Say it ain’t so - eviltoast
  • Primarily0617@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because the focus wouldn’t be on profit just for profit’s sake

    what socioeconomic system has existed where increased productivity was viewed as a bad thing?

    e.g.:

    • pure feudalism would’ve led to economies of scale because it would make the king of the castle wealthier.
    • any kind of socialism with a centrally planned economy would’ve led to economies of scale because it enables the government to more easily meet the needs of the people.
    • even pure marxist communism probably would’ve led to economies of scale eventually because any communities that worked together on a global scale would’ve been more prosperous for their community members, which is still a goal of the system

    The technologies just allowed it

    or in other words, their invention led to it, which was the original quote I was responding to

    Plus, technologies are not sentient, you can’t blame a technology…

    • socio-economic systems aren’t sentient either
    • nobody’s “blaming” a technology—there isn’t even really a consensus in this thread on whether economies of scale leading to increased meat consumption is a good or bad thing
    • abraxas@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t call “profit” synonymous with “productivity”. Quite the opposite. Profit is intentional market inefficiency for individual gain. I’m just calling it because so many people do make the mistake of treating them as the same, presuming the former is inherently good because productivity is.

      Pretty much everything else you said I agree with.