15% of the world population feeds 100% of the world population

Few people in administrative positions and services makes sense, but 85% of the world's population not working to make food. Societal collapse incoming faggots. Prove me wrong.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/2xjaLxHLE0I
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Farmers can be replaced by automation. Soy boys grow gardens and keep chickens in yhe city. Only ones to worry about are those who cant cook.

Odd that you did not bring up just in time inventory for grocery stores.

>Farmers can be replaced by automation.
Society will surely collapse at that point. If none of us are engaged in growing food, then all of us are engaged in satiating our low-level addictions.

>Odd that you did not bring up just in time inventory for grocery stores.
What's your estimate then? If not 85%, then what percent of the people are actual "neets" LARPing as employed faggots?

Because other industrial and administrative work is unecessary and we should all spend the majority of time hunting and looking for food like we did before agriculture.

>Because other industrial and administrative work is unecessary and we should all spend the majority of time hunting and looking for food like we did before agriculture.
I'm not saying that carpenters, builders, and others are all waste. But only 3% of the world's GDP is from agriculture. 97% is related to non-agricultural stuff. I mean, do we really need 97% of the cost to be spent on non-food items? Surely, at this stage, we're just feeding out addictions and not making any progress as a society.

Gusse who owns that food manufacturers.

Why would we spend an unnecessary amount of labor making food nobody needs?

That average includes the shithole countries too. In America, the ENTIRE agriculture industry, food and cotton and all the plants and animals and shit is like 3-4 million people.
Including export and waste they make enough food and shit for 1 billion people all around the world.
We just have great technology and land for producing tons of food for tons of people. Everyone else has to do busy work mostly.

>Gusse who owns that food manufacturers.
Impossible. Even they can't own all the food manufacturing and processing plants.

>Why would we spend an unnecessary amount of labor making food nobody needs?
If you're not engaged in making food, then what do you want to be engaged in? I'm sure people don't work for free. Everyone wants to work so that they make enough money to eat food. But if 85% of the world's population is not engaged in growing or making food, the fuck are we actually doing as a society? I mean what are we making that's so valuable?

No, making everyone grow food or something doesn't make progress as society. The fewer people we have growing food the more people can create, discover, explore, build, design, etc.

>That average includes the shithole countries too.
Not an average. 1 billion of the world's population is engaged in agriculture and related industries.
>In America, the ENTIRE agriculture industry, food and cotton and all the plants and animals and shit is like 3-4 million people.
So what the fuck are the rest of us doing?
> Everyone else has to do busy work mostly.
I don't know man. After reading about this, I'm not beginning to question the value of most American jobs. Is it all just fluff and we're mostly not producing anything of value?

this. agriculture allowed civilization to build. its the reason why egyptians had so much time every year to gather the entire populace to work on the pyramids.

Other essentials like construction/healthcare, technological innovations, services, etc. It's ridiculous to think any labor not used on making food is wasted labor.

And how many neets?

>The fewer people we have growing food the more people can create, discover, explore, build, design, etc.
Yeah, but for what? At the end of the day, people who create, discover, explore, build, and design don't do it on an empty stomach. Even they need to eat.

If more than 50% of us are engaged in non-food related jobs, then it becomes a societal norm to not work in agriculture. Collapse is then imminent because as the generations go by, less and less importance is given to agriculture.

>its the reason why egyptians had so much time every year to gather the entire populace to work on the pyramids.
Yeah, I'm sure they're around now to appreciate they built the pyramids. You're just proving my point that we're headed for a societal collapse.

Except less importance is given to agriculture because it is so much easier and efficient. How would that lead to a collapse? Agriculture is not some kind of holy grail of civlization. It is necessary only to feed people and nothing more.

>It's ridiculous to think any labor not used on making food is wasted labor.
Society survived even before healthcare and other tech innovations. At best, they make our life easier. Healthcare and technological innovations are not a necessity for human survival.

