Back to Ted

    • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What should happen is that the people who haven’t sowed the crops could do some work in order to earn access to the crops. Then we could create some kind of system whereby people get rewarded for the work they provide with an abstract token. We could call this money and people could exchange it for goods and services.

        • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How do we ensure the correct amount of people are doing the correct amount of work? The good thing about markets is that when demand is high and supply is low it suddenly becomes lucrative to do that thing and it attracts people to doing said thing. It becomes self correcting. If you leave people to just do what they most want to do everybody will choose to do what they consider fun rather than what is needed.

            • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              There’s nothing wrong with having fun, but if people just did what they wanted to do all the time, society would just straight up collapse.

              How likely is it that people’s preferred jobs match up with exactly what is needed?

                • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  We aren’t any of those animals though so I don’t see how it’s relevant to the discussion. We have evolved to form societies, and as such we need to work out the best frameworks given our fundamental human nature.

                  Other animals are in intense life and death competition with each other generally. There is not a single animal I’d rather be than a human. Non human wild animals have excruciatingly tough existences.

                  • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Other animals are in intense life and death competition with each other generally.

                    Humans on the other hand, travel to the other half of the earth in order to kill other humans because they’re afraid that other humans will destroy their economy in the other side of the earth.

                    Talk to me more about the superiority of humans over animals. I’m listening

        • Zengen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you can’t provide anything at all please tell me what the value of their life is? They better provide some dam good conversations. Cuz if the people are starving? I’m not wasting food on people that can’t contribute anything.

      • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah so what? The problem is the disproportionate accumulation of resources, goods or money. Which leads to accumulation of more of them, which lead to accumulation of power. There must be a limit on personal concentration of these. Anything above a level that is considered personal should belong to the community. Then there will be no incentive to make people capable of exploiting other people.

        • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There would also be no incentive for anyone to produce anything beyond what they personally need, which would definitely lead to widespread food shortages. The more food that is produced at once the more efficient the labour is per crop, which is exactly why farms boomed in size after the industrial revolution and advent of farming machinery.

            • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              So you think human beings should change their basic hardwired nature? Obviously humans have a tendency to care for the people closest to them over complete strangers. Humans always will come into conflicts of interest. What you’re asking for is for humanity to basically act perfectly all the time.

              • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Sure, they developed this mentality when surviving could also be competitive. When there was not enough food for all and somehow surviving meant that it will not be for all. Now we prefer to destroy tones of food in favor of economy because if there is extra food this means that the price go down

                • FastAndBulbous@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I think there is only so much humans can change. We aren’t beings of infinite moral potential and there will always be points of conflict.

    • Roflol@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      But you can throw people out of your community? Then some communities will be a lot better off than others

      • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, but as long as the “better” community doesn’t interfere and doesn’t try to take advantage of the less good communities I don’t see a problem. And of course doesn’t steal them their area and resources. Or does’t try to expand in ways that they accumulate more goods and resources than they need and can consume

        • Roflol@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hmm, who decides when they have too much area, and stops them from not following rules?

          • decisivelyhoodnoises@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is this a genuine question wanting to find an answer? Only their consciousness can really prevent them or a “law enforcement” that we should first find a way to be uncorrupted. Is this realistic nowadays? Of course not, but we were talking hypothetically I think