That used to be the reality of life. It’s only very recently that we’ve produced machines that far outpace what humans can do. The reason we aren’t seeing the benefits is that a select few own those machines and have consolidated their wealth.
There’s a certain balance we’ve yet to strike. Not necessarily having a living handed to you, but being in a situation where if a rough couple weeks knocks you out on your ass, you can meet your basic needs while you get back up on your feet.
We have tons of systems like this. The simplest example is that people can borrow money and pay it back later. We extend this option to people, without the government forcing us to at all, but we don’t do it when people are unlikely to be back on their feet after two weeks.
In terms of straight-up gifts, our society is absolutely full of that. On at least ten occasions I’ve lacked the ability to keep going, and have been given resources by public institutions, private institutions, and individuals.
The generosity of our society is off the charts. That’s why people don’t starve here.
First you suggest that taking out loans when you’ve fallen on hard times is a good solution, as if that wouldn’t just trap you in a neverending whirlwind of debt, then you use a personal anecdote about receiving gifts when you needed them to imply there’s not a problem with how our society functions.
It doesn’t take much reflection to realize your views come from a place of extreme privilege. Are you living under a rock or are you incapable of empathizing with others?
People always think they can slip in “food insecurity” to take the place of starvation.
I said nobody starves. I didn’t say it was effortless to get a perfectly balanced diet. I said nobody starves.
And I know for a fact, since I’ve worked for these systems myself, that the people who offer free food make a concerted effort to ensure the food they’re providing is healthy and balanced.
I ate like a king (far better, in fact, than most kings who’ve ever existed), for free at the Denver Rescue Mission for example.
I’m familiar with the fact that getting leafy greens is tough in our society. Not nearly as tough as dining them in nature, but tougher than opening one’s mouth and letting them flow in. The set of circumstances collectively called “food insecurity”, which could also be aptly called “not-yet-completely-effortless access to perfectly optimal diets”, is not at all the same thing as starvation.
So stop trying to equate these things. It doesn’t help.
We carve our living out of an uncaring and hostile universe.
Earning a living means doing your share of that.
That implies that we should all expect and deserve a status quo that is uncaring and hostile
It’s not we shouldn’t strive for a society that’s caring. It’s just that it isn’t a given. We have to work to have that kind of society.
Entropy is a bitch. Nothing lasts forever without doing work to maintain it.
That used to be the reality of life. It’s only very recently that we’ve produced machines that far outpace what humans can do. The reason we aren’t seeing the benefits is that a select few own those machines and have consolidated their wealth.
deleted by creator
Yep. It’s amazing how many people think all this should be handed to them. If everyone thought that no one would have anything.
There’s a certain balance we’ve yet to strike. Not necessarily having a living handed to you, but being in a situation where if a rough couple weeks knocks you out on your ass, you can meet your basic needs while you get back up on your feet.
We have tons of systems like this. The simplest example is that people can borrow money and pay it back later. We extend this option to people, without the government forcing us to at all, but we don’t do it when people are unlikely to be back on their feet after two weeks.
In terms of straight-up gifts, our society is absolutely full of that. On at least ten occasions I’ve lacked the ability to keep going, and have been given resources by public institutions, private institutions, and individuals.
The generosity of our society is off the charts. That’s why people don’t starve here.
First you suggest that taking out loans when you’ve fallen on hard times is a good solution, as if that wouldn’t just trap you in a neverending whirlwind of debt, then you use a personal anecdote about receiving gifts when you needed them to imply there’s not a problem with how our society functions.
It doesn’t take much reflection to realize your views come from a place of extreme privilege. Are you living under a rock or are you incapable of empathizing with others?
https://health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/food-insecurity
People always think they can slip in “food insecurity” to take the place of starvation.
I said nobody starves. I didn’t say it was effortless to get a perfectly balanced diet. I said nobody starves.
And I know for a fact, since I’ve worked for these systems myself, that the people who offer free food make a concerted effort to ensure the food they’re providing is healthy and balanced.
I ate like a king (far better, in fact, than most kings who’ve ever existed), for free at the Denver Rescue Mission for example.
I’m familiar with the fact that getting leafy greens is tough in our society. Not nearly as tough as dining them in nature, but tougher than opening one’s mouth and letting them flow in. The set of circumstances collectively called “food insecurity”, which could also be aptly called “not-yet-completely-effortless access to perfectly optimal diets”, is not at all the same thing as starvation.
So stop trying to equate these things. It doesn’t help.
In case there is any doubt or lack of clarity whatsoever, this is what I’m referring to when I refer to “starvation”: https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:800/1*bPvQruhbsPKhRpxUi-sAEA.jpeg