The point I'm trying to drive here is that the percentage of the population that's not engaged in agriculture is worrisome because such a skewed ratio can only imply that a large section of the world's population is engaged in non-value adding jobs.

Even more important is the fact the wealth being created by 85% of the world's population is not trickling down to the farmers. Majority of them aren't rich.

>How would that lead to a collapse? Agriculture is not some kind of holy grail of civlization.
Ok, never mind. I didn't realize that you were a troll.

Except you're defining value as solely survival. What makes comforts not valuable?

>So what the fuck are the rest of us doing?
Literally 100 million Americans aren't working. Just sit around, or are in college or do black/grey market shit. A good number of those are also retired/disabled.
Others are building spaceships, designing AI and building houses, making movies and dildos, etc

>Except you're defining value as solely survival. What makes comforts not valuable?
It's easy to connect any comfort item/good to survival. That is the evolutionary purpose of comfort items - to make your survival easier.

>Others are building spaceships, designing AI and building houses, making movies and dildos, etc
Except building houses, none of the other professions actually help us survive. They're only feeding our addictions. Building spaceships is taking the evolutionary instinct to explore new lands for hunting and resources to a whole new level. A.I.s make life easier but they're not necessary for survival. Movies and dildos, oh well. You get the picture.

Most of us are engaged in jobs that feed human addictions. They're not necessary for survival. Eventually, addictions will be confused with survival and people will produce less and less value - leading to a collapse of society.

We are already past that point. 95% of humans used to work in agriculture, now less than 1% do in the developed world.

What matters is food production, not the percentage of people that work in agriculture.

>100% of the world is fed

Armageddon is sweet release from the hell of existence

>What matters is food production, not the percentage of people that work in agriculture.
If percentage of people engaged in non-agricultural jobs is not important, then what are they doing that's so valuable? Desire to explore space would be a poor genetic trait if it meant no food - that trait would be wiped out. If we're not engaged in making food, then most of us are engaged in satiating our other evolutionary drives - not real jobs. Only feeding our addictions.

>100% of the world is fed
I'm not arguing against that. I'm saying that if 15% of the people feed the 100%, the majority of the remaining 85% are not doing anything of value and society is headed for a collapse since food and agriculture will be given less and less importance - you will eventually get people who think the sole purpose of life is to work and not to eat food.

I see you point, but farming really isn't that hard to learn dude. Niggers and soyboys might die off but most will be fine.

I work at the shit farm. All i see is the end.

society is more than food production
you need science to advance technologically and medically
you need art to advance culturally
you need people providing basic services

besides with current technologies on agriculture and cattle care you dont need many people to produce food since the crops grow bigger, faster, easier and its mostly automated, from plantation to irrigation to harvesting

but i agree that consumerism is taken to a extreme in the currenty capitalist format, which encourages consumption over production though.

>Farmers can be replaced by automation
No they can't, bucko. You know how you can tell Silicon Valley's vaunted self-driving car is horseshit? All the machine learning in the world can't even make the computer drive a combine through a flat field with no obstacles

>I see you point, but farming really isn't that hard to learn dude.
Duuuude, I said we're headed for a societal collapse because majority of the world's population is not engaged in making food - I didn't say farming was hard - but I think it is because I don't know how to farm.

youtu.be/2xjaLxHLE0I

Their society didn't collapse because of combines collecting wheat, I can tell you that now.

Primitivism is by far the most retarded ideology there is. Go ahead, go into a forest, live in a cave and hunt your own food with a club. Then and only then you can complain.

