5 ms·

> I don't think people have a good conception of just how incredible life will be in a world economy where the average Chinese or Indian worker produces and ea

> I don't think people have a good conception of just how incredible life will be in a world economy where the average Chinese or Indian worker produces and earns as much as the average American worker today. The problem is that's only going to happen because of American wages going down significantly; something Americans aren't going to think is so incredible. When the world lifestyle normalizes out eventually, the result will be the India's and China's lifestyle stepping it up a bit and the American lifestyle being reduced drastically. The whole planet cannot live the American lifestyle, we don't have those kind of resources.

twoodfin 11y ago
If it could be set up, I'd be happy to bet several thousand dollars that you're wrong. It's probably not that hard to take what amounts to a proxy bet by investing in, say, US construction companies.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  It's beyond silly to try and bet on things that are decades away. If you think I'm wrong, perhaps try pointing out what you think is wrong. Do you think the Earth has enough resources for 7 billion people to live the American lifestyle? I know for a fact it doesn't, so for the whole world to live about the same lifestyle, the American lifestyle must by logical necessity be reduced.
raldi 11y ago
> The whole planet cannot live the American lifestyle; we don't have those kind of resources. We would if a couple billion more people were given the opportunity to unlock their full human potential. And that's not even considering all the resource discounts we're going to be getting from AI and robotics improvements.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  > We would if a couple billion more people were given the opportunity to unlock their full human potential. No, we couldn't, the earth doesn't have the physical resources for everyone to live the American way. Robots and AI don't change that math.
  - raldi 11y ago
    May I see the math?
    - gnaritas 11y ago
      One such summary: http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2012-10/daily-infographic-if-everyone-lived-american-how-many-earths-would-we-need http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2012-10/daily-info...
      - raldi 11y ago
        As I suspected, it's full of bad reasoning. For example, "We make up 5 percent of the global population, but use 20 percent of the world's energy." If we gave a billion new people access to the same kind of education you and I were lucky enough to get, do you really think we couldn't quadruple our energy resources? We could literally put ten million college-educated scientists to work on nothing but solar panels.
        gnaritas 11y ago
        You're nitpicking energy; but no, that wouldn't happen because it takes energy to build those solar panels. The notion that we can somehow just up the lifestyle of the unwashed billions to our level and things will just scale up is patently silly. Our lifestyle isn't even sustainable as is. Our lifestyle exists due to third world labor arbitrage; robots can't fix that without first addressing that increases in productivity mostly help the capital holders so automated labor doesn't scale with capitalism far enough for everyone to live the American way. There are many many obstacles both politically and economically that would prevent raising the world lifestyle to ours long before resources even became a problem.
hiram112 11y ago
Why can't we all increase? Cause part of globalisation's promise is increased productivity which should mean we ALL get richer. Except, it turns out only the wealthy capital owners get more in the US. And please don't tell me I'm actually better off because I have an IPhone and my grandpa didn't. My grandpa had job security, a stay at home wife, and 4 kids on a middle class salary. Virtually nobody under 30 in the US or anywhere in Western Europe could afford that today.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  Normalization means some get richer, some get poorer; it will be America that gets poorer, by necessity. As for your second paragraph, we agree, so there's little to say there.

twoodfin 11y ago

If it could be set up, I'd be happy to bet several thousand dollars that you're wrong. It's probably not that hard to take what amounts to a proxy bet by investing in, say, US construction companies.

gnaritas 11y ago
It's beyond silly to try and bet on things that are decades away. If you think I'm wrong, perhaps try pointing out what you think is wrong. Do you think the Earth has enough resources for 7 billion people to live the American lifestyle? I know for a fact it doesn't, so for the whole world to live about the same lifestyle, the American lifestyle must by logical necessity be reduced.

raldi 11y ago

> The whole planet cannot live the American lifestyle; we don't have those kind of resources. We would if a couple billion more people were given the opportunity to unlock their full human potential. And that's not even considering all the resource discounts we're going to be getting from AI and robotics improvements.

gnaritas 11y ago
> We would if a couple billion more people were given the opportunity to unlock their full human potential. No, we couldn't, the earth doesn't have the physical resources for everyone to live the American way. Robots and AI don't change that math.
- raldi 11y ago
  May I see the math?
  - gnaritas 11y ago
    One such summary: http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2012-10/daily-infographic-if-everyone-lived-american-how-many-earths-would-we-need http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2012-10/daily-info...
    - raldi 11y ago
      As I suspected, it's full of bad reasoning. For example, "We make up 5 percent of the global population, but use 20 percent of the world's energy." If we gave a billion new people access to the same kind of education you and I were lucky enough to get, do you really think we couldn't quadruple our energy resources? We could literally put ten million college-educated scientists to work on nothing but solar panels.
      - gnaritas 11y ago
        You're nitpicking energy; but no, that wouldn't happen because it takes energy to build those solar panels. The notion that we can somehow just up the lifestyle of the unwashed billions to our level and things will just scale up is patently silly. Our lifestyle isn't even sustainable as is. Our lifestyle exists due to third world labor arbitrage; robots can't fix that without first addressing that increases in productivity mostly help the capital holders so automated labor doesn't scale with capitalism far enough for everyone to live the American way. There are many many obstacles both politically and economically that would prevent raising the world lifestyle to ours long before resources even became a problem.

hiram112 11y ago

Why can't we all increase? Cause part of globalisation's promise is increased productivity which should mean we ALL get richer. Except, it turns out only the wealthy capital owners get more in the US. And please don't tell me I'm actually better off because I have an IPhone and my grandpa didn't. My grandpa had job security, a stay at home wife, and 4 kids on a middle class salary. Virtually nobody under 30 in the US or anywhere in Western Europe could afford that today.

gnaritas 11y ago
Normalization means some get richer, some get poorer; it will be America that gets poorer, by necessity. As for your second paragraph, we agree, so there's little to say there.