4 ms·

Imagine being fresh out of school, competing in the job market against a huge pool of people who have been working for a century. Now that I think of it, though

Imagine being fresh out of school, competing in the job market against a huge pool of people who have been working for a century. Now that I think of it, though, what's the difference between a gerontocracy and hiring the most experienced senior candidates? Is it just government vs private sector?

godelski 5y ago
Imagine going to school for 50 years? You're still a child at 100? Imagine being able to use compounding interest for a hundred years before you start work. I do not think we can approach this world with our current perceptions.
- _carbyau_ 5y ago
  The biggest concern I have is that with current societal expectations an infinite life span would mean working for thousands of years for someone else with little to no retirement phase of life. Effectively, infinite slavery. No, we require major societal change for this to be attractive. Regards compounding interest, the economic markets have a basis in reality and so can't keep compounding forever. Also even if it does compound forever, your trifling savings compounded for 100 years means very little compared to all the elder around you who have also compounded their much larger wealth(having compounded across previous centuries too) across that time. Which means you will still be significantly outbid by most of the customer base for anything you could want.
  - godelski 5y ago
    > No, we require major societal change for this to be attractive. I agree. But unfortunately my understanding of history suggests that cultural and political change is reactionary, not forward thinking. I'd love it if it was forward thinking but I'm not hopeful that this time it'll be different. But if I'm right (and I think most people will agree) then there's no real point to this aspect of the argument because it's not something we can solve. > Regards compounding interest, the economic markets have a basis in reality and so can't keep compounding forever. Do you have evidence of this? This is essentially what generational wealth is. > your trifling savings compounded for 100 years means very little compared to all the elder around you who have also compounded their much larger wealth I have a bit of a controversial opinion on this (though I'm not sure why). I don't think it is about how far the ladder goes up, I'm more concerned with where the lowest rung is. If moving the lowest rung up requires shortening the ladder, so be it. But if it doesn't, so be it. If you can have a house, food, healthcare, and all your basic needs taken care of (which I presume will continue to increase as we take care of more needs. Moving goal post) then that is a win. I don't care how high the ladder goes if the lowest rung is post scarcity. If every person can has all their needs taken care of I don't care if there's a few x-airs that have quantum space yachts with holodecks. You don't have to compare yourself to everyone else. Everyone doesn't need to be equal. That's not a requirement to create a post scarcity world where everyone can pursue their dreams without worry of hunger or health. Inflation adjusted, food has become become a lot cheaper over the last hundred years, so at least one of those things is on the right track. What we're talking about would put healthcare on the right track (especially if you're pro single payer). Seems the other ones will similarly decrease in price as they become necessary (again, back to the reactionary nature). Maybe you disagree though. But as long as there are people, like you, pushing for these things, I have good reason to believe we will obtain them.
    - _carbyau_ 5y ago
      Your controversial opinion is not bad as a vision. But I don't think it would work out that way unless aforementioned significant societal changes occur. As a newcomer, you won't be able to buy a home. Similar to now, there will be many other more wealthy people who want to buy that home "as an investment" so they can keep growing their wealth in relation to their peers. I already fear we are heading towards economic feudalism. Throw in living forever and I fear something more akin to SLA Industries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLA_Industries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLA_Industries As you say though, with people pushing for things, hopefully significant societal change would avoid such a disastrous future. edit - more concise.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
    > Effectively, infinite slavery I’m really sick of people equating working for someone else with slavery.

godelski 5y ago

Imagine going to school for 50 years? You're still a child at 100? Imagine being able to use compounding interest for a hundred years before you start work. I do not think we can approach this world with our current perceptions.

_carbyau_ 5y ago
The biggest concern I have is that with current societal expectations an infinite life span would mean working for thousands of years for someone else with little to no retirement phase of life. Effectively, infinite slavery. No, we require major societal change for this to be attractive. Regards compounding interest, the economic markets have a basis in reality and so can't keep compounding forever. Also even if it does compound forever, your trifling savings compounded for 100 years means very little compared to all the elder around you who have also compounded their much larger wealth(having compounded across previous centuries too) across that time. Which means you will still be significantly outbid by most of the customer base for anything you could want.
- godelski 5y ago
  > No, we require major societal change for this to be attractive. I agree. But unfortunately my understanding of history suggests that cultural and political change is reactionary, not forward thinking. I'd love it if it was forward thinking but I'm not hopeful that this time it'll be different. But if I'm right (and I think most people will agree) then there's no real point to this aspect of the argument because it's not something we can solve. > Regards compounding interest, the economic markets have a basis in reality and so can't keep compounding forever. Do you have evidence of this? This is essentially what generational wealth is. > your trifling savings compounded for 100 years means very little compared to all the elder around you who have also compounded their much larger wealth I have a bit of a controversial opinion on this (though I'm not sure why). I don't think it is about how far the ladder goes up, I'm more concerned with where the lowest rung is. If moving the lowest rung up requires shortening the ladder, so be it. But if it doesn't, so be it. If you can have a house, food, healthcare, and all your basic needs taken care of (which I presume will continue to increase as we take care of more needs. Moving goal post) then that is a win. I don't care how high the ladder goes if the lowest rung is post scarcity. If every person can has all their needs taken care of I don't care if there's a few x-airs that have quantum space yachts with holodecks. You don't have to compare yourself to everyone else. Everyone doesn't need to be equal. That's not a requirement to create a post scarcity world where everyone can pursue their dreams without worry of hunger or health. Inflation adjusted, food has become become a lot cheaper over the last hundred years, so at least one of those things is on the right track. What we're talking about would put healthcare on the right track (especially if you're pro single payer). Seems the other ones will similarly decrease in price as they become necessary (again, back to the reactionary nature). Maybe you disagree though. But as long as there are people, like you, pushing for these things, I have good reason to believe we will obtain them.
  - _carbyau_ 5y ago
    Your controversial opinion is not bad as a vision. But I don't think it would work out that way unless aforementioned significant societal changes occur. As a newcomer, you won't be able to buy a home. Similar to now, there will be many other more wealthy people who want to buy that home "as an investment" so they can keep growing their wealth in relation to their peers. I already fear we are heading towards economic feudalism. Throw in living forever and I fear something more akin to SLA Industries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLA_Industries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLA_Industries As you say though, with people pushing for things, hopefully significant societal change would avoid such a disastrous future. edit - more concise.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
  > Effectively, infinite slavery I’m really sick of people equating working for someone else with slavery.