I have made similar comments on other threads, so I apologize to the people that are reading this again.
Somebody made a comment on how people are going to go the SS disability route, and well, that is exactly the vision of what will happen according to the science fiction writers. You may think I am crazy, but there are a lot of things in fictional writing that turns out to be true. Basically in these stories, you have an aristocracy of huge proportions, to the point that the poor are literally separated from the ruling class. The movie Elysium took this to an extreme, where the ruling and privileged were on a space city away from Earth, and would let no one from Earth in. What is going to happen is the people that own the automation and dictate the laws of the land, will have much more power, and the majority of the people will be dependent upon the government for their sustainability. I'm sure there would be some jobs, but they would be hard to get for the insanely high demand for them. When I was thinking what would happen on the economics of things, I think the government would literally print the benefits of the citizenship, while the citizenship spends that money on the automated processes. The owners of these processes will continually get more and more cash, because the benefits are continually printed. There would be lavish lifestyles beyond what we can comprehend, while many would be poor and would experience stagnation in their lives.
Before I continue, I must state some things. There are things about this country that I don't like, but quite frankly I am thankful to be an American. I have a roof over my head, hot water, food, air conditioning and heat, and internet among other things. I'm writing on an online forum! There are probably billions of people that don't have this standard of living, and that is why I am thankful for being an American. We should be proud how far we have come.
With that said, I think in order for us to improve the lives of the vast majority while also enduring the changes of technology, we have to rid ourselves from the mindset of capitalism and free markets. I don't want socialism, and I don't want communism.
There are brilliant minds that study economies, I think we should put our brain power together to construct a new economy that embraces the change of technology while keeping the quality of life for the vast majority the same if not better than it is now. Technology is going to replace labor, and without labor, our whole premise of practicing Capitalism completely changes.
I have talked about a vision of a new economy, and I have been told it is socialism, communism, or utopian. It is neither one of those. Could there be corruption? Yes. I feel that no matter what governing system we construct, the human mind will always be able to exploit others for themselves. But I do know that with a different economy there would be vast differences in the development of human brains. The human mind can develop in an infinite amount of ways, as per longitudinal studies of various cultures around the world. In other words, if self-maximization is not favored in this society, the vast majority will develop not needing to self-maximize. And, if we focus on quality of life rather than standards of living and the material world, people would be happier and more supportive of the culture they live in. Finally, this idea is an attempt to harmonize with the advancements of technology. You may not like it, but at least it is an idea to think critically about. I urge people reading this, to think how a new economy could work with the advancements of technology.
This idea is titled The Resource Based Economy, and it is not my idea. It is an idea that I have pondered about for a long time, and I love how it is an idea of an economy and it isn't the isms. I personally like the idea, and would like to see humanity implement it. (Venus Project)
With my understanding, there are two core assumptions:
1.) The Earth is a super-organism.
2.) Every single human being is entitled to the world's resources because they are human.
And, we would work to automate the resource distribution system (RDS). The system would be computerized, and would monitor all resources in real time. It would send resources based on what is available, and if the resources are starting to get low and are not available for use, the distribution system would deny all orders for that resource. The goal is to use resources, but to not make the resources extinct if at all possible. My addage to this idea would be to put into the algorithms of this system a philosophy of sustainability. We should not consume resources faster than the rate of replenishment. Does that mean we change how we consume? Yes. It makes logical sense, that if we wanted more to consume for ourselves, then there should be less people. Considering that we are over populated, I think humanity should think about decreasing the amount of people on this planet regardless of the arguments of freedom, would be in the best interest to life overall on this planet (The Gaia Hypothesis). This would be not only healthier for the planet, but would increase the amount that could be consumed on a per person basis.
Overseeing the system and repairing it when it needs it, would be done on a voluntary basis. The incentive is the honor incentive, the same reason why people go and volunteer for the armed forces. People that work to keep the way of life for billions would be revered by that society, and people would want to give back to a society that provides such a great quality of life.
The goal is to automate the distribution of resources and rid humanity from labor. Therefore, humanity would be free to pursue what makes them human (humanism). So if my calling is to help people in need, then I may become a doctor. If I want to put away violent people behind bars, then I would be a lawyer. People would choose what to do through internal motivators rather than the incentive for profit, and would arguably work at a better quality. By the way, it is theorized there would be a lot less crime because people resort to crime when resources are too scarce, or to ensure survival (corruption). If resources are provided to everyone fairly, there would be a lot less crime. However it is noted, that there would still be mental illness and violent people. I've read a book on violent offenders, and there are cases were people were born into a very nurturing family and environment. Yet this particular person murdered his entire family. Therefore, there may lie a genetic component to violent behavior. Who knows, if we perfect gene therapy, not only could we cure mental illness but we could radically reduce the amount of violence in this society.
I will stop, there is more. Again, at least this is an attempt. It is easy for someone to criticize a system or person and not provide a solution. I think the majority of us do that. I read an economist regularly and he is really good at saying why someone is wrong in their logic or understanding, but refuses to say what should be there instead, if that makes sense. To me, that is the easy way out.
If you don't like this idea, that is fine. But I want to show people that it is possible to think of economies that are not capitalism, socialism, or communism. We have to start thinking of societies that embraces and harmonizes with the change of technology, rather than entrenching in our ways to greatly diminish the quality of life for many many people.
"Don't care. I don't care about polar bears, and I don't care about people who think our policies should be dictated by the effects on polar bears. Polar bears are basically Ice Monsters. Like that thing in the second Star Wars movie. **** em. And anything with more than four legs." -Deuce
One of you will end up here next!
Japan is fast-tracking to develop computers that can program themselves and fight as soldiers.
It's a good thing we have Arnold Schwarzenneger.
I feel sorry for my kids and their kids (when they have them).
Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields
Example: 40 years ago, an architectural firm employed dozens of architects and engineers, and sometimes over a hundred draftsmen. Now, a single person or two can accomplish the same amount of work alone. That's why architecture schools are shrinking.
There's a coming storm sooner or later in this. I realize it's unavoidable. It's also why the movie "Terminator" wasn't as fictional and fantastical as it seemed in its basic premise.
Strippin and hookin are safe.