Back to Ted

  • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We produce more than enough food to feed everyone. Even if you say something like logistics is an issue, we could still feed everyone in the developed nations at least, but we don’t. That’s a choice.

    Climate change is much more of a practical issue than starvation and poverty. We already have solutions for starvation as I said.

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

      We don’t have solutions for starvation at all on a global scale and we do try to feed everyone in developed nations that’s why countries have welfare. I agree the welfare safety net should be stronger generally, but I don’t think people starving to death is a widespread issue in developed nations. The homeless are much more likely to die due to lack of shelter or drug issues.

      • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We have enough food and we have a global shipping industry that is very efficient. So why can’t we feed everyone again?

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

          It’s clearly because we haven’t had a socialist revolution. That would sort all logistical and societal problems out forever.

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s what I am trying to tell you. There are no logistical problems we don’t have the capacity to solve, it’s simply not profitable to do so. Feeding the poor who can’t pay you isn’t profitable so it doesn’t get done.

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

              There is thinking there are no logistics problems we can’t solve and then there is actually solving them taking into account real geopolitics.

              • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                taking into account real geopolitics"

                So you admit then that the problems are political, not practical in nature?

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

                  Geopolitical, as in a combination of political, cultural and geographical.

                  I don’t think noting the problem is partially political is enough to say it’s easily solveable.

                  I think we’re coming at this from a different philosophy, you see politics as something that is easily changeable, I see it as a product of environmental and cultural positions. Changing the entire world’s politics is a nigh on impossible task.

                  You see geopolitics as a variable, I see it as a constraint on the actual variables.