32 ms·

I couldn't disagree more. The more wealth is created out of thin air by technology, the better we all live, and the better our relations with one another. Scarc

I couldn't disagree more. The more wealth is created out of thin air by technology, the better we all live, and the better our relations with one another. Scarcity creates conflict and pain. Prosperity makes good neighbours out of enemies. I don't care if I have to pay megacorps for a right to my modern conveniences, if that means they extend to more and more people. Monsanto can take all my money if no one ever dies of starvation again. Microsoft can take all my data if we never have to do rote tasks again.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
The more wealth is created, the more we abuse wild resources and the natural ecosystem as well. If there were only humans on the planet, I would not disagree. But it is immoral to live better if it comes to destroying out natural connection with the biosphere. I also disagree that scarcity creates conflict and pain. Scarcity limits growth, which means it limits our expansion, which is good because other creatures have to live here too.
- pdonis 3y ago
  > I also disagree that scarcity creates conflict and pain. Every war in human history (and there have been a lot of them) was fought over control of scarce resources. Sure looks like scarcity creates conflict and pain to me.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    War causes some short-term pain but nothing in comparison to the long-term pain of post-scarcity where we use up so many resources that there are none left to use -- such as depleting most fishing stocks, rainforest destruction, and global warming. I'd take a few wars here and there over what we have now any day. Even if it means I die. It would be much better if humanity's population were limited.
    - zemvpferreira 3y ago
      If you want to limit human population, with all respect, you first. Talk is cheap.
    - app13 3y ago
      >It would be much better if humanity's population were limited. It's a shame your argument devolved into eugenics so quickly.
CatWChainsaw 3y ago
It's funny, in a sad way, that you think corporations will hold up their end of the "bargain". Can't remember which Youtube video I was watching, but this stuck out: "The irony that we're automating the production of art instead of the jobs everybody hates shouldn't be lost on us."
- Nasrudith 3y ago
  That pseudoprofound bullshit about automating art is the new version of the old ignorant chestnut of "If we can put a man on the moon why can't we just X?" Newsflash: there are vast differences in what is accomplishable. Self driving cars stalled out but not for lack of trying.
  - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
    Congratulations on writing a comment that had zero to do with Reaganite valleybros reneging on the social contract for more cheddar, I guess.
AlexVN 3y ago
I think it's important to keep track of which particular wealth we create and how it gets distributed. If eg GDP grows 2x, but instead of affording 2x more food everyone can now afford 10x more/better memes and better drones for their country military, I don't consider it a win. In other words, "growing wealth" means better access of people (on average) to some resources, but whether it's a good thing depends on the exact resources the world gains.

vouaobrasil 3y ago

The more wealth is created, the more we abuse wild resources and the natural ecosystem as well. If there were only humans on the planet, I would not disagree. But it is immoral to live better if it comes to destroying out natural connection with the biosphere. I also disagree that scarcity creates conflict and pain. Scarcity limits growth, which means it limits our expansion, which is good because other creatures have to live here too.

pdonis 3y ago
> I also disagree that scarcity creates conflict and pain. Every war in human history (and there have been a lot of them) was fought over control of scarce resources. Sure looks like scarcity creates conflict and pain to me.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  War causes some short-term pain but nothing in comparison to the long-term pain of post-scarcity where we use up so many resources that there are none left to use -- such as depleting most fishing stocks, rainforest destruction, and global warming. I'd take a few wars here and there over what we have now any day. Even if it means I die. It would be much better if humanity's population were limited.
  - zemvpferreira 3y ago
    If you want to limit human population, with all respect, you first. Talk is cheap.
  - app13 3y ago
    >It would be much better if humanity's population were limited. It's a shame your argument devolved into eugenics so quickly.

CatWChainsaw 3y ago

It's funny, in a sad way, that you think corporations will hold up their end of the "bargain". Can't remember which Youtube video I was watching, but this stuck out: "The irony that we're automating the production of art instead of the jobs everybody hates shouldn't be lost on us."

Nasrudith 3y ago
That pseudoprofound bullshit about automating art is the new version of the old ignorant chestnut of "If we can put a man on the moon why can't we just X?" Newsflash: there are vast differences in what is accomplishable. Self driving cars stalled out but not for lack of trying.
- CatWChainsaw 3y ago
  Congratulations on writing a comment that had zero to do with Reaganite valleybros reneging on the social contract for more cheddar, I guess.

AlexVN 3y ago

I think it's important to keep track of which particular wealth we create and how it gets distributed. If eg GDP grows 2x, but instead of affording 2x more food everyone can now afford 10x more/better memes and better drones for their country military, I don't consider it a win. In other words, "growing wealth" means better access of people (on average) to some resources, but whether it's a good thing depends on the exact resources the world gains.