Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

kemendo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 164 posts

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#151

Post by defrost »

kerkeslager wrote: post #140
defrost wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies to pivot into being long term energy providers rather than being solely relient on fossil fuel extraction . Countries are well able to strike…

> Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. I said companies care about profits, not short-term or long-term profits, and the distinction between short- and long-term still doesn't bring in ethics. > Pressure is on various traditional foss…

> Recycling plastic isn't real, it's a greenwashing campaign by petroleum comp

Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did.

> This is exactly the sort of pro-corporate nonsense that I'm talking about here. Fossil fuel extractors should be forced, not asked, to pay, not get paid for the damage they are causing.

Have you read the report yet?

> You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they cause

Did I? I have to ask, is english your first or third language?

Rage on my friend, fight the power .. and work on your conversational skills, launching in with heavy handled accusations based on your own assumptions won't always get the results you might desire.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#152

Post by AndrewKemendo »

pdonis wrote: post #145
imtringued wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Developing countries receive aid for geopolitical reasons, not to actually help them out. The IMF gives contradictory advice that doesn't help. China, Korea, Japan etc all ignored IMF advice and see where that got them. >In other words, solutions to the scarcity problems you describe in less developed countries appear to me to be primarily political, not economic. Uhm, that was the entire point of the paper. There is…

> Developing countries receive aid for geopolitical reasons The point isn't why those countries agree to receive aid, it's why there is political support in developed countries for sending it. If the paper's hypothetical were true, that people in developed countries prefer to increase their own personal happiness instead of helping others, the aid would never be sent because voters in developed countries would never…

At the macro scale they are the same thing

The failure of direct aid as described is entirely inclusive of all actors priorities involved.

There is no true global cooperative desire to solve these problems so it doesn’t happen, and these signaling actions - which is what they are - are known to be ineffective.

CFCs and Polio were eradicated. For all its flaws were pulled together to get through COVID. We can actually do stuff we want to do at global scale when we really want to

Go read the book on medicins san frontiers to get a closer look at the massive differences in what the “Aid” community does versus they claim to do

The fear of scarcity and all its downstream effects of hoarding and individualism

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#153

Post by AndrewKemendo »

pdonis wrote: post #139
imtringued wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So their people have no incentive to create any wealth through cooperation and trade, since they're not going to gain any benefit from it anyway. In other words, they know they will have no private property rights in what they produce, so they don't bother producing. That sounds way too much like capitalism. >What determines what you call "access to resources" (itself a misleading way to put it, IMO) in developed co…

> That sounds way too much like capitalism. No, it's basic free market economics. "Free market" does not mean the same thing as capitalism, although many capitalists (i.e., people who want to get their hands on as much capital as they can, by hook or by crook) like to claim that it does. Free markets promote freedom and wealth creation. Capitalism can under some circumstances, but under others it undermines those thi…

This is fully reflective of what I intended to convey thank you!

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#154

Post by kerkeslager »

defrost wrote: post #151
kerkeslager wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies with shareholders, expecially long term institution investors, can be bent to care about more than simple profits - while still profiting albeit not as much as if they chased nothing but maximal short term gains. I said companies care about profits, not short-term or long-term profits, and the distinction between short- and long-term still doesn't bring in ethics. > Pressure is on various traditional foss…

> Recycling plastic isn't real, it's a greenwashing campaign by petroleum comp Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did. > This is exactly the sort of pro-corporate nonsense that I'm talking about here. Fossil fuel extractors should be forced, not asked, to pay, not get paid for the damage they are causing. Have you read the report yet? > You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they…

> Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did.

You said, "Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies [...] Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors [...] That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials."

Quiz: which recycled material comes from fossil fuels?

> Have you read the report yet?

Which report?

> > You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they cause

> Did I?

Yes, you did. You said: "Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors to invest in parallel atmospheric carbon extraction".

That's just rewarding fossil fuel extractors for their bad behavior with government contracts.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#155

Post by MichaelZuo »

kerkeslager wrote: post #150
MichaelZuo wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... This seems like a stretch to be honest, especially since most HN users use pseudonyms. Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? e.g. even someone very inclined to go against your comments and arguments woul…

> Your still assuming their behaviour in actuality can be ascertained via what they type out in the comments box... Please refrain from telling me what I think. You don't know what I think. > Have you ever considered they might just want to rile you up online, for whatever reasons, but in real life know perfectly well what's what? I've come across this pro-corporate, anti-human ideology in person as well.

> Please refrain from telling me what I think. You don't know what I think.

Huh? The quoted section is not even suggesting to take it up as your own thoughts, let alone 'telling'. I'm not 'telling' anyone to even read my comments in the first place...

> I've come across this pro-corporate, anti-human ideology in person as well.

It seems really unlikely that you've met even 1/10000 of the user-base in real life, nor likely would it be a representative cross section, so how does this relates to the parent comments?

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#156

Post by defrost »

kerkeslager wrote: post #154
defrost wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recycling plastic isn't real, it's a greenwashing campaign by petroleum comp Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did. > This is exactly the sort of pro-corporate nonsense that I'm talking about here. Fossil fuel extractors should be forced, not asked, to pay, not get paid for the damage they are causing. Have you read the report yet? > You're literally proposing we reward these companies for the harm they…

> Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did. You said, "Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies [...] Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors [...] That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials." Quiz: which re…

> Quiz: which recycled material comes from fossil fuels?

Steel for one, right now I'm partnered with a friend decommisioning an offshore platform - lots of materials there.

> Which report?

