2 ms·
Sure, everything is owned by a human. But does it have to be 8 billion humans? Why not 8 million or even 8 thousand? If humans provide literally zero economic v
by janalsncm 3y ago
Sure, everything is owned by a human. But does it have to be 8 billion humans? Why not 8 million or even 8 thousand? If humans provide literally zero economic value and their costs are significant, what can our economic systems say about whether they should even exist? It’s Macroeconomic Changes Have Made it Impossible for Me to Want to Pay You [1] but on a global level.
[1] https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/macroeconomic-changes-have-made-it-impossible-for-me-to-want-to-pay-you https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/macroeconomic-changes-ha...
- RandomLensman 3y agoFunctioning societies are a lot more than economic systems.
- sgu999 3y agoYes, but at our current scale? At first glance it really seems that our simple economical metrics are a good way to have billions of humans living largely peacefully together – while ruining their environment of course.
- RC_ITR 3y agoThe scenario you're describing is one of extreme wealth inequality, which is a real problem, but one that's supposed to be solvable through democratic means. Stopping technological progress isn't going to solve it.