How will we eliminate scarcity with a limited amount of resources and such a large population?

Post-scarcity is not just an abundance of goods, but the ability for people to rationally select those goods. Bookchin talks about this more in Ecology of Freedom.

youtube.com/watch?v=1AUakdbd_r8

He really got everything figured out, didn't he?

Destroy production, Let billions starve, restart with low tech society that can sustain itself

Yup.

...

who is "we"

a healthy percentage of this board

discarded

The faster international socialism is achieved the sooner the population growth slows down due to increased quality of living. In time we'd learn how to synthesize scarce resources.

Increase production efficiency.
Control population by means of anyone trying to have more than 4 kids being coerced not to.

Are you this naive?

How won't you with a limited population and such a large amount of resources ?

Those in power really do want to cull the human race to a few hundred million. When a superbug is killing us off like flees then you'll know I was right

FALC is a meme

If you live in a first world country, your current standard of living probably isn't too far off what it'll be in a communist society. Most likely, it's higher.

YOU ARE A MEME

It depends on what you put under "standard of living" though.

Standard of living is a meme. I have to keep buying shitty products because of planned obsolescence. I have to buy foods with ungodly amounts of added ingredients because for some reason it makes it cheaper in the industrial food process (storage needs and preservatives could probably be greatly reduced with local farms). I see people around me buying all kinds of shit that generates literal tons of garbage a year. The west's standard of living is built on absurd overabundance. In a society where the resources are sanely distributed we'd lose the disposability of pretty much everything. I really don't give a shit about losing access to 40 different flavors of pasta sauce. With the extra free time and resources I have in socialism, I will be able to buy a basic version or all the raw ingredients and customize it to my taste. Westerners are accustomed to alienation form everything up to and including what we consume. I daresay that getting back in touch by removing wholly unnecessary production steps (that only exist so that goods can be produced for ridiculously cheap so the poor exploited masses can buy them) would raise the standard of living or whatever concept that shitty metric is an attempt to capture.

Nothing happens without diving into it.

Overpopulation is a lie made up by the Elites, so when the global culling of population comes you won't object. Sweet dreams, buddy.

Then why should I be a leftist? Seems like I'm working against my interest

Well assuming that's true. (It's not, see
here) You live in a precarious economy that at any time is going to crash and leave you and other people with much less than you have now. Not to mention the looming threats of automation, ecological disaster, and war at the hands of capitalism.

Can you elaborate user? Because to me, "rationally select those goods" sounds exactly like scarcity.

idk like maybe recycling? plastic is made from dead algae after all and a lot of what we produce is just a byproduct of the modern-day slavery system of capitalism, our analogy to building pyramids during times of unemployment.
also uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/torrent/13426496/The_Expanse_S01_Season_1_Complete_1080p_WEB-DL_[VietHD]

This is extremly inaccurate. Stoned liberal tier.

indeed, the richest 8 people now own more than 50% of the world's wealth, not just 35%.
however, this steadily increases because that's how capitalism is designed.
a while ago it used to be the richest 62 people who owned more than half the wealth, so at some point during the past years was right, assuming the wealth was counted correctly.
fortune.com/2017/01/16/world-richest-men-income-equality/
der-postillon.com/2016/01/62-fleiigste-menschen-genauso-reich-wie.html

Dude. Are you stoned right now? Read the article one more time.

We will cut all bourgeois humanitarian aid to africa. it should short it self out.

of course, and reading is for faggots, i just read the headline and linked it.

anyway I did read more now and thank you for pointing it out:
someone needs to contact Postillon and have the Chefredakteur update the article.

or maybe he can release a new version on the-postillon.com

Meaning that the population should be smart enough to take what it needs and only what it needs, unlike what we have now where those that have abundance also waste that abundance. For example helium is a finite resources on earth, yet it's so artificially cheap that if its found when fracking for natural gas it will just be burned off because it's not worth the time to harvest and sell it. Places with abundance of helium waste it, while places that actually need it can't get it at a price that denotes it's true abundance/scarcity.

No problem, keep tokin 420.
But having as much as the 50% poorest does not mean they have 50% of the wealth. Almost all wealth is controlled by the 50% of the population that is neither among the poorest or part of the 8 ritchest. ;)

Through fierce competition and the mass death of uncompetitive strains tbh.

you already posted under a different flag

What next?

that guy is a stoner but your posts are misleading. see attached chart. it is the .01% that have all the wealth, and we are gonna eat them.

increased efficiency. simply ending planned obsolescence will go a long way.

I agree. Was on the phone, so didn't have time for pie charts and fancy stuff like that. *whats the source of that chart by the way?*
But 0.01% of the worlds population is more than seven hundred thousand people, not 8 people.
An important distinction when organizing the bbq where we eat them all.