Live data from Hacker News

All poverty is energy poverty

omnibudsman.substack.com

411–420 of 466 posts

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#411

All poverty is institutional and societal poverty. People are poor not because of lack of energy, but because the societies they live in lack the inclusive institutions that can create those patterns for energy use, education, healthcare and anything else. When you put those institutions in place, the effect manifests itself as economic growth, energy use, increased education etc., which in turn strengthen those poli…

Was Man of the Hole poor? Was that a social poverty? And if not that specific instance, consider a theoretical lone hermit or tribes (say, the Sentinelese), not subject to any social pressures or constraints, but lacking in the necessities of a thriving life. Or similarly isolated peoples in preindustrial times. I'll allow that much poverty is socially imposed, particularly since the Industrial Revolution. I balk at…

Poverty is by definition a relative notion. A middle class occidental has access to culinary diversity, healthcare, transport speeds and indoor plumbing that not even kings could dream of a few centuries ago. Poverty is defined relative to the technological frontier - what is known and achievable in a certain age with reasonable effort and access to common resources.

> Was Man of the Hole poor? > Was that a social poverty?

Yes, he was. He may have chosen poverty freely, as was his right, but there is no doubt he was materially poor compared to most his contemporaries.

Furthermore, the main reason for that poverty was social - he lacked the very foundation onto which to build a productive economy, namely other people in his community. He was also constrained by repressive social institutions - his own life experience and culture and the unprovoked aggression by the farmers - and thus excluded from participating in the larger productive economy.

We can of course speculate about his reasons and worldview, but IMHO it's very plausible he may have wanted not to die relatively young of some preventable disease.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#412
post #390
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is more efficient than all the cars is electrified rail. That is an order of magnitude more energy efficient, more if you can manage to get near capacity high frequency trains. A lot of our energy expenditure is lifestyle satisfying. Asia and the better cities in Europe demonstrate you can build dense cities with excellent transit as an alternative to car dependency, but the US fairly universally rejects it from…

People always forget that it isn't a question of leaving American cities as-is and expecting everyone to give up cars. The solution starts with building walkable cities that have public transportation.

Public transit boosters usually understand that pedestrian friendly street design and higher density housing is also needed. The problem is NIMBYs who resist anything but single family house zoning. Not even duplexes are ok for these people.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An amish village is a laughable anachronism that only exist in the context of a much larger whole that is antithetical to the very values and way of life it practices because no larger scale society so constructed could exist or compete with other societies practicing opposing values. It's not a healthier better way to build a city its a tiny park on a corner lot surrounded by pollution and traffic.

First: yes, it is healthier for those living inside the park, compared to the alternative. Second: the point is not to build "a larger scale" version of those societies, but actually to replicate the idea of localism in many different places. Less EU and one-world government and more independent nation-states, if you will. Third: you can oppose the lifestyle and philosophy all you want, but it still is not slavery.

And this is how you arrive at needing walls and guns to keep people in - because we tend to vote with our feet and leave such sick authoritarian "utopias" at the price of risking our life - freedom is worth it.

Pretty much how all similar communist experiments had to change their country into a prison so that a "dreamer" such as yourself can have his "perfect" society.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#414
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are describing a world of slaves. How many people are you willing to sacrifice to achieve you vision?

Is participating jn an Amish village "slavery"? An Israeli Kibutz?

If you're not allowed to leave, YES.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#415
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 1800, almost everyone was destitute by current standards, even prosperous merchants. If you measure wealth by dollars or iPhone access, this tautologically true but it's not a good measure of how life was. A wealthy person had enough food, access to leisure, a large house with luxurious possessions and probably servants. Sure, health care might have been bad and they might have died of various epidemics. Their liv…

Then why did people migrate to where the industrial jobs were?

Maybe the alternative, whatever it was, seemed to be more horrible. Agriculture for example is really vulnerable to weather and other environmental factors. But the factory is always there, summer or winter, wet or dry season.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the better alternative?

A better alternative would be to have localised production and localised consumption of food and most basic goods. Stuff like not having foreign-cuisine restaurants and not buying salmon from thousands of kilometers away. Cloth production should follow the same idea. People should feel more attached to their birthplace and the goal should be to develop their skills locally with one company preferably. Strong bonds wi…

You appear to be ignorant of basic economics such as Ricardo's law of comparative advantage.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/comparativeadvantage.as...

What you have proposed is worse than what we have in every way. Transporting food and basic foods over long distances is cheap and very energy efficient. In fact it's more efficient than having a bunch of tiny factories in every city. People shouldn't be stuck living their whole lives in one place working for one company making shitty cloth or whatever.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#417
post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can it survive against a larger-scale opponent that wants to take its resources, though? Without a friendly superpower enforcing peace with an extraordinarily powerful military, that is.

Switzerland managed to do it for centuries already.

Switzerland's wealth is built on plunder and money laundering. That's not a model we should want to replicate anywhere else.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/nazis/reading...

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#419
post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switzerland managed to do it for centuries already.

Switzerland's wealth is built on plunder and money laundering. That's not a model we should want to replicate anywhere else. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/nazis/reading...

Well, good thing that I am not using them as example of "how to get rich", but only on "how to keep yourself small and still avoid being invaded by a stronger power".

But even if you want to talk about wealth of the countries, I'd be extremely eager to hear any example of any wealthy nation with a comparatively better moral ground than the Swiss.

Re: All poverty is energy poverty

#420
post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First: yes, it is healthier for those living inside the park, compared to the alternative. Second: the point is not to build "a larger scale" version of those societies, but actually to replicate the idea of localism in many different places. Less EU and one-world government and more independent nation-states, if you will. Third: you can oppose the lifestyle and philosophy all you want, but it still is not slavery.

And this is how you arrive at needing walls and guns to keep people in - because we tend to vote with our feet and leave such sick authoritarian "utopias" at the price of risking our life - freedom is worth it. Pretty much how all similar communist experiments had to change their country into a prison so that a "dreamer" such as yourself can have his "perfect" society.

You are still arguing the extreme version of a position of the argument, when I was arguing for the less radical side.

I am arguing for localism. Democratic governments that give more power to its people and their representatives in the lower spheres of power. People can (and should) vote with their feet, and communities can (and should) collaborate with each other.

Post reply on HN