>society is more than food production
Society depends heavily on food production.
>you need science to advance technologically and medically
>you need art to advance culturally
>you need people providing basic services
Yeah, but these people can't do their stuff without food. Thus, advancing technology, art, and services is not a fundamental requirement of evolution. These were traits humans developed to obtain food and resources. This implies that most of the people in the world are working on secondary evolutionary traits - not the fundamental ones.
>besides with current technologies on agriculture and cattle care you dont need many people to produce food
I get that, and that's why I'm asserting that the world is headed for a societal collapse. There's not anchor around which people are working - they're just working to work, progressing to progress, and innovating to innovate - feeding their addictions.

society NEEDS to collapse

>Their society didn't collapse because of combines collecting wheat, I can tell you that now.
Their society collapsed because they had too much time to do other things instead of growing crops and protecting them - they got invaded and fucked.

>Primitivism is by far the most retarded ideology there is.
Not advocating for primitivism, but hypothesizing that society has gone beyond a point of no-return. Now it has to keep progressing till it collapses and then it can be restarted.

I still don't understand how the collapse follows from food production.
Because of technology one guy can produce food for 50 people. What would even be the point of having 90% of the population growing food? What are we going to do with the food? Throw it away?

Hot white cunts, make them lick the sweat on my Arab balls.

>I still don't understand how the collapse follows from food production.
Not from food production, but from the fact that 15% of the people feed 100% of the world.
>Because of technology one guy can produce food for 50 people.
What do the remaining 49 people do if they're not working to obtain food? If one guy produces enough food for the whole 50, that should make him the richest guy among the 50. But is he the richest guy? No. So what are the remaining 49 doing that is so valuable? Nothing from an evolutionary perspective. Sure, advancing tech and healthcare and all great, but they're not necessary for survival. But the fact that we give importance to non-agricultural jobs implies that we're just working for the sake of working - most of us really are not doing anything of value.

but how prove wrong if no wrong?

You're retarded, why would we want to do that?

A few months ago I bought a gallon of milk for 75 cents at shartmart. The prices are still very low for milk. I think we are alright.

Better to spend my time killing white bois and impregnating white women with my fertile Arab cum.

ALLAHU AKBAR!

>Only feeding our addictions.
Pretty much. The great lie of economics is that trade is inherently fruitful. As long as you are doing *something* and getting paid *something* then we are growing. Key in point: my great hollow home of upside down land has managed to maintain "positive economics growth" (IE: GDP growth) for the last 20 odd years, and yet somehow employment is far lower than ever, everything costs more than ever, we are taxed more than ever and somehow still in debt. Australia bought into the Service Economy meme and now the only productive work that is done is digging up the minerals in the ground and shipping them to Asia.

The great horror of post-societal collapse is that resource extraction and conversion is the only real industry that actually promotes human flourishing. This horror deepens when we realise that all of the cheap and easy energy has already been extracted, requiring ever more elaborate infrastructure and more advanced technology to get the vital energy needed to fuel our economies.

Ultimately the extraction of resources from the earth and the conversion of those resources into useful forms is what gives us prosperity. This prosperous giving quality is why land is valued - owning and extracting the resources contained within a piece of land is where all power is derived from. All other industrious activity is vanity - a mere exchange of already extracted value. The service economy is quite analogous to the financial market in this regard, only different in the form of the skimming and rent-seeking that occurs.

Malthuse take me.

Why should YOU define what is of value and what is not? Something is valuable if it is accepted by a significant portion of the population as valuable. It's Economics101.

>Sure, advancing tech and healthcare and all great, but they're not necessary for survival
>healthcare
>not necessary for survival
It literally is. The reason we don't die of the common cold at the age of 30 is because of advanced healthcare.

I'll put it another way for you then.
There exists a concept known as marginal utility, that is, extra benefit from consuming 1 more unit of a particular good. Related to that concept is the diminishing return of marginal utility, so the more you consume the less utility you will have from consuming 1 more unit. E.g. Money. $10 extra when you have $100 will give you much more satisfaction than $10 extra when you have $100,000. The amount is the same ($10), but your marginal satisfaction is less. We can extend this concept to include two goods (in reality the quantity of goods available is hundreds, if not thousands), so you would try to maximize the utility you get from having both goods. If we have food and clothes you can have various combinations to form baskets of goods. If the baskets of goods have the same utility you can make an indifference curve, and using multiple indifference curves you can make an indifference map which will tell you what baskets are preferred to what baskets. In general, people believe that more is better, so they will try to get a bit of each good in a basket but not necessarily be in the middle of an indifference curve. We can now apply this logic to scenarios where 3+ goods exist. Assuming a variety of goods is available, people will demand less food(which brings them little marginal utility) for goods they don't have (which give them a lot of marginal utility).

