• killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    If everyone thought like this, everyone would have a home.

    And 50 or so people would own all of the rest of the land and do nothing with it because we’re too fucking stupid to realize that a system that wants us all to live in 50m² micro apartments is a load of shit, and strung together by a greedy few.

    There is enough land for us all to live comfortably, but a fraction of a percent don’t want anyone to use most of the land for anything useful so hey let’s just give up and take almost-squalor because at least it not squalor!

    Fuck both these pictures.

    • HatchetHaro@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Land-usage” is such a narrow-minded way to think about the implicit wants and needs of society. You sound like you’ve never been to actual cities, or never got your head far enough out of your arse to actually experience one.

      North American suburban sprawl already proves that “enough land for us all to live comfortably” is a terrible way to live sociable lives and drains the economy due to massive swathes of those lands being used for roads and the maintenance of said roads.

      I implore you to take a trip to almost any European city, and see for yourself what actual “comfortable living” for most people looks like.

      • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve lived in cities my whole life, which paints a pretty broad picture of you doesn’t it? Couldn’t even get the premise of your own bullshit comment right.

      • AgentOrangesicle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        …Why did you reinterpret the premise of their statement into something entirely different and then attack them for it?

        I’m not saying your interpretation is wrong, but that was mean.