3 ms·

On some level, it is due to the "invisible hand" as it were, that market forces in our current system optimize for convenience because that's what sells. On the

On some level, it is due to the "invisible hand" as it were, that market forces in our current system optimize for convenience because that's what sells. On the other hand, it certainly isn't once the alternatives to the microwave-wares are eliminated because they don't sell well. An obvious example of this are SUV sales in the US. Car companies continue to sell non SUV vehicles in other countries where SUVs are too big but in the US where sprawl in abundant, SUVs sell more so car companies no longer sell them. But the thing is that was a decision the car companies made. Regardless, you're not going to like this suggestion but fundamentally the issue OP has is with capitalism. While capitalism more or less created the wonders of modern life of convience we have, it also destroyed the naive, idyllic past(at least for some) and continues to do so as businesses look for more and more to commodify and more efficiency to exploit in order to maintain profit levels. The article is geared towards individual action to find more spice in life, I guess, but like that figure from the scirep paper, the whole market of stuff you can find out there just like the SUVs are focusing in on the efficient which is outside of your control.

rendall 6y ago
I'm cheerfully open to a critique of capitalism but with sincere respect "it destroyed the naive, idyllic past" can only be a positive. By any measure, more people are living better lives, and the number of people living in grinding squalor diminishes steadily. Given that capitalism is the dominant paradigm, my conclusion is that this progress is due to it. Again, I'm open to new information (e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely unrelated markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite). I have little doubt that as scarcity itself diminishes, more people will have more time for contemplative, fulfilling experiences and activity. That such an article as this is read and discussed is definitely not a sign that we have lost something important, but that we are collectively gaining
- Baeocystin 6y ago
  I'm not sure if capitalism deserves the credit or not, but you are completely correct when you say that life is much, much better now than it was even in the recent past. To those who doubt this: Please watch Hans Rosling's talk first, which I will link below. I promise it is not a waste of your time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm5xF-UYgdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm5xF-UYgdg
  - agent008t 6y ago
    In some ways it is better, in others it is worse. For example: in the 1960s it was common for a family of 4 to have 1 breadwinner. Now it is impossible for most to sustain a family like that. There are small houses in my part of town that were originally built as workers' cottages, for workers operating the railway, construction workers etc. As you can imagine, they are not the best of houses and not in the most picturesque location. Now, these houses are completely unaffordable to most, and cost well over a million. A job for life used to be a thing, where you didn't really have to worry about it. Now it isn't.
    - rendall 6y ago
      Yes. I'm not sure why that happened nor why that stopped. Capitalism? Crony Capitalism? Deregulation? Globalization? Finance capture?
    - Baeocystin 6y ago
      It's massively better for literally billions of people in the developing world. It's worse for many people that live in the US, which is also a real issue. I live in the US, I see it. But the uplifting out of abject poverty of the majority(!) of the world's population is a real thing, and honestly amazing.
- rendall 6y ago
  e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely unrelated markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite That was supposed to read "e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely *unregulated* markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite"

rendall 6y ago

I'm cheerfully open to a critique of capitalism but with sincere respect "it destroyed the naive, idyllic past" can only be a positive. By any measure, more people are living better lives, and the number of people living in grinding squalor diminishes steadily. Given that capitalism is the dominant paradigm, my conclusion is that this progress is due to it. Again, I'm open to new information (e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely unrelated markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite). I have little doubt that as scarcity itself diminishes, more people will have more time for contemplative, fulfilling experiences and activity. That such an article as this is read and discussed is definitely not a sign that we have lost something important, but that we are collectively gaining

Baeocystin 6y ago
I'm not sure if capitalism deserves the credit or not, but you are completely correct when you say that life is much, much better now than it was even in the recent past. To those who doubt this: Please watch Hans Rosling's talk first, which I will link below. I promise it is not a waste of your time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm5xF-UYgdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm5xF-UYgdg
- agent008t 6y ago
  In some ways it is better, in others it is worse. For example: in the 1960s it was common for a family of 4 to have 1 breadwinner. Now it is impossible for most to sustain a family like that. There are small houses in my part of town that were originally built as workers' cottages, for workers operating the railway, construction workers etc. As you can imagine, they are not the best of houses and not in the most picturesque location. Now, these houses are completely unaffordable to most, and cost well over a million. A job for life used to be a thing, where you didn't really have to worry about it. Now it isn't.
  - rendall 6y ago
    Yes. I'm not sure why that happened nor why that stopped. Capitalism? Crony Capitalism? Deregulation? Globalization? Finance capture?
  - Baeocystin 6y ago
    It's massively better for literally billions of people in the developing world. It's worse for many people that live in the US, which is also a real issue. I live in the US, I see it. But the uplifting out of abject poverty of the majority(!) of the world's population is a real thing, and honestly amazing.
rendall 6y ago
e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely unrelated markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite That was supposed to read "e.g. I do wonder if, say, slavery is an inevitability of completely *unregulated* markets; or perhaps exactly the opposite"