• killea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    24 hours ago

    It occurs to me that I’d argue we’re heading towards a forced scarcity society rather than post scarcity. That’s the only way they can make sure we don’t get a Star Trek type future if/when we figure out fusion power. Hell, we’ve already basically been able to feed everyone for ages.

    • vateso5074@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Artificial scarcity is definitely nothing new. Look at the diamond industry, for example. Diamonds are common as hell, but they regulate the supply so severely in order to sell these cheap chunks of carbon for thousands of dollars.

      If there’s no competition in a market willing to race others to the bottom in terms of price, there’s no incentive to actually produce a reasonable amount of something people want. You can just withold supply and charge way more.

      • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Or just the fact that grocery stores throw away thousands of tons of perfectly edible food every day while there are people dying of malnutrition. They aren’t starving, they are being starved.

    • ganymede@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      forced vs post scarcity

      tbh i’m happy whenever someone at least acknowledges the tension between these two facets.

      anyway my actual point, imo the “too many humans” propaganda is part of the forced scarcity lobby. there’s perhaps too many humans to live as wastefully as we are, so why wouldn’t reducing waste be our #1-3 top priorities?

      but waste is more ‘profitable’ (in short term), so we go all in - while pretending Us Living & Others Not-Living is a moral obligation on our part wtflol