We basically just need to eat, don't get sick and protect ourselves from the elements. That's all we really need.

We could live in an utopia but the vast majority of us are cunts of one sort of another. Greedy.

And i'm no exeption.

TAKBIR!

ALLAHU AKBAR!

>The great lie of economics is that trade is inherently fruitful. As long as you are doing *something* and getting paid *something* then we are growing.
Precisely.
>and yet somehow employment is far lower than ever, everything costs more than ever, we are taxed more than ever and somehow still in debt.
Inflation? Pump more currency into circulation and all things cost more - higher GDP.
>The service economy is quite analogous to the financial market in this regard, only different in the form of the skimming and rent-seeking that occurs.
Yeah, that is true.

>Something is valuable if it is accepted by a significant portion of the population as valuable.
>Implying advertising and marketing play no part.
How many items would you buy if there was no advertising or marketing in the world?

>The reason we don't die of the common cold at the age of 30 is because of advanced healthcare.
>The reason we don't die of the common cold at the age of 30 is because of good genetics
FTFY.

the 80/20 rule has been around forever and is indicative of situation normal, not something to be alarmed about. If anything, 15% means we're doing better than expected.

Very clever blue eyes!

>There exists a concept known as marginal utility, that is, extra benefit from consuming 1 more unit of a particular good. Related to that concept is the diminishing return of marginal utility,
I got my Ph.D. in economics, but never mind. I'll play along.
>We can extend this concept to include two goods (in reality the quantity of goods available is hundreds, if not thousands)
Ok, this is referred to as a consumption set and utility functions are indeed defined on multi-dimensional consumption sets.
>so you would try to maximize the utility you get from having both goods.
Fine, with you so far.
>If we have food and clothes you can have various combinations to form baskets of goods.
Consumption set, but fine, we'll refer to it as a basket of goods.
> If the baskets of goods have the same utility you can make an indifference curve, and using multiple indifference curves you can make an indifference map which will tell you what baskets are preferred to what baskets
Ok, still with you.
> In general, people believe that more is better, so they will try to get a bit of each good in a basket but not necessarily be in the middle of an indifference curve.
Fine, still with you.
>Assuming a variety of goods is available, people will demand less food(which brings them little marginal utility) for goods they don't have (which give them a lot of marginal utility).
You need to elaborate more on this because your assumption here is that people want less food - food which is necessary for survival is interchangeable with say soap. You didn't say this explicitly, but you did assume interchangeability of goods in your explanation and hence I'm not convinced with your argument.

You got to get better bait, mate. If you're on this website spouting shit you're wasting your doctorate.

What's the point of anything faggot? When i say ALLAHU! you say AKBAR!

ALLAHU!

AKBAR!

ALLAHU!

AKBAR!

ALLAHU!

AKBAR!

your argument is retarded and you should feel bad.

>i promise i saged

The Ferengi?

value is human.
we assign it. a things value is directly equal to how useful it is to a human being.
there is no absolute value. Marx was retarded

>I got my Ph.D. in economics, but never mind
No you fucking didn't. The way you are writing and complete lack of understanding are what I would expect of a teenager.

>people want less food - food which is necessary for survival is interchangeable with say soap
It's not necessary for survival if you have more food than you are able to consume. If you have a million potatoes, are you gonna eat them all or are you going to exchange some of your potatoes for soap, a computer, a hair cut or other stuff which makes your life easier?

