On 10/21/2013 03:00 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > This is a technological imperative. It is the only way we will be able > to live when robots and computers make human labor worthless. You > cannot opt out of the world as it is shaped by technology. Today you > cannot live without automobiles, electricity, telephones, the Internet > and so on. Yes, there are groups such as the Amish who hold some parts > of technology at arm's length, but even they cannot escape from it > completely.
Who wants to slow down technology? I want to stop the subjugation of people through threats of violence. A couple of points: If human labor is worthless, then wealth will be prevalent; and when wealth is prevalent, there will be a lot of people willing to share wealth. You don't have to force people to use your currency, fill out your forms, pay your taxes, so that you can then distribute the wealth through some central bureaucracy. None of these things: highways, airports, telephones, sewers, water, and nuclear power plants, have to be centralized through some government agency, which prevents competition. There are many people who are more than willing to provide the services that other people need. It's not socialism unless you make it socialism, which the government has done in many, many, cases. If I want to start a cable television company in my town, it's illegal because there is already a sanctioned cable television company. If I want to start up a bus service in my town, it's illegal because there's already a sanctioned bus service with which no one is allowed to compete. If I want to send my kids to an alternative school, well I can't do it because they are already taking the money from me for the public school. I am only trying to change one thing. Get consent. Stop threatening violence to achieve social solutions. The Woodlands, Tx is a city of almost 100,000 people, but until recently, you couldn't find it on a map because it wasn't incorporated; yet it is one of the most beautiful cities in Texas and the people there love it. All the rules are imposed through agreement amongst the landowners, and the landowners are responsible for violations that occur on their property -- in civil court -- not criminal. The city raises about $80 million per year in agreed-upon fees. This idea that agreements can be signed upon transfer of property, allows a city to do anything that the planners can dream up, from running the police and courts, to maintaining the parks, pools, roads, and sewer systems. These amenities don't have to be coerced from the top, down. People need courts, police, roads, sewers, power, cable, and everything else we take for granted in modern society; but we have grown accustomed to threatening violence to achieve the goals that some of us feel are needed. Well, if these goals are shared by everyone, then you don't need to threaten violence against people, to achieve them. You'll be able to get their consent. Entire cities can be built like this. If your idea to share robot-created wealth is a good one, then people will sign up. If you have to threaten to take someone's property or throw them in a cage because they don't want to pay for your idea, then perhaps it's not such a great idea afterall. We have marginalize and institutionalized violence, and this leads to ever-increasing debt, ever-increasing taxation, endless wars, a growing police state, and perpetual violence; and the only way to stop the degradation and deterioration of society, is to stop the violence at its most fundamental level. So get consent if you want someone to participate in your plan, because coercion is not making things any better for anyone. Craig
