3 ms·
>Fortunately, working for money is not an inherent part of nature. It is a construct, created by people, that can be changed by people I don't think that's tr
by vivekd 10y ago
>Fortunately, working for money is not an inherent part of nature. It is a construct, created by people, that can be changed by people
I don't think that's true. Certainly money is not a part of nature, but I think working in exchange for goods and services is an inherent part of human nature as demonstrated by archaeological records of early humans.
For example starting about 130 000 years ago, (and even earlier according to some researchers) we have evidence of long distance trade roots being established between prehistoric human tribes.
All of recorded history begins at a period when long distance trade roots had already been established.
Trade seems to me to be a fundamental aspect of what makes us human. Without the opportunity to create value and exchange things of value I fear much of humanity may end up in the dire state that many long term welfare recipients or third world welfare states experience.
- avmich 10y agoWe seem to have had a similar society organizations in the past. Slavery developed in many places on Earth across many regions, and sometimes sustained for at least centuries. Different members of societies could have different number of slaves, and the associated abilities to generate consumable resources, but you can imagine a whole society based on slavery (assuming slaves are not a part of society). Replacing slaves in such an organization with robots was considered in some fictional stories (Asimov, IIRC). This may help to start shaping some approach to the question.