This distinction isn’t as profound as it seems. Why do humans accumulate extreme wealth? Why does a fox engage in surplus killing when it gets into a henhouse? The answer to these two questions is the same: nature was solving one kind of problem (scarcity) in a way that utterly fails to handle the opposite problem (abundance).

Now you might say “billionaires are different from foxes, billionaires have a choice!” But then if they chose differently, they wouldn’t become billionaires in the first place. Thus all billionaires are people who could not resist the lure of wealth (for whatever reason).

It’s a selective process, no different in mechanics from natural selection. Hence the meaninglessness of the natural/man-made distinction here.

As an FFT enjoyer, all I can think is "who the fuck is that red haired guy?"

Lol i assumed it was an actual FFT line. Nice work

Of course poverty is natural. That's why humans have always banded together to create wealth.

Frist thing a tribal society does is try to store up food and create tools to get more food.

Then they try to get clothes and shelter.