this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2026
241 points (98.8% liked)

Not The Onion

21182 readers
1619 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Okay, let’s assume it’s 10-1. How many other people, in a perfectly efficient system, would it take to provide a decent quality of life for that caretaker and the 10 elderly people? Growing and transporting food, building and maintaining infrastructure, researching and providing medical care, producing electricity and clean water. Nothing extra.

And how many people to support these people.

Probably more than we’d have available to work.

There’s a reason China started taxing condoms.

[–] marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Way, way less than you think. 2+2++1+3%. That is the entirety of food workers and food transportation, packaging, and sales, respectively, as a percentage of population for the united states, which produces twice the food needed by the population.

Water workers? maybe 5%. and that's a hard maybe because that includes all plumbers, not just infrastructure. Electricity? As long as we don't go with coal and oil it's an average of 1 worker per GW. admittedly line workers and electricians make up a decent chunk approaching 3 whole % of a population, but let's be honest here, we're fine on that front still.

And that's the great thing about economies of scale and automation and mechanization. It's not the 1700s anymore. We don't have to have 98% of the population in food production. We don't have to waste productivity. We are, and this isn't a joke, on average more than 10,000 times more productive as individuals and as a species than our ancestors.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Having worked in technology for a quarter century I do not have the rosy view of it that you do.

[–] marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today 1 points 10 minutes ago (1 children)

That's nice kiddo. Statistics do not lie. Period. The sole reason you and everyone you have ever or will ever know is not a farmer, is exclusively because of mechanization and automation. The reason you have clothes that do not cost a month's pay check is exclusively because of mechanization and automation. The reason you have the technology to type this sentiment on is because of mechanization and automation.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 1 points 9 minutes ago

Counterpont: I have been and endeavor to be again a farmer