AI aside, this is kind of a dumb argument to make. And yes I get it’s a meme, but the point it making is still stupid.
Plants can have value other than just as a food source. There’s nothing wrong with cultivating decorative flowers, shrubs, or trees. By this argument everyone should have a small garden or farm yard else they’re wasting time/resources, ignoring that garden/farm plants may require more time and resources to raise and care for.
Lawns do serve a purpose other than just looking nice as well. In many areas if you don’t have a lawn, you’ve got a dust and dirt flying everywhere when the wind picks up.
Either way, the argument should be more in favor of native plants and wildflowers if it was to make a better point. Not to say there aren’t also native grasses out there.
There’s a phrase: food not lawns. It’s usually used for promoting growing produce at home, but I think the concept needs a slight expansion: food or habitat, for people or animals. You mention decorative flowers, shrubs, and trees: there are many species of these that feed or shelter wildlife, so many in fact that it’s not in any way difficult to exclusively plant these over ones that don’t in most settings and climates.
In other words, there are plenty of “productive” uses of yard space other than food production for human consumption, of course. But I like this comic because I like the question posed (when expanded a bit): if we’re actively cultivating a plant, rather than leaving the space wild (where it could feed and shelter wildlife) and it’s not for us to eat, and wildlife can’t eat it or shelter in it either, then what are we doing?
Lawns are useless… and even the dust ring thing you mentioned can be avoided by many different means (including growing anything local, not a lawn)
The point is clear, lawns are expensive and useless features for a house. Considering the resources spent on them, there are a multitude of better options, even if those options are not edible
