• dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    6 days ago

    According to The Dawn of Everything, there is evidence of multiple instances where societies developed agriculture and then discarded it.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      6 days ago

      Well yeah, because it really sucked. Early agrarians were much less healthy, suffering from malnutrition and diseases that hunter-gatherers did not.

      People persisted though. And over ten thousand years they eventually won out. Turns out that being able to store enough food to last all winter is a huge long term advantage. Specialization was an even greater advantage (that also took millennia to develop).

      And the issue with trying to put the genie back in the bottle is that if one group left that money on the table another group would come along and pick it up.

    • rabber@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I mean agriculture is what enabled humans to take over the earth and then destroy it. Before that we were actually part of the food chain. At this point we would have to abandon it to save the human race otherwise mother nature will clean us up and forget about us.

  • potoo22@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    “We had a good harvest this year. Way too much for us to use. I wonder if our neighbors would be willing to part with some of their excess pelts if we gave them…”

    NEW ACHIEVEMENT

    Commerce
    You have something I want, and I have something you want. A fairly simple exchange can’t possibly get out of hand, right? RIGHT?!

    Reward
    Capitalism will ensure you never live a peaceful life. Not that you had a peaceful life before. Let’s just say your descendants will be forced into labor if they simply want to have shelter.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Capitalism will ensure you never live a peaceful life.

      Isn’t a big allure of capitalism the kind-of comfort trap of desiring modern amenities enough to voluntarily engage with the industrial system?

      Also, any proper Marxist is going to tell you that capitalism is a fundamental stepping stone to post-scarcity utopian communism. Capitalist mode of production generates the surpluses necessary for the kind of leisure enjoyed by a professional managerial class that ultimately forms a socialist bureaucracy. You don’t get your libraries and your hospitals and your trains without a pivot to capitalism.

      Also, anyone who has done the proper deep wilderness style campaign can tell you that its anything but peaceful. You’re exposed to the elemental whims, your livelihood is predicated on ecological changes beyond your comprehension much less control, and you lack some really fundamental human achievements like modern language, art, and music. Hell, you might not even enjoy the benefit of simple machines like the screw or the wheel.

      And that’s not even the really attractive achievements. Ask anyone with advanced tetanus or glaucoma how many years of restaurant work they’d be willing to endure for medical relief.

      • potoo22@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        I mean, find a nice piece of land, build your shelter, no one bothers you about property tax or reports you to the HOA. Maybe a land ownership dispute, but even if you lose, as long as you live past that, you can setup somewhere else.

        • Zron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          The not getting mauled by wildlife and having medical professionals able to come to my house if I break my leg is kinda nice tho.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    But seriously, thinking about a species-appropriate lifestyle for humans, since we can’t seem to keep societies stable, resulting in environment destruction, death and suffering.

    Considering that we have a background in 100 - 150 people communities, maybe the ting/ding of ancient germans is the most ideal we can get.

  • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Credit scores are objectively beneficial for everyone except people who don’t pay their debts.

    Downvoting doesn’t make it not true.

    • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      There is a subsection of people in those that “don’t pay their debts” that can be described as “can’t pay their debts,” usually facilitated by the system.

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s not relevant.

        Whether you don’t pay your debts by choice or not, the fact remains that not paying them demonstrates that you are risky to lend to. It makes perfect sense for people to not want to lend you more money if you didn’t pay back what you borrowed before.

        Downvote all you like, but that’s the fact of the matter. Getting rid of credit scores will change nothing for people who don’t repay their debts, but it will harm those who do, because good borrowers won’t be able to prove that they have a history of repaying their debts, and will therefore be treated as greater risks than they actually are.