3 ms·
BZZZ! WRONG ANSWER! First and foremost this article totally disregards technological acceleration. Its conclusions draw on a past that will look as quaint as t
by transfire 13y ago
BZZZ! WRONG ANSWER!
First and foremost this article totally disregards technological acceleration. Its conclusions draw on a past that will look as quaint as the 1700s do today, and in only a few more decades.
Secondly, the tax example is the perfect demonstration of the fallacy of the argument. Those jobs have only managed to grow b/c the government keeps creating ever more complex tax regulations. Which is exactly what happens when a society puts the "jobs numbers" and "full employment" above actual economic efficacy -- They have to create bullshit work to keep people busy.
- ballard 13y agoThe other point is we have to look at a way that somehow voluntarily redistributes some gigawealth for necessities of those that are struggling to survive. There is so much wealth now that survival is pretty much assured, but it's the degree of pleasantness and dignity where a little can go a long ways.