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

Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

lareviewofbooks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 96 posts

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#31

Post by maxxxxx »

jstanley wrote: post #7
brightball wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post scarcity is one of those terms that just does not make sense. How much is enough for everybody? What if some people want more? Who decides exactly when something isn’t scarce anymore? I’ve yet to see anything that convinced me that post scarcity is anything more that a recent buzzword because fundamentally...supply and demand can’t ever actually go away.

The way a post-scarcity society could come to exist is if we stop doing any activity in the physical world and everything moves online. We've actually gone quite a long way down that road already. I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years or so, most physical-world activity has stopped. Once basic electricity, internet connectivity, food, etc. is provided automatically, and all work and leisure is conducted online, the…

That's my hope. Maybe the period where humans had an impact on the planet will be short lived and they will disappear again. When I look at my 50 year old body and its slow decline I wouldn't mind getting rid of it and live virtually.

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#32

Post by vzcx »

imgabe wrote: post #24
brightball wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post scarcity is one of those terms that just does not make sense. How much is enough for everybody? What if some people want more? Who decides exactly when something isn’t scarce anymore? I’ve yet to see anything that convinced me that post scarcity is anything more that a recent buzzword because fundamentally...supply and demand can’t ever actually go away.

I think of it like oxygen. We don't pay for the air we breathe. You don't need an "air" utility to pipe breathable air into your house and have to pay them a monthly bill (yet anyway). You just breathe. You want to breathe harder? Go ahead. Everyone on Earth could run wind sprints all day and we wouldn't run out of air. It replenishes itself naturally. Once we can do the same with potable water, food, shelter, we'll…

Once we can do the same for uranium, platinum, N-(4-Methoxybenzylidene)-4-butylaniline, polyisoprene, hydrogen fuel cells, lithium ion batteries, silicon wafers, liquid oxygen, nitrogen tetroxide, hydrazine...

we'll be at a post-scarcity economy.

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#33

Post by cat199 »

ddnb wrote: post #19
maxxxxx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't even need basic income. Just let people's incomes rise at the same rate the economy grows instead of funneling all gains to the business owners like it happened over the last 30 years or so. Unfortunately in the US the Republicans seem hell bent to accelerate the trend towards more income concentration at the top with their tax plans. I don't know how to change this realistically. It probably needs some cha…

The incomes need to rise but can the business owners be forced? The basic income would make sure everyone gets the extra income.

tax+spend; not supporting 'trickle down' economics w/r/t other gov't policies, actually enforcing monopoly laws, regulating other areas in favor of small business (e.g. FCC used to have media ownership laws to keep media companies smaller) etc..

if everyone has more money but there is no cap on the top, things will just get more expensive, and then more basic income will be provided, and the cycle will continue..

not necessarily a fan or a detractor of any/all of these things, but just chiming in.

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#35

Post by archevel »

misja111 wrote: post #20
jstanley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way a post-scarcity society could come to exist is if we stop doing any activity in the physical world and everything moves online. We've actually gone quite a long way down that road already. I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years or so, most physical-world activity has stopped. Once basic electricity, internet connectivity, food, etc. is provided automatically, and all work and leisure is conducted online, the…

Although electricity, food, etc. are not provided automatically yet, I don't think that in the developed world they are scarce anymore. People don't chase a promotion, work overhours or buy a lottery ticket in the hope of being able to obtain more food. It might not be a gourmet meal in a Michelin star restaurant, but you surely can buy as much food as you need to never be hungry. If you want a car, then at least in…

> So a true post-scarcity will never exist. People will just invent new goods or services to go after in the future when today's iphones and sportscars have become affordable. Not because they need them, but for the simple fact that they are difficult to obtain.

This assumes material wealth remain a source of status. If all things are easily aquired, then there is no reason to hold people with certain possesion in high regard. Instead knowing social codes and ability might become even more important. Perhaps the exception would be historical artifacts abd handmade things, asuming those could not be perfectly copied...

