> I think that is one of the most interesting take aways from this line of thought. It is nearly impossible to reconcile the idea that we as a species have unimaginable surplus, but nearly all of us feel we are living precariously on the edge of ruin, or are living in destitute poverty. There is plenty to go around, but because the worst parts of human nature have triumphed the good, we are forced to live in an incredibly inequitable distribution.

This is correct. The surplus was for a few. Agriculture did not even give commoners more free time. Rather it gave them less.

Which is a complete heel-turn from the false narrative in your original comment. Well, the narrative can only be true if only the ones with surplus are human beings and the people toiling the field are something else than “we humans”.

> It might just be human nature, our worst instincts tend to beat our best instincts.

Human nature. The standard refrain of the sociopath enabler.