• untorquer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    It’s in our genetics to engage in a perpetual exponential quarterly growth and make our decisions based on the benefit it brings to our investors. Any caveman could tell you that smh…

    E: my god it’s a hyperbolically absurd take in memes and even with the caveman comment I still need to /s apparently…

    • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      No, cavemen were very egalitarian. This is because back then, you couldn’t hoard much of anything - food spoils quickly, sex requires your partner to like you, and personal possessions were things like tools or the odd bit of clothing. It was when wealth could be preserved, such as livestock, stored grain, jewelry, and eventually coinage, that wealth became an hereditary thing.

      This is why a future economic system has to be designed to prevent the excessive hoarding of wealth. Not too little, nor too much. Humans weren’t evolved to be free of consequence, especially from each other.

    • Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      If you ran humanity in thousands of simulations how often would we end up in the same capitalistic situation?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Very frequently, but it is exactly just as likely it would have moved on to Socialism and eventually Communism, or retained feudalism, it all depends on when in development.

      • untorquer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        So many it would be hard to count, at least 4 or 5. But numbers don’t really go much higher than that. Any caveman could tell you that.

      • Grapho@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        33 minutes ago

        Far less often than we end up with communalist hunter gatherers and early agrarian communes and evidently for a much shorter time. Does that mean feudalism can never work? Capitalism is never at any point of productive development possible?

        If you’ve never studied an economics text (a real, materialist one, not fucking graphs with conveniently simple and clean cut rules that never seem to apply and zero statistics) then try not to speak so authoritatively on economics.

        • Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Your words make no sense to me. If you want to convey ideas use the common tongue. It feels like you have some neat ideas though.

          Edit: Can anyone please decipher what this guy said?

          • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 hours ago

            people share goods and culture naturally. the prevailing historical models are cooperative. anticooperative, competitive societies are rare.

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        What an interesting question. I have no idea what the answer is, but the question is bloody great.

    • Spaniard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      No, but greed and envy is. That’s why humans have written so much in the last thousand years about greed and envy.