Which things? Because all historical sources show that the bottom 10% had all the bare necessities for life. They didn’t have luxury apartments, but they had a roof. They weren’t eating steak every night, but they had more caloric input and healthier diets than the US.
Comment on A perfect visualisation of a wasteful system
GBU_28@lemm.ee 9 months agoThat’s what everything everywhere is. Many folks in communist countries lack things others have too.
Only in a hypothetical utopia could all persons have all things equally.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world 9 months ago
historical sources
Hit me
rockSlayer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
How do you feel about a CIA report on behalf of the department of agriculture? www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498133.pdf
QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I’m trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, so I’ll edit this comment if I find more relevant information, but so far I’ve only found one paragraph related to food inequality, and it seems to disagree with you:
the figures shown represent average nutrient levels on a per capita per day basis for the USSR as a whole. They do not indicate the differences that exist in the diets of different population groups, which preliminary research indicates are substantial.
Fal@yiffit.net 9 months ago
The problem isn’t lack of shelter. There’s enough shelter available for the homeless. They just choose not to use it because it comes with rules like no drugs and (often) no pets.
BeneGesseritWitch@sh.itjust.works 9 months ago
No, there is not enough shelter available for the homeless. Shelters have occupancy limits and especially in major cities there is literally not enough space. So yes, there is a lack of shelter.
echodot@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Especially because unless you’ve solved the limited resources problem, then even in a utopia you’re still going to have to have something like money, and therefore you will still have things that some people have that other people don’t have.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
What essential resources are so limited that we can’t provide them to everyone based on need?
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Define ‘limited.’ Because limits include trained manpower, right? There’s only a certain amount of that. Our ability to provide certain drugs for everyone who might need them are limited by the number of people trained to make them. This is true of virtually any industry. It is as limited as the number of people who can make it usable. And that is usually not an ‘anyone can do this’ issue.
rockSlayer@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Labor of any stripe is abundant. In an economy that doesn’t prioritize profit, people would be able to pursue specialized jobs that they want to contribute towards. For example, after the modernization of the USSR, they had the most doctors of any country in the world and healthcare was made accessible for millions of people. Our growth as a society is limited by the amount of cooperative labor we have available, but it’s not a limited resource.
In contrast, capitalism is reliant on a reserve pool of labor to keep wages down. If someone remains in the reserves for too long, they become homeless because every aspect of life has been commodified.