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#36

Post by maxxxxx »

jules wrote: post #14
twoquestions wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing enough for everyone to exist is trivial, what's distinctly non-trivial is satisfying those needs in an economic system like ours. Right now our economy requires access to necessities to be precarious, to motivate people to sell their time and most of their freedom to Those In Charge to buy them. The alternative to this, where everyone has what they need to exist without submitting to one leader or another,…

The only reason we have enough is because of that economic system. Take a look at Venezuela. It ought to terrify everyone that so many take what we have for granted.

We shouldn't always point at obviously dysfunctional examples when we look at problems in our society. There is no natural law that things will always end up like Venezuela or the Soviet Union when we change things.

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#37

Post by krapp »

francisofascii wrote: post #26
jstanley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way a post-scarcity society could come to exist is if we stop doing any activity in the physical world and everything moves online. We've actually gone quite a long way down that road already. I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years or so, most physical-world activity has stopped. Once basic electricity, internet connectivity, food, etc. is provided automatically, and all work and leisure is conducted online, the…

I never thought of moving more to the online world a good thing, but this makes me question that. Let's consider a wealthy art collector. It would seem to be better for the collector to buy digital art, which is electronic and reproducible, than to buy up physical paintings, which means less paintings available for others.

> It would seem to be better for the collector to buy digital art, which is electronic and reproducible, than to buy up physical paintings, which means less paintings available for others.

Except the experience of viewing physical artwork is better than viewing a digital representation, in the same way that physically traveling to another country to experience the culture and atmosphere is better than simply seeing it in the 3D view of Google maps. The map is not the destination, and a PNG of a painting isn't a painting. It's only in science fiction that the physical and virtual worlds are indistinguishable.

Notwithstanding the value that also exists in the rarity of physical artwork itself, and in collecting it because it's not infinitely reproducible.

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#38

Post by marcosdumay »

misja111 wrote: post #20
jstanley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way a post-scarcity society could come to exist is if we stop doing any activity in the physical world and everything moves online. We've actually gone quite a long way down that road already. I wouldn't be surprised if in 100 years or so, most physical-world activity has stopped. Once basic electricity, internet connectivity, food, etc. is provided automatically, and all work and leisure is conducted online, the…

Although electricity, food, etc. are not provided automatically yet, I don't think that in the developed world they are scarce anymore. People don't chase a promotion, work overhours or buy a lottery ticket in the hope of being able to obtain more food. It might not be a gourmet meal in a Michelin star restaurant, but you surely can buy as much food as you need to never be hungry. If you want a car, then at least in…

> So why do many people still work so hard?

Let me make you a question. For how long will you still afford all that stuff if you simply quit working?

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#39

Post by maxxxxx »

cat199 wrote: post #33
ddnb wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incomes need to rise but can the business owners be forced? The basic income would make sure everyone gets the extra income.

tax+spend; not supporting 'trickle down' economics w/r/t other gov't policies, actually enforcing monopoly laws, regulating other areas in favor of small business (e.g. FCC used to have media ownership laws to keep media companies smaller) etc.. if everyone has more money but there is no cap on the top, things will just get more expensive, and then more basic income will be provided, and the cycle will continue.. not…

I wonder how things would work out if we had a system where companies beyond a certain size are strongly discouraged. I think the economy would be much healthier if we had many small businesses instead of behemoths like apple and Google

Re: Post-Scarcity Economics (2013)

#40

Post by vzcx »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #30
brightball wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post scarcity is one of those terms that just does not make sense. How much is enough for everybody? What if some people want more? Who decides exactly when something isn’t scarce anymore? I’ve yet to see anything that convinced me that post scarcity is anything more that a recent buzzword because fundamentally...supply and demand can’t ever actually go away.

Fundamentally they can't, but that's not what the concept is aiming at. What we can do is to drop costs of things people need (or want) in their daily lives to the point that supply/demand basically stops working for them on an aggregate scale. If we do this to the point that any person can live a full life and participate in the society at large without having to exchange labour for resources or worrying about their…

Ah, but what is a "full life?" Might someone believe that they need something more rare in order to attain it?

Isn't "post-scarcity" just taking the limit as supply reaches infinity, and thus just another term for "asymptotically cheap?" Do we really need a "fresh new" economic theory to talk about this?

Post reply on HN