Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-15-2018, 06:34 PM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,592,327 times
Reputation: 4817

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
In a less humorous vein... a minority can't live some totally detached life, robots or no. The situation will self-correct - economically, democratically, or violently.
What would the "self-correcting" mechanism be?

The elimination of the "useless" would be completely natural and economically optimal for the system. Democracy has very well proven to be a joke. And good luck with violence. We'd just kill each other. Anyone deemed a real threat will be incarcerated as a terrorist. And held indefinitely without charge if necessary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2018, 06:52 PM
 
Location: Forest bathing
3,203 posts, read 2,483,098 times
Reputation: 7268
Quote:
Originally Posted by hikernut View Post
So you are suggesting we should all be kicked out of the house at 18, naked and penniless and expected to "fend for ourselves"? That's the ultimate in self sufficiency.
I wasn't kicked out naked but had to work for my living costs and schooling expenses. My mom did kick in $100 per quarter (tuition was $88/quarter, minumum wage was $1.25) for the first two years but i had to pay for everything else including food, rent, books, etc.

With hard work and living frugally, we are now retired somewhat comfortably. If i could do it coming from an abusive home, then anyone can. It did help that i was college material. My husband couldnt afford to attend as his dad passed away and he had to help out his mom. But, he worked hard and together we built a life. So, no excuses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2018, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,712 posts, read 6,754,936 times
Reputation: 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
What would the "self-correcting" mechanism be?

The elimination of the "useless" would be completely natural and economically optimal for the system. Democracy has very well proven to be a joke. And good luck with violence. We'd just kill each other. Anyone deemed a real threat will be incarcerated as a terrorist. And held indefinitely without charge if necessary.
Since we're into technocratic suggestions, I will point out that Robert Heinlein said "never hand the problem of overpopulation to a mathematician (he'd just shoot half of them)." Optimal solutions that don't depend on genocide are probably more optimal than those that do.

We either negotiate our way to a better system with population participation (something like democracy), or we change the operating policies to reflect reality (something like economic reform) or we all shoot as many of each other as possible and hope there are pieces to pick up.*

Since I don't believe you can legislate change and would prefer not to have to stack five billion corpses, my efforts are on economic reform - and I mean reform way past tinkering with the details.

Also called "windmills," but I enjoy tilting at them.


* Which, unfortunately, is the road we seemed to have swerved drunkenly onto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2018, 11:14 PM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,592,327 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Optimal solutions that don't depend on genocide are probably more optimal than those that do.
From the standpoint of whom?

If you read any of the robotics thread, I predicted that the useless masses would be mollified at a low level of resource consumption, and encouraged not to breed. But that still relies on charity, which I don't believe is a defining feature of the megarich.

I hope for better. Much better. We will have the opportunity for greater freedom than we've ever known; prosperous and interesting lives as a birthright. Do what you like. But we need to open our eyes and *collectively* fight for that outcome while we still (theoretically at least) have a chance.

But the propaganda and misinformation, antagonistic and divisive level of discourse, and utter lack of cooperation on everything, are not encouraging.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 11:40 AM
 
1,514 posts, read 890,316 times
Reputation: 1961
Saw a funny pic that I wanted to share:



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,712 posts, read 6,754,936 times
Reputation: 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
From the standpoint of whom?
From the prospective corpses, maybe?

Maybe I'm just a mush-headed, soft-hearted bleeding lib'ral, but solutions that don't involve the extermination of some large part of the population appeal to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 11:54 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,712 posts, read 6,754,936 times
Reputation: 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by txbullsfan View Post
Saw a funny pic that I wanted to share:
Good one.

I can't help but note that there are more people, with more wealth, in the S-by-S'ers box.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 12:48 PM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,592,327 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
From the prospective corpses, maybe?
Right. But if they had a say in the matter they wouldn't be dead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 12:51 PM
 
10,075 posts, read 7,536,844 times
Reputation: 15501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Good one.

I can't help but note that there are more people, with more wealth, in the S-by-S'ers box.
there is also less money per person there too

being equally poor doesn't make things better
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2018, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,712 posts, read 6,754,936 times
Reputation: 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
there is also less money per person there too

being equally poor doesn't make things better
Well, it is just a cartoon.

We need not be "equally poor." It's just as within reach to be "equally rich." Have you ever looked at what distributing the wealth of the 1% to the rest of the population means on an individual and family level? I don't advocate any such distribution (by force or fiat)... but an economic system that blunts such transuranic density of wealth would benefit well over 99% of us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top