• @other_cat
          link
          English
          62 months ago

          They do! Kurzesgast has a few videos about ants and one of them looks at a slaver ant!

  • @r0ertel
    link
    502 months ago

    I read a paper a few years ago that basically said that food insecurity is not a problem with production, but is instead a problem with distribution. The USA throws away enough food to feed another good sized country. I don’t know the exact nature of the distribution problem and whether it’s a problem of resources or something else, like s political problem.

    • @afraid_of_zombies
      link
      162 months ago

      Sure it makes sense. You got some dairy making way too much milk, how are you going to get it around the world? The fuel spent is worth a lot more than you would get for selling it. Plus it has to be kept cold. That’s why all the cheap food we eat is made pretty close by and if you are getting something imported chances are it costs more. And that doesn’t even get into what if the place is unstable which would add more costs.

      The shit thing is the very people who need food the most are the ones who can’t afford it.

      So yeah the food is there but getting it where it needs to be is the tricky part.

    • BraveSirZaphod
      link
      fedilink
      132 months ago

      The biggest issue involves the logistics on the ground, and in places with extremely high food insecurity, there tends to be little to no legitimate government, and so getting anything done involves dealing with local gangs and warlords. It doesn’t matter how much money you have if every shipment you send will just be stolen at gunpoint and sold to fund the local thug’s next golden toilet. This is not a problem that can really be solved by throwing money at it.

      • @AdamEatsAss
        link
        42 months ago

        … You could fund your own local gang to take over and do your bidding.

        • Justas🇱🇹
          link
          fedilink
          42 months ago

          CIA tried doing that, it didn’t go too well. Probably just a skill issue I’m sure

        • BraveSirZaphod
          link
          fedilink
          22 months ago

          That’s proven to be both unpopular and often having unintended side effects.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 month ago

        This is not a problem that can really be solved by throwing money at it.

        You’ve never heard of mercenaries?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      82 months ago

      The distribution problem in 100% of famines is that some government somewhere cracks down on the free transfer of food. They either physically stop food from moving, or they provide huge financial incentives for moving food outside the famine area.

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      Many grocery stores give expired food to charity. You will often see a Walmart truck making deliveries to the Homeless shelter

      • @r0ertel
        link
        12 months ago

        This is a great thing. I didnt know that Walmart was doing it, I have only heard of local grocers in Europe doing this.

        • Possibly linux
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 months ago

          I know right? We may not be able to get them off the streets but we can at least keep them fed.

  • @thezeesystem
    link
    English
    272 months ago

    Remember, food insecurity Is a feature of capatilism and is designed to make people compliant, can’t revolt if they can’t eat.

    • @HiddenLychee
      link
      212 months ago

      Well, it’s a feature of violent power structure, which shows up in more than just capitalist cultures.

      • @masquenox
        link
        -32 months ago

        You are not wrong, but capitalism is the most violent power structures to ever exist - even a fascist will reject the idea of infinite consumption in a finite universe.

        • Justas🇱🇹
          link
          fedilink
          32 months ago

          I would reply to this comment, but my corporate overlords decided to send my nation to Siberia and replace us with Russian settlers. /s

  • @SchmidtGenetics
    link
    21
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Most other mammals destroy their offspring if there’s a risk and there a chance of survival for themselves or a smaller amount of offspring.

    They can always mate again, that baby is gonna be dead before it has the chance.

    • @hperrin
      link
      -10
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Most other mammals? Humans do this too. We’re just advanced enough to do it before it’s actually a baby.

      Edit: I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. How is it that people in this thread think humans are never selfish or immoral, and other animals don’t care for their young?

      • @SchmidtGenetics
        link
        142 months ago

        We don’t leave our babies for a predator, we protect them and sacrifice ourselves since others will care for them.

        We don’t kill 3 of our 4 offspring so the other can survive.

        We don’t eat our young for sustenance.

        Sure we cull obvious defects to prevent undue suffering, but at the same we don’t as well.

        • @hperrin
          link
          -2
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’m talking about abortions. Plenty of people have abortions because they can’t afford to have kids or have enough kids already.

          Also, people have gone to prison for killing their kids. Don’t think all humans are perfectly moral all the time. We’re still animals.

          Also, plenty of other animals sacrifice themselves for their kids. Morality and self sacrifice aren’t unique to humans.

          • @SchmidtGenetics
            link
            3
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I’m talking about abortions. Plenty of people have abortions because they can’t afford to have kids or have enough kids already.

            At the same time, people are also forced to carry.

            Also, people have gone to prison for killing their kids. Don’t think all humans are perfectly moral all the time. We’re still animals.

            At the same time, some people willingly take non-viable fetuses to term and let the “baby” suffer so they don’t themselves.

            Also, plenty of other animals sacrifice themselves for their kids. Morality and self sacrifice aren’t unique to humans.

            My first comment;

            Most

            Yes there are species that don’t kill their young, than there is hamsters who stress eat their young.

            • @hperrin
              link
              -62 months ago

              I feel like you’re talking in circles. We can at least agree that some humans kill their young, just like other animals.

              • @SchmidtGenetics
                link
                2
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Yes, but for vastly different reasons. Almost all mammals but humans destroy non-viable infants, so I don’t get what point you were trying to even discuss here?

                The topic being, most other mammals would destroy their young before they died of hunger or thirst, so it’s a uniquely human issue.

                • @hperrin
                  link
                  -52 months ago

                  If it’s not viable, you don’t need to destroy it. It’s already not viable. You also don’t know why an animal does something. I’ve seen a dog nurse a kitten before. I have no idea what it’s thinking and why it’s doing that.

                  My point is that you’re putting humans on some pedestal like our behavior is vastly different than the other animals when it’s not. We’re more social than other animals, but we have the same instincts and base behaviors. After all, we are animals.

  • @Carvex
    link
    212 months ago

    I can’t wait to see at what the rate per kwH unlimited fusion power is going to be sold to us.

    • @KazuyaDarklight
      link
      English
      112 months ago

      Don’t get me wrong, undue profits WILL be made, but at the same time it’s not really free either. Gotta pay for parts/equipment and the people maintaining the reactor and infrastructure.

  • @spittingimage
    link
    112 months ago

    I dunno. I think that not having to worry about having enough would change how people feel about resources. If it’s always going to be there, it just… doesn’t matter.

    • @Uninformed_Tyler
      link
      82 months ago

      How does OP define unlimited? There’s hella diamonds but their release is controlled by a cartel inflating their value. Not unlimited surely but also not equally accessible so the price can be manipulated.

      One could argue we currently live in a universe with virtually unlimited resources. It’s accessibility that is the issue.

      • @brygphilomena
        link
        32 months ago

        I’m imagining replicator technology like Star Trek.

      • NoIWontPickAName
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        Also, since we’re talking about horrible companies, Nestlé killed a bunch of babies so…

    • Entropywins
      link
      fedilink
      42 months ago

      My thoughts exactly. We willingly and enthusiastically harm and kill our fellow man in the name of convenience and/or profit.

  • FunkyMonk
    link
    fedilink
    22 months ago

    I would hope the need to feed the ego as a provider would overhwelm the need for ego as the denier. That or ego just goes out of the equation if apes had unlimited access to unlimited ressources.

  • Possibly linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -112 months ago

    Only in a Communist Utopia

    Honestly we just need to be more proactive. It is fine to give tax breaks to the rich as long as they are actually sending most of the money saved to charity.