3 ms·
Maybe also a good question is "what should they do". A lot of jobs are rubbish. That opinion rubs people the wrong way for totally acceptable reasons, but only
by tehchromic 11y ago
Maybe also a good question is "what should they do". A lot of jobs are rubbish. That opinion rubs people the wrong way for totally acceptable reasons, but only a hundred years ago, around 90% of people were farmers. Today it's 2%. I think it's fair to say that the cataclysmic effect that our human economy is having on the planet can not last in it's current configuration. Most people should be employed in building and maintaining the planetary biome... in other words, they should be: farmers, only a sort of high-tech, hi-fi, scientific mercenary warrior type of farmer. A plumber for example - the world will always need those - ought to be primarily concerned with diverting waste as a source feed for soil, in a clean and efficient way: a hero. But most jobs exist under a 100 year old paradigm which will change rather quickly. You might say they are "soon to be farmers" - that's the best case scenario. Other's would have us all be mercenaries and go out in a blaze of glory. Not me.
- pharke 11y agoReminds me of this talk https://youtu.be/21j_OCNLuYg https://youtu.be/21j_OCNLuYg and also happens to be my current mid-range goal. I've worked on a farm, gardened, and raised chickens growing up and I'm dead set on doing it again, the amount of work that goes into it vs. the amount of food and enjoyment that you get out of it makes it a no brainer if you can take the leap and buy a plot. Construction begins this summer and I couldn't be happier.
- yetanotheracc 11y agoYou are right. The world doesn't need engineers (we didn't run out of television sets). It needs farmers.
- duckingtest 11y agoI think you're ignoring the possibility of technical progress. Who says we will even need food in 100 years? Eating dying plants and dead animal bodies is, on the whole, a very, very inefficient way of getting energy from the sun.