pull down to refresh

What trade-offs should we be making instead?
I think it's just a different framing of your point.
We're overconsuming things that make us unwell. There isn't too much food, for instance. Plenty of people go without adequate nutrition and they'd be better off if we weren't bidding it away from them.
Consuming less of those things would allow us to enjoy higher quality goods of the same kind, different kinds of goods, more leisure time, and/or save more.
There's no universal right answer, but properly valuing one's wellbeing would lead to changes like that.
reply
35 sats \ 0 replies \ @kr OP 6h
It seems like we've nearly eliminated famine, probably aided by the popularization of shipping containers in the 1960s.
While there is still substantial malnutrition in the world, it's going to be hard to parse through that data to figure out how much of it is people struggling to find food vs. people choosing to eat food that isn't nutritious.
But looking at the total number of calories the world produces each year, we certainly have enough to give all 8 billion people the 2,000 or so that they need (though distribution still needs some work). This wasn't the case until ~50 years ago.
reply