The storage unit business is still booming, growing at over 7% annually in NA.
We have so much shit we have to rent units offsite to store our shit.
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
670 points (98.3% liked)
Political Memes
2041 readers
676 users here now
Non political memes: !memes@sopuli.xyz
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
And that’s happening at the same time that the square footage per capita has increased dramatically. Not only are houses bigger now, but household size (number of people living in each house) has shrunk too. That’s how much shit we got.
Is this happening in rural areas? I feel like in cities and suburbs there are more people living in a household. Like roommates or multiple families, because of how expensive housing is.
load more comments
(1 replies)
These thimble deep hot takes are annoying.
Is there waste in the system... Yeah. It's also worth noting there has never been a zero waste supply chain or distribution system under any economic system or government.
Centrallia PA had a lot of vacant houses for years. 500+ over about 4 decades. Nobody seemed to want them on account of the giant underground coal fire randomly collapsing the terrain and spewing toxic gasses. What a waste of good housing am I right?
Or check out some of the offerings around Amboy CA. You can get a vacant house and 5 acres in twenty nine palms for 18 grand.
https://www.trulia.com/home/78701-ramona-dr-twentynine-palms-ca-92277-299170461
load more comments
(13 replies)
The weird part is that the rest of us don't simply devour those who are perpetuating this evil on almost everyone else.
Why doesn't Ross, the largest friend, simply devour the others!?
but where’s the profit in that?! /s
I agree about the furniture, electronics and housing part. But food gets spoiled rather rapidly unfortunately. Any effort to give food away to those in need would have to move the goods quick enough.
Any effort to give food away to those in need would have to move the goods quick enough.
Having volunteered at a local food bank I can confidently say that it is absolutely possible to do. And not even that difficult, assuming there is a genuine will to do it.
Annoyingly, there are still far too many companies in the food supply chain whose mindset is that they would rather trash something than allow it to get into the hands of people who need it without them paying for it.
We have long life food, it still goes into the bin at your local supermarket.
Food insecurity is a capitalism problem. We can supply logistics to anywhere in the world if we want. We have more than enough to feed everyone. We don’t because profit is the motivation not humanity.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Stuff was tried and is being tried. For example, in my country, local supermarkets are giving away food that's close to due date at a discount (mostly it's 50%). It's an easy way of buying food for cheap.
Logistically it’s a nightmare, but local food offerings in supermarkets and farmers markets are useful in reducing resources usage.
Logistically a nightmare like having a "last chance" area where homeless and poor people can just take it before it gets thrown in the dumpster? Like, literally just allowing a space?
We put more effort into denying homeless people a place to exist than it would take to enable them to exist.
I know when I say "enable" people will immediately conflate that to "encourage", but we've tried for decades to be as ruthless and unkind to homeless people and the numbers haven't exactly plummeted.
I completely agree. Things like anti homeless architecture, shelter quality and the housing voucher system (and consequent rent gauging) are obscene.
Ending homelessness would take way way less money than the current system, but the capitalist elites need a threat to barely making ends meet workers so they don’t have time or energy to worry about their neighbor.
If it is something for the homeless people inside the same city, it's fine. However, I was thinking about the scenario where food would get transported from the richer parts of the world to the poorer parts of the world. In that case, I do not see the viability of a "last chance" - part of the food would still get spoiled and thrown away, unless you want to feed the poor some spoiled food.
I'd rather see more people educated not to buy too much food in the first place, then direct the remaining to the poor (and even, if possible, produce less in the 1st place. Have fewer cows, less agricultural land and more wild terrain (forests and the likes) if possible).
Oh, for sure transporting food across the world is a disastrously inefficient way to solve it.
I may be wrong about this, but I dont think there are many (if any) food-poor countries that are that way because of a lack of local fertile land.
I don't think waste and excess are really the issue, but rather misallocation of resources, like you mentioned, raising cattle (or growing coffee/cocoa) over primary foods for profit over basic needs.
Something-something-communism, I suppose.
Logistically it’s not a nightmare. We already do it, we get crops grown in country A, shipped to country B to be processed before shipping them off to country C to sell. We could easily work out to send less to C and more to D, if we wanted to.
It’s a capitalist choice to not supply everyone.
Logistically, ie making sure the food is still fresh or good Legally (as in the US it’s illegal to give food to the homeless in some places) There are some CSR initiatives from supermarkets like Lidl but in a capitalist society it’s just not profitable for the supply chain. Maybe a nightmare is too dramatic, but highly improbable in current society as it stands.
That's true