Capitalism and extreme poverty: A global analysis of real wages, human height, and mortality since the long 16th century (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106026)

• The common notion that extreme poverty is the “natural” condition of humanity and only declined with the rise of capitalism rests on income data that do not adequately capture access to essential goods.
• Data on real wages suggests that, historically, extreme poverty was uncommon and arose primarily during periods of severe social and economic dislocation, particularly under colonialism.
• The rise of capitalism from the long 16th century onward is associated with a decline in wages to below subsistence, a deterioration in human stature, and an upturn in premature mortality.
• In parts of South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, wages and/or height have still not recovered.
• Where progress has occurred, significant improvements in human welfare began only around the 20th century. These gains coincide with the rise of anti-colonial and socialist political movements.

Keeping people just healthy enough to not die usually works fine. Big diseases like the COVID19 pandemic disrupt the gobal economy and supply chains, which slims profits. In this mode of just healthy enough to expand profits “fewer deaths from preventable disease every decade” is a given. But true prevention of health issues through rigorous environmental conservation and enforced protection and offering free, extensive and immediate healthcare to all citizens just will not happen.

To your last point: “more access to information for more people every decade” - true, but that doesn’t mean anything if people having access to this vast amount of information do not have had lessons (and need to be constantly reminded of them) in critical thinking towards media consumpion. This tabula rasa approach to letting people use the internet is just ripe to be exploited by phsychological manipulators, as we can observe on a daily basis.

Sorry to be the pedantic one, given then topic of this thread, but the points you named coincide with the talking points of status quo advocates and can all be proven to be untrue or misdirecting at the least.

Sisyphos is an educated man as he is son of Aiolos and king of Corinth. So long as he accepts that there is nothing more to life than his absurd struggle, then he can find happiness in it, says Camus. He may be the ideal absurd hero, as his punishment is representative of the human condition: Sisyphus must struggle perpetually and without hope of success.

I think he happy no matter where he ends up :)