[boudin]

It depends if you see the economy as a source of a result. I don't think the current system was built to feed people. It is the end result of centuries of political decisions, individual actions, wars, trade agreements, etc... It's more an image of the balance of power rather than a tool thought from head to toes to run our socities. So either we think that actually nothing changed in the environment and we can keep the system as it is or we consider that all the changes that have been stressing this system (covid-19, climate change) required some adaptation so that the system stay somewhat balanced.

I think it's where this becomes quite problematic, re-balancing this requires people with a huge amount of power (the wealthiest part of our society) to accept being less powerful. That's where we've been stuck for years now. What we're seeing now is how this system should have changed before we were in this emergency situation because it clearly can't handle actual emergencies.

[bad_user]

> "I don't think the current system was built to feed people"

And yet it does feed people, billions of us. Even more so we have less extreme poverty and fewer people suffering from malnutrition than any other time in human history, with poverty plummeting since 1960 at least.

The current system wasn't built indeed, it was evolved, in tune with the industrial revolution. And it works. In the 19th century over 80% of the world population was living in extreme poverty.

The progress has been immense, both technological and social, in only one century, a blink of an eye in the context of human history. Any such discussion should acknowledge this.

> "...rather than a tool thought from head to toes to run our socities"

Yeah, you know what economic system was designed like that? Communism. So I'm skeptical of any such claims.