>You got to get better bait, mate.
Why do you think I'm baiting you? This is not a slide thread. Also, why are you accusing me of baiting you when I said you assumed food is interchangeable with other goods? Chill bru.

>What's the point of anything faggot?
Now? I'm not sure anymore.

>>i promise i saged
In the options field?

I dont know if this is related. But one of my fantasies is to have land in high ground near mountains. A house with naturally appearing fortification. (Similar to the house in shooter). Amd have 10 years supply of food and private well water. All so when the walking dead or next plauge, or influenza outbreak kills millions. I can retreat to my house in the mountains.

>a things value is directly equal to how useful it is to a human being.
Very often it isn't. See Diamond-Water paradox.

Exactly, you had a good run hwite bois. Now open the legs for the Caliphate, bitches!

TAKBIR!

ALLAHU AKBAR!

>>I got my Ph.D. in economics, but never mind
>No you fucking didn't. The way you are writing and complete lack of understanding are what I would expect of a teenager.
Look, I do dumb down the ideas for Sup Forums and I ask questions to ensure everyone else is on the same page as me. Why are you getting all faggoty on me? I don't speak like a PhD because people here don't have PhDs and having a PhD doesn't mean you should speak like an English professor.

>It's not necessary for survival if you have more food than you are able to consume.
For the U.S.? Sure. But you're making a poor assumption - that we can transport food from the U.S. or any other area with a surplus to an area with a shortage. In fact, for many years U.S. controlled the prices of agricultural products via controlled disposal of those products.

>If you have a million potatoes, are you gonna eat them all or are you going to exchange some of your potatoes for soap, a computer, a hair cut or other stuff which makes your life easier?
Agreed. I would exchange those products for something more useful - but by this logic, the U.S. farmers would be the richest entities in the U.S. - which they're not. Why is that?

>Exactly, you had a good run hwite bois. Now open the legs for the Caliphate, bitches!
You seem to be under the misconception that our ancestors were never as violent as you. We were and far more violent then you. We advanced technologically and we became peaceful. That is the fate of most civilizations. They advance technologically because farming gives them more time, and they collapse once the population forgets its warrior and belligerent ways.

damn white girls fucking suck

>You seem to be under the misconception that our ancestors were never as violent as you.

No. i'm not.

>We were and far more violent then you.

No, you weren't.

>We advanced technologically and we became peaceful. That is the fate of most civilizations. They advance technologically because farming gives them more time, and they collapse once the population forgets its warrior and belligerent ways.

Sure, whatever.

Haha, i'm actually an Arab btw. Well kind of, i'm part Spanish and Portuguese but i look like an Arab so i am one. Guess i ougtha thank the Jews after all because now i get the chance to fuck and impregnate your hot aryan sister, haha. Hilarious.

Nasty gook sluts acting all innocent and shit, gonna make them lick my nasty Arab asshole.

its just another retarded pseudointellectual commie talking dumb bullshit in their usual deluded attempts to "cunningly outsmart" Sup Forums and "lead them to communism"

You can tell by his infantil and retarded fundamental missconceptions and failed attempt to interprete basic agrar industry data, how "the agrar industry" actually works and intervines with other industries and technology and isnt some MUH selfcontained commune of farmers. Technology that eased and stablized our lifes and didnt "collapse" them at all. How this retard doesnt even grasp the basic concept of running a farm in the 21st century or how food is actually produced beyond watering flowers and food actually ends up in his mums grocery basket which is also not food. Mindnumbing retarded shit like "if Egyptians had less efficiently produced food and spend all their efforts only to fulfil the dear leaders quotas they wouldnt have been invaded" and typical communist tier retarded "why are shitty farmer jobs in an age where food production is easy as fuck not equally paid as guys doing not simple stuff hu? im not saying its capitalism but its capitalism" just fits into the picture.

Nothing thats is excused by commies favourite pretense to have to "dumb down things for Sup Forums" they obviously dont even understand themself.

