• steltek@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That’s sort of a shitty premise because the current system isn’t capitalist in that there’s no exchange of capital for that water. If users needed to pay for what they used, it would no longer be economical to exploit the aquifer and those users would go somewhere else. That’s kind of the point of a capitalist system: using money to efficiently allocate production.

    Currently the government is using public assets (aquifer) to support otherwise unsustainable jobs, which has more flavors of socialism than capitalism.

    • Mana@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You have it backwards . The water is an input to the agriculture meaning the fact that the capitalist system sees sees it as an externality gives it immense exchange value which promotes exploitation of the aquifer for profits. The point of capitalism is to reap profits and if you still think the market is an efficient way of allocating resources, you have a current housing crisis, military industrial complex, multiple water crises and climate change to read up on.

      One of the many points of socialism is to allocate resources based on need. Declaring unsustainable jobs as a feature of socialism is incredibly ignorant considering our current paradigm of the gig economy, decaying infrastructure, wealth disparity, perpetual subsidies to fossil fuels, and war.