4 ms·
>This is idiotic, especially when we don't have scarcity any more. We are nowhere near living in a post-scarcity world - a world isn't possible anyway (assumin
by mason240 12y ago
>This is idiotic, especially when we don't have scarcity any more.
We are nowhere near living in a post-scarcity world - a world isn't possible anyway (assuming an earth based society) because there is a finite amount of resources such as land, water, minerals, ect.
- astazangasta 12y agoThere is plenty of land, water, minerals, etc. We just need to use it efficiently. Agriculture needs to go, for example. This is not impossible on Earth. As for whether we are post-scarcity, our productive capacity is high enough to give everyone a decent life - global GDP per capita is $13,000. We just need to organize to achieve this.
- festivusr 12y agoAgriculture needs to go where, exactly?
- logfromblammo 12y agoI'm just guessing as to the intent of the previous poster, here: Up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_farming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_farming
- AndrewKemendo 12y agoUp. Vertical hydroponics are absolutely the future.
- adrianN 12y agoThey make zero sense from an energy point of view. We have way more land than energy.
- astazangasta 12y agoWe're basically tapped out in terms of arable land usage; you should look at the numbers some time, they are alarming (I recommend the FAO's "Livestock's Long Shadow"). Meanwhile, the energy budget of the planet exceeds by many orders of magnitude what is required to satisfy the meager energy needs of humans. What we need to do is stop dispersing our energy consumption through soil, plant matter, cow intestines, etc., before it gets to humans.
- anonbanker 12y agoI even do vertical farming in Minecraft.
- BrandonMarc 12y agoExactly. Humans have been doing agriculture for 10's of 1000's of years. Simply stating, "Well, that just has to go, period." without explanation (and then moving on from there) is cute, and ridiculous.
- aros 12y agoYour comment is overly simplistic to the point of nonsense. Where exactly do you expect us to get food if you decide to just rid the world of agriculture?
- PerfectElement 12y ago> We are nowhere near living in a post-scarcity world I agree that we're not near living in a post-scarcity society, but not necessarily because of technical limitations. Humans don't need infinite amounts of land, water, minerals, etc. The biggest problem is that a scarcity-based economy hinders the development of a post-scarcity society, by creating artificial scarcity.
- IndianAstronaut 12y agoHumans don't need it, but they want it. Everyone wants a bigger or fancier house, a bigger car, to travel more cheaply, to travel further(space tourism anyone?), etc.
- StavrosK 12y agoThat's only valid if people would consume infinitely. There's clearly enough dirt and oxygen on earth that we can give it away, even though there's a finite amount of it.
- drcube 12y agoThere is, however, an infinite amount of information, which is basically free to copy and transmit anywhere in the world. So to the extent that our lives exist on the internet, we are already living in a post-scarcity world. And considering that robots already took all the agriculture and manufacturing jobs, and we're supposedly split between "knowledge workers" and "service workers", I'd say the problem of automation taking our jobs still has a long way to go.