Keep moving up comment until you reach my first comment - I assumed (bad mve on my part) that you'd arrived here by some kind of context rather than randomly landing on something you wanted to launch your particular thinkys from.

The report in question addresses sustainable use of global resources at scale, it's not merely focused on greenwashing plastic.

> That's just rewarding fossil fuel extractors for their bad behavior with government contracts.

Err, no. It's changing the deals that have been done in the past to include teardowns and restorative work (carbon capture). You'll notice I was disparaging about carbon capture for the good reason that to date nobody has a project proposed on the scale of recovery to match the downsides.

If they can't actually meet a "zero emission" or better balance then such deals should preclude extraction.

You're coming at this with a whole set of your baggage.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#157

Post by lorepieri »

skeledrew wrote: post #82

Quite a bit of interesting history here. This resonates with my thoughts on the matter. On the AI/automation point, my largest curiosity is what will happen when we get to 99+% of the automation of all value-providing labor. At that point, the concept of wage labor will be meaningless, and along with it the wherewithal of exchange which currently powers the world economy (money). If the vast majority of the populatio…

One possibility is total cooperation on the basic needs (free for all) and a "capitalistic" system on the luxury needs. See https://lorenzopieri.com/post_scarcity/

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#158

Post by kerkeslager »

defrost wrote: post #156
kerkeslager wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who mentioned plastics .. that's correct, you did. You said, "Pressure is on various traditional fossil fuel comanies [...] Countries are well able to strike deal with fossil fuel extractors [...] That said large scale consumers, entire countries, purchasing blocs, can put pressure on resource providers to change behaviour, and on secondary processing to take increased input from recycled materials." Quiz: which re…

> Quiz: which recycled material comes from fossil fuels? Steel for one, right now I'm partnered with a friend decommisioning an offshore platform - lots of materials there. > Which report? Keep moving up comment until you reach my first comment - I assumed (bad mve on my part) that you'd arrived here by some kind of context rather than randomly landing on something you wanted to launch your particular thinkys from. T…

> Keep moving up comment until you reach my first comment - I assumed (bad mve on my part) that you'd arrived here by some kind of context rather than randomly landing on something you wanted to launch your particular thinkys from.

Ah, no, I didn't read that report. It's 181 pages. I was responding to something you said was in the report. Hopefully it's safe to assume that what you said about the report was accurate?

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#159

Post by littlestymaar »

orwin wrote: post #146
littlestymaar wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To be fair, the black death killed France's first demographic transition Never heard of that, any sources to recommend on the topic? > Abundance of food, and local peace is clearly the common denominator for demographic transition That sounds really suspicious as description of France in the eighteenth century…

Louis-Henri Fournet was probably the historian I've read that from first. You can find the book on Amazon, but it's in French (tableau synoptique de l'histoire du monde). I used to be quite interested in the first empire era, then found his book on it, then found the book I've told you about and now I just read stuff on western history, from Louise de Savoie to the first world war 18 to 20 millions in a smaller terri…

> Louis-Henri Fournet was probably the historian I've read that from first. You can find the book on Amazon, but it's in French (tableau synoptique de l'histoire du monde)

Merci (ça ne va pas poser trop de problème ;))

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#160

Post by pdonis »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #149
pdonis wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the individual desire to increase personal happiness beyond basic needs for reproduction, significantly outweighs their desire to end that same extreme poverty condition for others...my hypothesis is that this is a learned/taught perspective, and based on a foundational idea that is no longer true, aka a myth. I think you're missing my point. My point is that, before we even get to your hypothesis about why the cla…

Your perspective boils down to “we’ve already tried to and failed.” To which I would argue, in fact, we have not tried it, even barely Actually trying would look more like the following: The children who are currently mining for Mica for beauty products on behalf of LoReal would be stockholders outright of stock in LVM, as a result of their work, not literal slaves You are suggesting that the process that we have use…

> Your perspective boils down to “we’ve already tried to and failed.”

We have already tried "redistributing wealth" by having rich countries give stuff to poor countries, yes. And yes, it has failed.

> Actually trying would look more like the following:

The children who are currently mining for Mica for beauty products on behalf of LoReal would be stockholders outright of stock in LVM, as a result of their work, not literal slaves

Ok, fine, but how am I, as a citizen of the US, supposed to make this happen? Isn't it a matter of the political system in the country where this is going on? What does any of this have to do with how I, as a citizen of the US, make use of the wealth I have helped to create?

> the people who hoard wealth and power will hoard more wealth and power up until socially that is no longer acceptable.

As I asked you in another post upthread, what's your definition of "hoarding"? Am I, as a citizen of the US, hoarding wealth and power because I have retirement savings and because I choose to spend money on things that are not, strictly speaking, necessities of life? (Which includes the means of participating in this very discussion; the forum we are using, and the underlying infrastructure that makes it possible, would not exist if everyone just focused on the necessities of life.)

> we need to determine ways to distribute or rather, not steal in the first place, the value that labor is creating

In a free market, that distribution occurs automatically, because people get paid according to the marginal value they create. While I am totally in favor of people having ownership shares in things like factories, the reason for that is not that it "distributes wealth better" but that it increases the marginal value that a person can create, and therefore increases their income by straightforward free market economics. (It also, though, comes with taking on increased risk, because as an owner you are directly exposed to all the business risks that a wage-earning employee offloads to their employer. Some people prefer not to make that tradeoff.)

If all that isn't happening, the obvious solution is to fix whatever political issue is making the market not free and therefore preventing it from happening. Again, that has nothing to do with what I, as a citizen of the US, choose to do with the wealth I have helped to create.

Post reply on HN