Welcome to the Melbourne Community Daily Discussion Thread.

  • MeanElevator@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Eating the rich is the goal. Eating the homeless is a temporary solution to satisfy hunger. They are not mutually exclusive.

    • Rusty Raven @aussie.zoneM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fair enough. Canabalism is arguably the most sustainable diet. Based on the the ecological footprint calculator I was looking at if I eat just 5 other people my current lifestyle would be sustainable. If I can eat 25 I can live the lifestyle of the rich!

      • MeanElevator@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Now imagine if you could eat 25 rich people and gain their assets!!!

        Then of course you’d be in line to be eaten next, but since you’ve been not-rich before, you could probably fool the ravenous hordes.

        • Rusty Raven @aussie.zoneM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          This could get mathematically complicated. If I eat 25 people, who are each living the lifestyle that is 25 times the sustainable amount and take their assets, I would have the assets to live the lifestyle of 625 sustainable people. So I would have to eat another 600 people to make it sustainable, which would in turn make it unsustainable. A terrible paradox.