’s no reason to believe that a formerly homeless person wouldn’t put in the effort on a house restoration project if given the chance to live in it permanently.
Not enough memes. Besides that, definitely agree.
Blows my mind how you operate under the notion that we should give houses to homeless people.
I guarantee you, you’re a lot closer to being homeless than you think. And if ever you will be in a situation like that, I hope you only meet people like yourself. Scum.
Removed by mod
I would help you if you’re beaten down, and you would accept it too.
I am in a position of giving freely without losing much of anything too.
It’s sad to see what you are, but you’ll figure it out eventually. Life has its way’s.
How do you give up a house without loosing too much? Are you a billionaire or something?
Who says you need to give up a house? Where does that come from?
Define “successful”
That’s all. Then I’ll make fun of you in a more accurate way.
In this context, successful - wealthy enough to own a house, or maybe a few.
Ah yes of course. Wealth = success. Tried and tested, corporate approved line. There is nothing that wealth cannot buy. Nothing of any worth to human experience is not encompassed in the pursuit of wealth and money.
It sure is a good thing that the world offers us all exactly the same opportunities to be “successful” and that is the true measure of a person.
What a pathetic world view, my guy.
Ugh, we’ll be bloody feeding them next!
Removed by mod
Should we… not?
They’re obviously a troll.
Why should we?
Why should we not?
Justification is needed for action, not inaction. I don’t need a reason to do nothing.
Because we’re humans with empathy and don’t want to see others suffer?
Hmm, ok. Let’s say you can afford to spend some of your wealth to help others. Why tf should you spend it on fucking hobos? Isn’t it more reasonable to help your friends and family?
they need it more? hobos are humans? (watch “invisible people” on YouTube)
Lots of less expensive housing in the suburbs and country, go live in them. The reduced noise and air pollution is great.
Air pollution can be just as bad if you live near big farms in a poorly regulated air quality state.
Also you’ll socially rot.
Yea not in cali
A house in the suburb for both norcal and socal is about 1.5m, unless you’re looking at the ghetto
Hell even washington is like 1m ish for a house in the suburb
Crazy to talk about “cheap housing” and look to the suburbs in the year 2025. That ship sailed decades ago.
That’s before you start pricing in the time-value of an hour or more a workday trapped in traffic.
A house in the suburb for both norcal and socal is about 1.5m
A 3br 3ba 2,155sqft home in the suburbs elsewhere is $350k. It was literally the first one I looked up, these are everywhere. Here is another, a 3br 4ba 2,864sqft in the suburbs in a completely different state for $352k. Again, this was literally just the second one I looked up, these things are everywhere. Spending $1.5m on a house is crazy talk.
pfff. wrong.
1 third of all ppl have access to a washingmachine. there not enough resources to build one for everyone. or cars etc…
Couldn’t we just share laundromats and busses?
good question in an otherwise delusional sub.
ofcourse your question has been asked and from what i remember not even the reddist leftwinger in the first world would give up on a washingmachine.
so im theory yes, but with real humans sharing does not work out.
If I give up my washing machine for a laundromat, does that mean we get to live in a utopia where that’s my biggest problem?
doubt your altruism can compensate for the rest. it means some maga can buy one more suv/pickup/truck.
