3 ms·

> This is defeatism and not true. It is, though, as the problem is scarcity. So long as you have that, it is impossible to not end up in a situation where some

> This is defeatism and not true. It is, though, as the problem is scarcity. So long as you have that, it is impossible to not end up in a situation where some people have things other people don't have. It doesn't go away simply by slightly changing the way people choose to organize. > Worker solidarity, political awareness, and effective political work is the solution. These are oft considered useful tools to help us achieve post-scarcity, but are not the solution in and of themselves. This is like saying that the hammer is the solution to the housing problem. Indeed, a hammer can help with solving the housing problem, but simply having a hammer doesn't get you there. You have to also hit the nail.

analognoise 3y ago
We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already - remember Grapes of Wrath? I think the way they took the venom out of that book was to make us all read it in high school, but it was right there: "And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth." We are currently ensuring scarcity to propagate the system and not "solving" the problem. We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. The solution is... to build housing. We FORCE homelessness on people to ensure them "participating" in the system.
- randomdata 3y ago
  > We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already That's what Cuba thought, with the people coming together under worker solitary and political awareness to create an explicit mandate to see the transition from forced scarcity to post-scarcity through. Ironically, many years later, there are few places with more scarcity. They had the tools. Yet, it seems they missed the nail. But they maintain the transition will happen any day now, so... We shall see. > We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. I don't know, the moon might be a nice place to visit, but is rather hostile as a place to live. You might want to give this a second thought. > The solution is... to build housing. A good idea in theory, but in practice requires people. We've completely failed to automate house production in any meaningful way despite a whole lot of trying. And who wants to subject themselves to that harsh environment when you can relax behind a computer screen instead? Construction is not exactly fun. I expect you aren't lining up to do it. I'm definitely not. The few who are willing to do it are booked up years in advance. They are already building as fast as they can.
  - thiagoharry 3y ago
    Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Even with these difficulties, it managed to become one of the countries in Caribbean with highest GDP per capita. Of course, the embargo causes scarcity and lowers a lot the Purchasing Power Parity despite the relatively higher GDP for the region. I do not know how is this in USA, but in my country (Brazil) we have more empty houses than homeless people (it's 11 millions of empty houses vs. 6 millions of homeless people). It shows that even if this supposed scarcity of houses are solved, capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit, it insists in maximizing only profit and reproduction of capital. The headline in this news is a symptom: if a new tech makes possible produce more with less labor, we worry that capitalism will cut jobs, and the best news that we could receive is that it will not happen, perhaps because it will open more markets to compensate. We will never celebrate that now we will have more free time because the new tech will allow us to work less.
    - randomdata 3y ago
      > Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Right, real scarcity. You can't just wish post-scarcity into being. The USSR also made the same pledge under much the same conditions, all while being in control of most of the world's natural resources. But, still, scarcity prevailed. > capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit Where humans are deemed beneficial then capitalism will allocate towards maximizing human benefit. Where humans are not deemed beneficial, you cannot system yourself out of that. Capitalism itself has no thoughts or feelings towards humans, only humans do. And, indeed, you are quite right that humans by and large hate other humans and will do all kinds of things to "keep them down". The legal system goes to great lengths to ensure that humans cannot be come beneficial. That’s not capitalism, though.

analognoise 3y ago

We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already - remember Grapes of Wrath? I think the way they took the venom out of that book was to make us all read it in high school, but it was right there: "And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains. And the smell of rot fills the country. Burn coffee for fuel in the ships. Burn corn to keep warm, it makes a hot fire. Dump potatoes in the rivers and place guards along the banks to keep the hungry people from fishing them out. Slaughter the pigs and bury them, and let the putrescence drip down into the earth." We are currently ensuring scarcity to propagate the system and not "solving" the problem. We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. The solution is... to build housing. We FORCE homelessness on people to ensure them "participating" in the system.

randomdata 3y ago
> We have FORCED scarcity as is, not REAL scarcity, already That's what Cuba thought, with the people coming together under worker solitary and political awareness to create an explicit mandate to see the transition from forced scarcity to post-scarcity through. Ironically, many years later, there are few places with more scarcity. They had the tools. Yet, it seems they missed the nail. But they maintain the transition will happen any day now, so... We shall see. > We could also solve homelessness - we went to the moon. I don't know, the moon might be a nice place to visit, but is rather hostile as a place to live. You might want to give this a second thought. > The solution is... to build housing. A good idea in theory, but in practice requires people. We've completely failed to automate house production in any meaningful way despite a whole lot of trying. And who wants to subject themselves to that harsh environment when you can relax behind a computer screen instead? Construction is not exactly fun. I expect you aren't lining up to do it. I'm definitely not. The few who are willing to do it are booked up years in advance. They are already building as fast as they can.
- thiagoharry 3y ago
  Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Even with these difficulties, it managed to become one of the countries in Caribbean with highest GDP per capita. Of course, the embargo causes scarcity and lowers a lot the Purchasing Power Parity despite the relatively higher GDP for the region. I do not know how is this in USA, but in my country (Brazil) we have more empty houses than homeless people (it's 11 millions of empty houses vs. 6 millions of homeless people). It shows that even if this supposed scarcity of houses are solved, capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit, it insists in maximizing only profit and reproduction of capital. The headline in this news is a symptom: if a new tech makes possible produce more with less labor, we worry that capitalism will cut jobs, and the best news that we could receive is that it will not happen, perhaps because it will open more markets to compensate. We will never celebrate that now we will have more free time because the new tech will allow us to work less.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    > Cuba is a place with little natural resources and that suffers with a criminal economical blockade. Right, real scarcity. You can't just wish post-scarcity into being. The USSR also made the same pledge under much the same conditions, all while being in control of most of the world's natural resources. But, still, scarcity prevailed. > capitalism will not allocate the resources in a way that maximizes human benefit Where humans are deemed beneficial then capitalism will allocate towards maximizing human benefit. Where humans are not deemed beneficial, you cannot system yourself out of that. Capitalism itself has no thoughts or feelings towards humans, only humans do. And, indeed, you are quite right that humans by and large hate other humans and will do all kinds of things to "keep them down". The legal system goes to great lengths to ensure that humans cannot be come beneficial. That’s not capitalism, though.