6 ms·

Technically we could simply stop all of this IT stuff, re-allocate the world so everyone gets an acre and dissolve the government. No one would work more than a

Technically we could simply stop all of this IT stuff, re-allocate the world so everyone gets an acre and dissolve the government. No one would work more than a few hours per day (tending the garden, etc..) The problem is trust. We can't trust someone else because there will be stealing. Those thieves will meet others like them that steal, rape, pillage. Cycle of mis-trust starts all over again and societies form to do something about it. Then things go from there. Now that I think about what I write, we have Facebook because of thievery (just a joke). I do get your point of not starting over, but just listing the case why we get complexity. Some of it is likely not necessary but it's usually because of something.

jmcqk6 7y ago
Technically we could not do this. This is wildly inaccurate. The massive redistribution of population alone would be totally infeasible. And if everyone is going to make due with what they can grow in their acre, how is famine going to be dealt with? Is everyone expected to become vegetarian? What about diseases? What about transportation?
- pixl97 7y ago
  Who cares about transportation, lack of water would kill the majority very quickly.
josephdviviano 7y ago
this would result in the life expectancy hitting ~25-30, just like the good old days.
- pixl97 7y ago
  If you lived past childhood it is highly likely you would live to your 50s or 60s. Surviving your first few years was the hard part.
  - josephdviviano 7y ago
    It would be hard again, under your arrangement.
pjc50 7y ago
> Technically we could simply stop all of this IT stuff, re-allocate the world so everyone gets an acre and dissolve the government. No one would work more than a few hours per day Well, apart from all the people who would be dead; the diabetics, many of the elderly, and those with various other chronic conditions. The gradual reintroduction of fatal measles would kill from the other end of life. Women would probably be extremely upset about the end of access to contraception, especially as the maternal mortality rate crept back above 1/100.

jmcqk6 7y ago

Technically we could not do this. This is wildly inaccurate. The massive redistribution of population alone would be totally infeasible. And if everyone is going to make due with what they can grow in their acre, how is famine going to be dealt with? Is everyone expected to become vegetarian? What about diseases? What about transportation?

pixl97 7y ago
Who cares about transportation, lack of water would kill the majority very quickly.

josephdviviano 7y ago

this would result in the life expectancy hitting ~25-30, just like the good old days.

pixl97 7y ago
If you lived past childhood it is highly likely you would live to your 50s or 60s. Surviving your first few years was the hard part.
- josephdviviano 7y ago
  It would be hard again, under your arrangement.

pjc50 7y ago

> Technically we could simply stop all of this IT stuff, re-allocate the world so everyone gets an acre and dissolve the government. No one would work more than a few hours per day Well, apart from all the people who would be dead; the diabetics, many of the elderly, and those with various other chronic conditions. The gradual reintroduction of fatal measles would kill from the other end of life. Women would probably be extremely upset about the end of access to contraception, especially as the maternal mortality rate crept back above 1/100.