• Eheran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    That was never the point. The point is precisely that many poor people will NOT see the money/food/help just like all the times before now.

    I also assume that, even if they miraculously really all get it, you will have at least one boomer generation, so more people per area that need to be fed. You then need to immediately get education up and running. Things then need to be stable for decades to make the fertility rate drop. It is not a simple “costs X then solved forever worldwide” kind of thing. It is also not something we can somehow “force” on them, at least not by throwing money at the problem.

    • IntoDaLagoon@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Damn you’re right, it’s almost like we need to also restructure society in such a way that prioritizes human need and equitable access to resources and education on an ongoing basis, instead of the maximization of profits at the expense of literally everyone on Earth. It’s a good thing the world isn’t currently being ravaged by an economic order reliant on murder, starvation and inefficiency, otherwise this persistent handwringing about logistics and overpopulation would seem really strange and premature.

      Like dude, no person or faction with the political will to go up against the forces keeping people in poverty is currently in any position to do so. We’re talking about a make-believe scenario, and the fact that even then your mind goes immediately to “overpopulation” is mega sus and indicative of where your priorities are.