• Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    'Cost effectives’ when not counting all the costs of monoculturing all the things. Or transport.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Most “cost effective” things are only that if you don’t count Negative Externalities.

      The obvious example is fossil fuels.

      Yeah sure, if everybody else is enduring and/or paying for the bad side effects of the way somebody conducts an economic activity, it’s “cost effective” for those doing that activity that way.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.todayOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the hypothetical here implies transport would still exist for a primarily home-garden non-industrial agriculture replacement system. Or do you think the whole world should suddenly stop trading? Might as well since we’re writing a fantasy fiction, anything goes.