Extremely not-fun fact: collectively, humanity currently produces more than enough food for every person. But a huge part of it is either wasted or inaccessible by people that need them, which usually results in them not going to anyone and being wasted, which is why we still have food scarcity.

  • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Then what would you suggest? If getting rid of food costs say $5 and sending to a different area costs say $10 then between both selections which one is better for the economy?

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I stated a fact, I didn’t suggest anything. wtf are you still talking for?

      If you’re paying to get rid of something you paid for, you fucked up.

      • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sounds like you figured it out then. If we can just determine a way to efficiently distribute the food, then we’ll be good.

          • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I thought we we were close to a breakthrough. Just for fun imagine a situation where eliminating a food product costs 100 pesos, but packaging and shipping that same food product to another location costs 200 pesos; which of these is more economical?

              • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Probably smart. Blocking me costs you about one minute of time, whereas continually responding to me has already cost you several minutes. Way more efficient.