The article is actually decently well written good-faith satire meant to address how poverty and hunger are inherent to capitalism as a system. The title was just too bold lol

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    “No one works harder than hungry people”

    While this is probably true, the problem is that their reward for this hard work in no way comes close to fixing their hunger problem.

    Meanwhile the assholes in control of the economy and responsible for their hunger problem are taking all the rewards and hoarding it for no better reasons than to compare with other assholes.

    • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      To quote the article in question (highlight is my own):

      “[H]ow many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply, we enrich others, those who own the factories, the machines and the lands, and ultimately own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labour, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So is the title “the benefit of world hunger” more of a cynical title, then? Or is it actually making an argument in favor of world hunger for the benefit of our economy?

        • OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Both. It’s satire.

          The “benefit” of world hunger is that it keeps people locked in their place and entrenches the status quo. This is actually true, and the author believes it, but he doesn’t like it.

          Many people benefit from world hunger though, and every time you hear that poverty is a hard problem to solve you should ask yourself, how much of that is actual problems and how much is the status quo resisting change?

        • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s an ironic title. Like saying “A benefit of loosing your legs is that you don’t need to buy shoes anymore. I mean I can’t get down the stairs to leave my apartment, but at least I never have to shop for shoes again!”.

          The benefit is real, but it’s also clearly not in proportion to the drawbacks presented, so focusing on the benefit is a joke.