Betterment of yourself and your part of society, human connection, just fucking around with curiosity and silliness. That’s what I know deep down I want to guide me, but I’m also fighting against an internal system that had me hearing “you have to work if you want to eat” since I was a child.
You have to eat food to eat. That’s it. It’s literally the basis of life. I don’t see birds commuting and paying taxes on their food
Yes, they follow their basic needs. Migrating and commuting are not the same thing. They don’t have to deal with made up “you have to work from the office” situations was my point
Surprise, it comes out of the fucking ground! Of course if you want to eat something that is not native to your region it’s a whole thing with exploitation and whatnot. I just find the disconnection with nature/life jarring
I think your observation is valid even though labor and planning are needed to produce enough and consistently enough to sustain a big population. Reconnection with nature, some autonomy in culture, I also think are necessary
Food doesn’t simply erupt out of the ground on its own, not in quantities necessary to feed any kind of significant population. Farmers do in fact have to do labor to produce crops.
The bit about food not simply erupting from the ground on its own in quantities sufficient to feed a significant population goes double for cities where you have lots more people and lots less growing land.
Of course that was hyperbole. I am not saying that growing food is effortless or easy. I’m just saying that food is natural (duh), while coerced farmers aren’t natural, but rather a product of capitalism allowing you to buy any kind of food known to man, fresh, in a huge supermarket, and throw it away if it is not sold. Or any another authoritarian system for that matter, it would just happen in different ways.
As my other comments show, I’m talking about different scales. Cities provided an advantage not long ago in many ways - infrastructure, culture, economy, opportunities etc -, but as modern technology shortened distances, I feel less and less people can find a compelling reason to live surrounded by miles and miles of cement and smog. High-density and high-volume communities/housing are two different things.
You started with a rejection of “you have to work if you want to eat”, my whole point was someone has to work if you want to eat, and if that someone isn’t you they probably need some kind of incentive for why they are working so you can eat.
Betterment of yourself and your part of society, human connection, just fucking around with curiosity and silliness. That’s what I know deep down I want to guide me, but I’m also fighting against an internal system that had me hearing “you have to work if you want to eat” since I was a child.
You have to eat food to eat. That’s it. It’s literally the basis of life. I don’t see birds commuting and paying taxes on their food
Birds commute all the time. If they aren’t where the food/nesting material/mating partner is, they commute there.
Yes, they follow their basic needs. Migrating and commuting are not the same thing. They don’t have to deal with made up “you have to work from the office” situations was my point
deleted by creator
…and that food has to come from somewhere. Someone has to work so you can eat.
Surprise, it comes out of the fucking ground! Of course if you want to eat something that is not native to your region it’s a whole thing with exploitation and whatnot. I just find the disconnection with nature/life jarring
I think your observation is valid even though labor and planning are needed to produce enough and consistently enough to sustain a big population. Reconnection with nature, some autonomy in culture, I also think are necessary
Food doesn’t simply erupt out of the ground on its own, not in quantities necessary to feed any kind of significant population. Farmers do in fact have to do labor to produce crops.
The bit about food not simply erupting from the ground on its own in quantities sufficient to feed a significant population goes double for cities where you have lots more people and lots less growing land.
Of course that was hyperbole. I am not saying that growing food is effortless or easy. I’m just saying that food is natural (duh), while coerced farmers aren’t natural, but rather a product of capitalism allowing you to buy any kind of food known to man, fresh, in a huge supermarket, and throw it away if it is not sold. Or any another authoritarian system for that matter, it would just happen in different ways. As my other comments show, I’m talking about different scales. Cities provided an advantage not long ago in many ways - infrastructure, culture, economy, opportunities etc -, but as modern technology shortened distances, I feel less and less people can find a compelling reason to live surrounded by miles and miles of cement and smog. High-density and high-volume communities/housing are two different things.
You started with a rejection of “you have to work if you want to eat”, my whole point was someone has to work if you want to eat, and if that someone isn’t you they probably need some kind of incentive for why they are working so you can eat.