Erik Reuter wrote:
The cheap answer is: have immigrants 'pay their dues' by doing the scut work, like they already do.... But more realisticly, we automate as much as possible, keeping the minimum necessary to maintain the machinery and infrastrustructure etc, and have the rest research how to automate the rest. Now, surely, a good portion of those liberated will swill away their freedom, and eventually get bored and go back to work voluntarily, solving a fair bit of that problem. But I think that the ones who are intelligent will spend their time productively, and come up with stuff more valuable that the work they could have produced (i think there is a saying in R&D that goes roughly 'the one pays for the other hundred'). At least I hope that would happen. The alternative is somewhat scary to me: everyone would continue working harder and better and harder and longer forever, never enjoying the fruits of all their labor.On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 12:47:27AM -0500, maru wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong Trent, but isn't the whole point of modern
society, technology, science, and liberal democracy to reduce the
amount of physical misery, mental anguish and sheer drudgery/work a
person has to go through
I wouldn't go so far as "the whole point", but it is an important part, yes.
I mean, I am not an economist, but when I see the wealth figures
heading really far north to the point where the wealthiest person
can have 90 billions (up from mere millions not that many centuries
ago), I cannot understand how anybody could begrudge a person wanting
a modest sum of in the thousands, which would suffice to keep bones
together after all too many years of toil.
A modest sum in the thousands? Like, say ten thousand dollars? Per year? For 30 years? Increasing at 2% per year for 70 years? Multiplied by 100 million people? $119,986,746,685,453? About 120 trillion dollars? The numbers rapidly become rather immodest, don't you think?
With all the wealth and production of goods, Trent, I ask you why
people should be forced to spend their best 'healthy' years doing
things that in the final analysis they really don't want to do
Why should anyone be forced to work? Why can't everyone just go around doing whatever the hell they want?
Why do we continue to work so hard when machines work so well?
Until we can make self-replicating, self-powering moderately intelligent machines to do ALL the drudge work, how can we avoid doing some of the drudge work ourselves?
And Erik, I don't think 120 trillion dollars over 70 years is all that much. How large would the economy get in that time? And what price happiness, anyway?
And if the money is a barrier, remember, I don't care how the resources are conveyed to the retirees, it is not relevant, whether it is in money or other financial instruments. I hear that farmers are paid really large sums to deliberately curtail crop production; why not take that wasted money, use it to buy the excess crops and give it to those retirees in some way or other (so they don't starve- an important thing)? That would appear win-win. And there are probably analogues in shelter too.
~Maru
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
