3 ms·
Luddites were wrong because the rise in efficiency was matched by rise in consumption back than. Today the main problem is how to rise consumption even further.
by rumcajz 11y ago
Luddites were wrong because the rise in efficiency was matched by rise in consumption back than. Today the main problem is how to rise consumption even further. And there seems to be easy answer to that. There's definitely a limit to what ads can do.
- netcan 11y agoI kind of disagree. That is, I suspect this is wrong but I don't think we really know. The problem with imagining increased consumption is that we tend to imagine frivolous consumption. There are non frivolous things tot consumer too. Health, for example. We have a pretty greedy appetite for health "consumption." If we can afford more of that we will. Elderly care is another thing people struggle to afford enough of. Education… I don't think consumption capacity is really the issue. I think the ability of the great majority to contribute economically to a sufficient degree that they can have a non-humiliating piece of the pie. Jobs, basically.
- rumcajz 11y agoTrue. If we are able to channel more wealth to the poorest they will definitely spend much more on health, education and such. Even more so if it's done on global level: How much more would Africa, India and such consume if given the chance! But when all that is done we are back to the fundamental problem: Productivity can raise without a limit, while consumption is inherently limited.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]