4 ms·

Can you define what you mean by economic liberation? For most of economic history, I think the definition would have been freedom from famine and slavery and I

Can you define what you mean by economic liberation? For most of economic history, I think the definition would have been freedom from famine and slavery and I think on both counts we've been wildly successful. Both basically only occur in failed states, where there's either no government at all (Somalia, Sudan, parts of Iraq and Syria) or the government is an authoritarian dictatorship (North Korea, Venezuela) I ask, because I think you might be overestimating the ability of the current global system to produce "economic liberation", depending upon what you mean. A rough estimate of GDP per capita would put it at ~$20K if you adjust for purchasing power, less than $15K if you don't. That's well below what most people in the developed world would consider to be free of burden or worry and it assumes a completely equal distribution of all production, which is obviously unreasonable. We need to continue to push the ball forward in growing wealth by continuing to improve productivity, which is going to require continued advancements in technology like mass adoption of AI.

llamaimperative 2y ago
Oh sure, I'm not one of those "the world is so awful" people. We've made immense progress on a lot of very important dimensions. Fair point on the current output not producing enough to really give people their time back. And yes I agree, we should continue pushing productivity forward. My point is only that productivity growth by itself does not necessarily yield anything close to the optimal distribution of its benefits. In fact we have good reason to believe that higher tiers of technology which produce more technological leverage owned by fewer and fewer people are naturally antagonistic to optimal distribution of its benefits. I'll take a fairly expansive definition of "optimal distribution" here to just say we should shoot at least for a distribution of wealth that is socially and politically stable for a free society in the long run.
djeastm 2y ago
>A rough estimate of GDP per capita would put it at ~$20K if you adjust for purchasing power, less than $15K if you don't. Is that spread across only working adults or does it include children? A better metric to examine might be per family, if you have it.
alexashka 2y ago
> Can you define what you mean by economic liberation? Not having to work outside of providing basic necessities for yourself and the rest of humanity. As for GDP - economists have been embarrassing and discrediting themselves for decades - please don't cite their propaganda in discussions about the real world. You need to measure real world things. Can we grow enough food, can we build enough shelter, can we transport goods, can we make clothes, basic medicine? Without working 40 hours/week? The answer should be obvious. This insane talk of productivity is more economist propaganda. We've been plenty productive for a long time. The problem is an incompetent elite and a populace that continues to not believe their lying eyes, citing 'experts'.
pithanyChan 2y ago
a) to be free from the enforcement of someones desperate desire to hard-code envy into children via products, ads and media b) to not have schools and teachers filter and then reinforce pupils for jobs that serve class construction c) to make sure that every kid can get it's near infinite and non-hazardous (before creative construction) LEGOs that they can play with in peaceful environments where fathers and mothers have enough on their accounts to provide peaceful and unhealthy-stress-free environments and food and water c) so that anyone can at least try long enough, if they so wish, to become a polymath scientist, artist and craftsman, and if it doesn't work out, to never have to be angry at some pre-emptively envious people who create and abuse crisis to drive pointlessly higher and higher prices that are NOT supported by any logic or otherwise reasonable justification

llamaimperative 2y ago

Oh sure, I'm not one of those "the world is so awful" people. We've made immense progress on a lot of very important dimensions. Fair point on the current output not producing enough to really give people their time back. And yes I agree, we should continue pushing productivity forward. My point is only that productivity growth by itself does not necessarily yield anything close to the optimal distribution of its benefits. In fact we have good reason to believe that higher tiers of technology which produce more technological leverage owned by fewer and fewer people are naturally antagonistic to optimal distribution of its benefits. I'll take a fairly expansive definition of "optimal distribution" here to just say we should shoot at least for a distribution of wealth that is socially and politically stable for a free society in the long run.

djeastm 2y ago

>A rough estimate of GDP per capita would put it at ~$20K if you adjust for purchasing power, less than $15K if you don't. Is that spread across only working adults or does it include children? A better metric to examine might be per family, if you have it.

alexashka 2y ago

> Can you define what you mean by economic liberation? Not having to work outside of providing basic necessities for yourself and the rest of humanity. As for GDP - economists have been embarrassing and discrediting themselves for decades - please don't cite their propaganda in discussions about the real world. You need to measure real world things. Can we grow enough food, can we build enough shelter, can we transport goods, can we make clothes, basic medicine? Without working 40 hours/week? The answer should be obvious. This insane talk of productivity is more economist propaganda. We've been plenty productive for a long time. The problem is an incompetent elite and a populace that continues to not believe their lying eyes, citing 'experts'.

pithanyChan 2y ago

a) to be free from the enforcement of someones desperate desire to hard-code envy into children via products, ads and media b) to not have schools and teachers filter and then reinforce pupils for jobs that serve class construction c) to make sure that every kid can get it's near infinite and non-hazardous (before creative construction) LEGOs that they can play with in peaceful environments where fathers and mothers have enough on their accounts to provide peaceful and unhealthy-stress-free environments and food and water c) so that anyone can at least try long enough, if they so wish, to become a polymath scientist, artist and craftsman, and if it doesn't work out, to never have to be angry at some pre-emptively envious people who create and abuse crisis to drive pointlessly higher and higher prices that are NOT supported by any logic or otherwise reasonable justification