• Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It costs money to produce food.

    The more people you want to feed, the more money it costs.

    Food production is not free. Food distribution is not free.

    If you have an alternative to capitalism, I’m open, but you can’t just stamp your feet and go “but it should be free!” It’s not, someone has to pay for the seed, irrigation, fertilization, equipment fuel and labor involved in production and distribution.

    p.s. Is it just me or is it the same people wanting $20+ hour minimum wage who also think food should be free?

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It does however get considerably cheaper to produce more food when production is scaled up. If enough people got together on the “free food” they could potentially do it cheaper than what capitalism provides.

      The issue however is that capitalism has already made food really fucking cheap. It’s actually too cheap. And that is because someone else is paying the true cost of providing it. Obviously the animals who sacrifice the their lives, but also the human workers who also sacrifice their lives, just to bring food for everyone. Everyone eats, nobody gets paid, except for the owners who also do none of the work.

      • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        On a per capita basis, yes. But the Doritos that sell for $6 a bag come out of a multi billion dollar organization (Frito Lay, part of Pepsi).

        Individuals coming together to produce a single bag of Doritos aren’t going to be able to do it for $6. They need the infrastructure of that multi billion dollar corporation to get there.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, exactly. The problem is to get local produce cheaper than importing global crap. Distribution is a huge part of it. It shouldn’t be cheaper to transport crap food globally than for a domestic producer to deliver quality food, but it is.

          • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The thing is, you can’t source enough local produce to support any significant population. I live in a town of 641,162 (2021 numbers), you’re not going to deliver 1,923,486 meals a day, 702,072,390 meals per year, using only local resources. It simply can’t be done.

            Even on my property, for two people, I would not be able to produce 6 meals a day every day. I have to bring in outside resources.

            • Metallibus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              And outsourcing this solves the problem how? You’re just making someone else deal with your locality’s problem.

    • nintendiator@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It costs money to produce food.

      The more people you want to feed, the more money it costs.

      Food production is not free. Food distribution is not free.

      Then it should be a task of the State, as “feeding people” is, quite obviously, a task Too Big to Fail. And, as such, the State can (and should) just automatically print the money needed to reward the work done. Feeding the hungry should not depend on a “budget”. A budget is basically putting a price on human lives.

        • nintendiator@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Of course, but maybe destroying the modern economy is a good thing. Things like serving essential needs causing hyperinflation showcases that modern economy is purposefully built to make people lose. No matter what you try to do to help society, something (or rather, someone) counterplays you.

          IMO the real solution is that things that are essential, like food and health, should not depend on money exchange to be provided, period. Sure, producers of food and providers of health should be paid for their work, but that payment should not have a codependence with the fact that the hungry or unhealthy person get the attention they need.

          • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            that things that are essential, like food and health, should not depend on money exchange to be provided, period.

            The problem with that is the people providing the food and health services still need to survive.

            Doctors need to pay their rent. Farmers need to buy feed, seed, and fertilizer. Everyone pays for water.

            So once you go down the road of making it impossible to charge for services that need to bring in money to literally keep the lights on, you collapse the economy, and no, that’s NOT a good thing. That road leads to chaos and death.

            • nintendiator@lemmy.fmhy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not saying doctors et all should not be paid for their work. I’m saying it should not depend on a money transaction on the afflicted citizen. I think it’s perfectly feasible to, for example, have the State pay for things that are essential, it’s kind of the entire role of the State after all. Or even better, give doctors and providers of those services the same treatment as in not collecting from them for stuff.

              Also, if there’s such things as “companies Too Big To Fail should be handed over to the State”, then that also applies to Tasks Too Big To Fail. Like, you know, keeping your citizens alive. I insist: the core task of the State is to keep the Country alive.

              If that collapses the economy, IMO that’s an indicative that the economy model is not good, or perhaps even unethical.

    • Pleaseletmeinalready@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Our labor has conquered scarcity”… Bro they’ve conquered scarcity now? I didn’t even know! If someone has conquered the universal reality of scarcity they can ask whatever they want as minimum wage. 🤣