3 ms·
> businesses wouldn't benefit from having poorer consumers, so it doesn't make sense to increase productivity at the cost of consumer power. I think your logic
by dmreedy 3y ago
> businesses wouldn't benefit from having poorer consumers, so it doesn't make sense to increase productivity at the cost of consumer power.
I think your logic is impeccable here, and yet we frequently see businesses making decisions that do exactly that. The growing wealth gap seems to be indication enough. I can posit all sorts of explanations for why that might be but I'm much more curious as to what you imagine a fix for it might look like, from your model. Or do you think it will simply fix itself once things "bottom out" as it were (and not to present a false dichotomy).
> relieve humans of mundane tasks
In the economy/system we currently have, mundane tasks are entire classes of jobs. Jobs not frequently pursued out of passion, but necessity since it is very difficult to survive without a source of income, and a baseline of health insurance. And even more difficult to grow. So while I love the vision of that future, I'm much more interested in what the bridge to getting there looks like. Because traditionally we haven't built those bridges, we've just hoped enough survivors will learn how to swim.
> resource-based economy where money becomes less important
In the current society/economic system, money is a proxy for the abstract concept of resource. Do you mean a more direct resource foundation, like a barter system? An economy that moves without the lubrication of a finance industry using the abstraction of money to provide liquidity? Something different?