Comments by "" (@diadetediotedio6918) on "The Market Exit"
channel.
-
@michellebyrom6551
I don't like the way you are excluding elements from the problem, this is a vice that many people that defend hunters-gatherers as a better model of society incur in.
You cannot remove the "we have the healthcare available to us" from the "we work 40 hours per week", you cannot remove elements from a set without it losing it's identity.
Hunter gatherers worked less, this is true. They also had less populations and their groups were far from each-other as you mentioned, this is also true. But they worked less thus they had less technology and spare resources available for them, this is an implication. They also had less populations and were far from each-other because their child mortality was basically ~50%! And the child mortality was so high because they had no spare resources and no healthcare, because they did not had to work as much as we do. They could not spare resources to dedicate to their children and they could not take care of their diseaseds, they also could not afford to feed the impaired the same way as the normal working members of their societies. Of course they worked less, so this can apparently be ignored safely.
And about private property and profit, they are absolutely important for survival and the fact that you are dissociating them from our modern life with all the conveniences (life healthcare) is the same vice that leads you into thinking they are "abstracts of philosophy". Even a hunter-gatherer had property of his clothes, his primary weapons (when using them) and of his own body. They did not needed or could afford private property of many things because they didn't even had those things to begin with, because they did not worked as much as we do.
1
-
1