33 ms·
> Someone has to buy for the system to work, no? Well yeah, but not human consumers. Businesses can buy from other businesses and that can be the only survivin
by Miner49er 1mo ago
> Someone has to buy for the system to work, no?
Well yeah, but not human consumers. Businesses can buy from other businesses and that can be the only surviving part of the economy. Even further, maybe those businesses are fully autonomous. There's no reason this wouldn't work, as far as I can tell.
The economy would be much more focused. It would be mostly energy, materials, and tech.
- pixl97 1mo agoExactly, it seems many if not most people are trapped in an 1800s ideal of how an economy works. "You do work, you get money, you spend money, you do work" In fact the entire "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." statement is in full force here. It's impossible for most people to envision an economy without them even though there are economic systems that will work without them.
- nobody9999 1mo ago>It's impossible for most people to envision an economy without them It's possible that's the case because (at least in the US) 68% of GDP is consumer spending[0]. As such, 2/3 of the economy is "them." [0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DPCERE1Q156NBEA/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DPCERE1Q156NBEA/
- account42 1mo agoYes, that's the inefficient part of the economy that can and will be eliminated as far as the elite are concerned. The only reason that hasn't been achieved yet is because so far you still need manual labor to support the wishes of the elite.