Screw a 40 hour work week

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:47 pm

reading is for morons...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:47 pm

Why aren't you reading then?

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:47 pm

i ain't got time to read...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:48 pm

But you admit you're a moron?

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:50 pm

a little...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 4:50 pm

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:14 pm

Kracus wrote:Hunting is a small role in a hunter gatherer society?

What the fuck bullshit book are you reading?

Your whole post is idiotic but I decided to pick this as your most salient point.

In a hunter gatherer society Hunting accounts for a about 20% of caloric intake whereas the gathering supplements the remaining 80%.
You see, hunting is a dangerous activity. Not just in terms of injury but moreso in terms of what a person can potentially get out of it. You see when a person goes to gather they are definately going to return home with food. Sure they spend energy gathering but it is nowhere near as strenuous than hunting. Now when a person goes on a hunt they often have to invest days out in the wild to get food. This results in a huge amount of energy spent for a potential return that is tenuous at best.

Just another area in which you are completely wrong. The bottom line is that you're completely talking out of your ass Kracus. You have no facts and no resource from which you can get any facts.

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:18 pm

Kracus wrote:

Now if we all went by your reasoning here that hunter/gatherer way of life demands a different social setting then why live socialy at all?

I mean let's all just split off and live alone as hermits! THAT would be the MOST efficient way to live since we only really have to work for food a couple hours a week to sustain ourselves! Priceless, I never woulda thought of it Jackal. :icon19:

I know you're being sarcastic here but let me try to explain something to you. We could never all live as hermits because, as humans, we are social animals. Without society humanity would just die off. The creation of culture is the single greatest adaptation humanity has ever made, it is what has put us at the top of the food chain.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:19 pm

Kracus does have a resource for all his facts. It's called "thin air".

BTW Kracus, archery and hunting are two completely different things. Also, what's your bow made of? Complex modern materials? I think so. Can you make your own arrows?

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:21 pm

Also can you make a poison efficient enough to kill a giraffe?
What's that? Lead pipe? oh.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:22 pm

So now you're agreeing with me and calling me ignorant?

You're so fucking pathetic jackass and I quote.

Now when a person goes on a hunt they often have to invest days out in the wild to get food. This results in a huge amount of energy spent for a potential return that is tenuous at best.

So what's all this bullshit about hunting being more efficient than farms?

I'm not going to argue you're points on foraging vs hunting although I will mention all that foraging wouldn't do shit for you with no meat in your diet which makes it pretty important.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:23 pm

Kracus wrote:If 1 farm, operated by say 10 workers has the ability to provide for say 1000 people (I suspect the number would be higher but let's use 1000 for fun)

What, so you're saying that 10 people can hand-plough a plot of sufficient size to feed 1000 people for a year? Crops are seasonal you fucking idiot.

Post by **DRuM** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:23 pm

Foo wrote:I see.

But without the need to pare things down to such a simple way of looking at things, you can easily work a 20 hour week in western society, and earn sufficient for a better quality of life than hunter-gatherers.

There was a young man called foo,
who lived in a very nice shoe.
he worked and he ate
and he ate and he worked,
but one day he needed a poo.

Post by **+JuggerNaut+** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:25 pm

DRuM wrote:
Foo wrote:I see.

But without the need to pare things down to such a simple way of looking at things, you can easily work a 20 hour week in western society, and earn sufficient for a better quality of life than hunter-gatherers.
There was a young man called foo,
who lived in a very nice shoe.
he worked and he ate
and he ate and he worked,
but one day he needed a poo.

go back to bed.

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:25 pm

Kracus wrote:So now you're agreeing with me and calling me ignorant? You're so fucking pathetic jackass and I quote.

Now when a person goes on a hunt they often have to invest days out in the wild to get food. This results in a huge amount of energy spent for a potential return that is tenuous at best.
So what's all this bullshit about hunting being more efficient than farms?

I'm not going to argue you're points on foraging vs hunting although I will mention all that foraging wouldn't do shit for you with no meat in your diet which makes it pretty important.

Show me where I said hunting is better than farming. I've been speaking of hunter/gatherers this entire time. Also, you seem to be under the assumption that hunter/gatherers have no concept of agriculture or husbandry which is completely untrue.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:25 pm

So what's all this bullshit about hunting being more efficient than farms?

Hunter-GATHERING, idiot. He's already stated that 80% of the caloric intake is NOT from hunting.

I'm not going to argue you're points on foraging vs hunting although I will mention all that foraging wouldn't do shit for you with no meat in your diet which makes it pretty important.

See above.

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:27 pm

This is honestly like trying to argue with a 7th grader.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:31 pm

I mean ferchrissakes, you only need to factor in man-hours lost to 'flu and you've got a ridiculous energy burden on large agriculture-based populations which hunter-gatherers simply don't encounter. TB? I think so.

The Inuit are an interesting exception to the gathering>hunting rule though.

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:34 pm

In the case of the Inuit I would say that they are truly subject to the whims of the environment, causing a completely different system of subsistence. I mean, you can't after all go pick vegetables when they have no chance of growing in the first place.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:36 pm

Pass the muktuk

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:38 pm

mmmm....fatty...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:40 pm

No actualy by your reasoning inuits do extremely well. See they hunt whales and you only need about 2 whales per year to sustain a community and to catch a whale usualy takes a couple day's I beleive.

As for farms supplying food for 1000 people yeah retard, it would. I'm talking modern farms here mind you, cause we are living in the modern age. Regardless though even ancient farms supplied a more consistent source of food than a hunter/gatherer society does otherwise we would have never evolved past this point! Why are you arguing an ancient way of life is more efficient than todays? It's the fucking most rediculous thing I've ever heard and you fucking retards sound serious! Fuck go live like a hermit if you want to, I know it's tempting to not have any of the modern day responsibilities we all have but it's NOT better.

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:45 pm

Kracus wrote:to catch a whale usualy takes a couple day's I beleive.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Post by **Jackal** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:50 pm

Post by **Geebs** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:52 pm

Kracus wrote:As for farms supplying food for 1000 people yeah retard, it would. I'm talking modern farms here mind you, cause we are living in the modern age.

Yeah, with the aid of machinery. Who designs, researches, makes markets and sells the machinery? Who writes "What Machinery" magazine? Who finds the oil? Who drills the oil? Who finances drilling the oil in the first place? Who transports the oil? Who ensures the overwhelming military superiority needed to ensure the supply of oil? Who makes the guns? You need to consider pesticides if you're going to go for a huge monoculture. Who designs, and makes those? Who provides the raw materials? Who mines and refines the metal? Who makes the plastics?

Once the crop's harvested, how does it get to the consumers? Who processes it to actually make it edible in the first place? Who makes sure there's not a problem with the crop which will make a large proportion of the population ill?

See? I though about this for about a MINUTE, and I've already destroyed your "ten people" theory.