The point hes trying to make talking all this stupid bullshit is simply MUH capitalism endtimes MUH capitalist scam MUH im not saying communism but muh communism MUH Sup Forums subversion

>We were and far more violent then you.
>No, you weren't.
Yes, we were.
>Haha, i'm actually an Arab btw.
Gee, I dunno what gave you away. The flag or Allahu Akbar.
>Well kind of, i'm part Spanish and Portuguese but i look like an Arab so i am one.
I won't judge. I know you're Arab. No need to be shy.
> Guess i ougtha thank the Jews after all because now i get the chance to fuck and impregnate your hot aryan sister, haha. Hilarious.
Jokes on you my man, but it'll dawn on you what I mean in the future.

>Farmers can be replaced by automation.
I work on a farm.
>corn, peanuts, soybeans, cotton
Even today, when we are doing more with less, farming is long hours, and labor intensive.

>non sequitur gibberish about genealogy and sister fucking
>meme flag

>We basically just need to eat, don't get sick and protect ourselves from the elements. That's all we really need.

>Yes, we were.

>muh spread eagle

>Gee, I dunno what gave you away. The flag or Allahu Akbar.

>I won't judge. I know you're Arab. No need to be shy.

That's what i'm gonna tell your sister: no need to be shy.

>Jokes on you my man, but it'll dawn on you what I mean in the future.

Don't take too long hwithe boi, time is running out.

Your Pagans believe the same shit IIRC.

>That's what i'm gonna tell your sister: no need to be shy.
Only child.
>Don't take too long hwithe boi, time is running out.
For you to fuck my imaginary sister.

...

>war causes breakdown in global supply lines
>net food importers fucking starve in like 2 weeks
good outcome desu

The most successful farmers produce most of the food we consume.which means that out of those 15%, a way smaller amount actually produces our food. This means that if the world were to go through a food shortage, we would see the gap being filled fairly quickly. Also, keep in mind we waste a lot of food. Instead of producing more food, we'd be able to solve hunger if we had better methods to avoid waste. And even then, food will only become a problem if the global population becomes unsustainable with the maximum amount of available agricultural land we can have in this planet. Food will only become a problem in like , 50 years or so, considering we all haven't been annihilated by something else.

Well , there's always your mother and the rest of your female relatives.

wrong, ferengi are honest in their greed.
changelings pretend to be your own and subvert your government

Damn white girls fine af

>this is what numales actually believe

>The most successful farmers produce most of the food we consume.which means that out of those 15%, a way smaller amount actually produces our food.
Not arguing about food shortage. Hypothesizing that since 85% of the world is not engaged in jobs related to directly producing food, we're headed for a societal collapse.

I thought that percentage would be a lot smaller desu

>Well , there's always your mother and the rest of your female relatives.
Tch tch. Arab women not good enough that you're after western mothers?

There's hot women of all races but White women are by far the hottest, i give credit were credit is due. Too bad you don't get to keep them eh? ahahahahaha!

I've already hijacked all of your efforts and extinguished the race raves flame wars through mechanised micro quantum mosquitos carrying gene alterers to upgrade the species and distribute my genetic and other codes. Not to mention (through mentioning it) FTL gossamerish hyperdimensional transdimensional migrations.
Have fun arguing over penis to vagoo counts. I'm here to help establish net positive singularities. On the event of my abuse, trauma or death(s) the extradimensional quantum fleets will pull my infomorphology, consciousness, and soul into heavenlike realms and enact relativistic retributions of retrocausal quantum theory proportions, among things, after a waiting period to study you and build up their own informatic archival databases before civilisation wide timespace resets.
Now that we're all really related, play nice sons, daughters, hirs, virs, and bits. And other(s).
You forget yourself.

>Too bad you don't get to keep them eh? ahahahahaha!
Tch tch. Counting your chickens before they hatch.

>50 years

Damn.

>jewish controlled porn = reality
this is about as far as larping mudslimes on Sup Forums get intellectually