3 ms·

And remind me why I, as a farmer (hypothetically) who spent millions of dollars buying a piece if land and millions more to buy robots to work on it, then spend

by hugh4 11y ago

And remind me why I, as a farmer (hypothetically) who spent millions of dollars buying a piece if land and millions more to buy robots to work on it, then spends all his time worrying about maintenance and shipping and prices and pruning and planting and weeds and so forth... remind me why I should consent to having my profits confiscated and given to other organisms for no reason other than that they happen to be of the same species? Imagine the social unrest when a large portion of the populace is literally of negative value. It's not going to be pretty. We need to start thinking now about how we're going to achieve a smaller but more elite population, so only useful people get born.

wolfram74 11y ago
one: taxes are your subscription to the society plan that offers you property rights and other elements that allow an investment in farm equipment to be profitable. two: the metric you use to determine the value of a person is highly arbitrary, based on GDP, divorces are better for society than marriages, despite the fact that children going through divorces suffer in school and later go on to accomplish less, capitalism is generally too myopic to actually address any existential risks to the human race.
sinxoveretothex 11y ago
There's a finite population that a single planet can hold, so there will have to be some form of population control eventually. Now, why the heck would you (the farmer entrepreneur) care about what the government does with the taxes it generates from your revenues? The question is: is your investment profitable enough? Everything else about your scenario is politics and, in a democracy, these things are decided (or supposed to if you drink from the cynic's cup) by the population. If the farmer (as a person) disagrees, he can just not buy or buy in another country or planet or whatever. A post-scarcity society has value enough for some of us that we'd run such an automated farm for little profit if only to selfishly sustain said society.

by hugh4 11y ago

wolfram74 11y ago

one: taxes are your subscription to the society plan that offers you property rights and other elements that allow an investment in farm equipment to be profitable. two: the metric you use to determine the value of a person is highly arbitrary, based on GDP, divorces are better for society than marriages, despite the fact that children going through divorces suffer in school and later go on to accomplish less, capitalism is generally too myopic to actually address any existential risks to the human race.

sinxoveretothex 11y ago

There's a finite population that a single planet can hold, so there will have to be some form of population control eventually. Now, why the heck would you (the farmer entrepreneur) care about what the government does with the taxes it generates from your revenues? The question is: is your investment profitable enough? Everything else about your scenario is politics and, in a democracy, these things are decided (or supposed to if you drink from the cynic's cup) by the population. If the farmer (as a person) disagrees, he can just not buy or buy in another country or planet or whatever. A post-scarcity society has value enough for some of us that we'd run such an automated farm for little profit if only to selfishly sustain said society.