• AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Every serious study of pre modern economics that I have seen supports that premise. Homelessness and starvation when famine isn’t present didn’t exist anywhere before capitalism. Hell, even Adam Smith said that it would be necessary to switch off of capitalism to something more equitable once certain economic milestones had been achieved. We achieved those milestones in the mid 1850s to 1870s by the latest.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Every serious study of pre modern economics that I have seen supports that premise. Homelessness and starvation when famine isn’t present didn’t exist anywhere before capitalism.

      Jesus fucking Christ.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          And he spoke to the ultra-impoverished, discussed hunger outside of the context of famines as a serious problem, and was homeless.

          But hey! Historical evidence doesn’t matter when there’s an ideological axe to grind. Facts are twisted to suit ideological conceptions, not ideological conceptions changed to suit facts, right?

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            He spoke to the poor. There were no ultra impoverished. That category didn’t exist based on historical evidence. He spoke to hunger, not starvation outside of famine.

            We don’t know if he had a home, he probably did, but just kinda abandoned it.

            Try actually reading Adam Smith

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              He spoke to the poor. There were no ultra impoverished. He spoke to hunger, not starvation outside of famine.

              People in the ancient world often sold themselves into slavery to stay alive.

              People don’t sell themselves into fucking slavery because they’re only moderately impoverished and fear just being a little bit hungry.

              The idea that there was no extreme poverty in the ancient world is utterly bizarre and against everything we know about ancient societies and economies.

              We don’t know if he had a home, he probably did, but just kinda abandoned it.

              “he probably did”

              Jesus fucking Christ.

              Try actually reading Adam Smith

              I have read Adam Smith, ffs. Have you?

              • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Yes, I have. As well as Marx, and Trotsky. You seem to have missed the part where Smith would tell you to stop cockgobbling capitalism when it has served its intended purpose by the mid 1800s and move on.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  You uh, miss the majority of the fucking comment which challenges your initial absurd claim that I objected to?

                  People in the ancient world often sold themselves into slavery to stay alive.

                  People don’t sell themselves into fucking slavery because they’re only moderately impoverished and fear just being a little bit hungry.

                  The idea that there was no extreme poverty in the ancient world is utterly bizarre and against everything we know about ancient societies and economies.

                  You seem to have missed the part where Smith would tell you to stop cockgobbling capitalism when it has served its intended purpose by the mid 1800s and move on.

                  “Cockgobbling capitalism is when you point out that poverty, starvation, and homelessness predate capitalism, and that feudal and clientistic societies are the ones in the modern day which continue to experience mass starvation, not developed capitalist societies, whose cultivation of a proletariat creates an independent power base for organized workers to demand certain minimum protections and sets up the possibility of a socialist future”

                  • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    I don’t care about the rest of your fantasies. People sell themselves into wage slavery or indentured servitude now.

                    I also don’t particularly care about what a work of mostly historical fiction from over 2000 to 5000 years ago says about how to live. They didn’t know shit about our world.

                    Capitalism is causing death today. It needs to be destroyed entirely, and replaced with democratically elected councils, not presidents and supreme leaders.

              • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                People don’t sell themselves into fucking slavery because they’re only moderately impoverished and fear just being a little bit hungry.

                Wacky declarations are no replacement for actual historical context and facts.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Wacky declarations are no replacement for actual historical context and facts.

                  I’m sorry, just to be clear - are you disputing that people in the ancient world often sold themselves into slavery to avoid starvation?

                  Do you want me to start citing legal codes and chroniclers? Because I can. But I want to make sure that when you start pissing about playing dumb that everyone sees you got what you fucking asked for.