• Alterecho@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think that for sure one of the drawbacks of the labor to currency system is the blind consumerism and the unethical conditions necessary to, say, make a bacon cheeseburger. I think the unethical parts of that interaction have more to do with corporate price-gouging and abuse of labor than the consumer themselves, who (in our current system) is kept intentionally blind to the real cost of their meal.

    I think that for sure rent-seeking is one of those things that, in this theoretical government, would need to be addressed. Landlords and speculators are clearly opportunists with no connection to the stuff they milk value from, and that’s problematic.

    On reflection, ultimately I have no problem with the premise that people don’t necessarily need to understand how to grow wheat, or even know someone who owns wheat, in order to consume the labor of a farmer- so long as that farmer is capable of truly leveraging their labor favorably and also benefits from that interaction. In that scenario, the farmer also uses the abstraction, which allows them to really utilize all of their labor through a larger base of people to sell to. They can also put this theoretical currency towards things that contribute to their fulfillment and that of their family members without knowing the person who produces those things personally, and so on.

    I think one place I’m struggling with this is I’m having a hard time conceptualizing how people with more ephemeral skills would be able to leverage that skill into the resources necessary to obtain other types of fulfillment without a way to hold and transfer the value they generate. I’m sure there are philosophers who’ve written books on books about it, and I just need to find their work lol.


    I think that we stopped using horses and adapted systems to do similar work, for sure, but that was after we had already iterated into the saddle, the cart, the wagon, carriage, etc. Horse to car is a big step if we look at the two of them without the greater context, but it was thousands of years of technology and iteration before we got there. They’re fundamentally interrelated- I mean heck, we even measure the power of an engine by horses.

    I agree that the natural next step economically is coming, and that’s a fact- the questions in my eyes are: what’s the horse, what’s the carriage, and what are we replacing the horse with?

    • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cybernetics. The needs of people are essentially known and predictable. We can just make them and give them to people. That is also kinda how most of human history worked and it was fine then. It could be fine now, even better with computer data analysis and rational processing.

      Sure there will be exceptions like little Japanese computer parts. However some democratic process could be used. Plenty of writers and scifi stories have possible systems. We can figure that out when we get there.

      • Alterecho@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m actually not not into the idea of being able to instantly and accurately judge the needs of a whole nation of people. I mean shit, we already collect so much data through smart watches that once we are able to accurately measure metabolic rate, that’s like 90% of it right there I think lol

        • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is a book, the people’s republic of Walmart.

          Basically every company with sufficient money does exactly this and they are very effective at it. Just what if instead of using the tech to make Walmart slightly more money we used it to make some public goods cheap and effective

          • Alterecho@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah Yes, another fine addition to my reading list.

            seriously though, we live in a late-stage capitalist hellscape and it’s always funny to be when people use government monitoring fears to justify removing core social safety nets while simultaneously Walmart, Google, etc. Know when your balls ache because they have collected data on you from when you were prepubescent.

            • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Those companies use the money they squeeze out of you to buy politicians to make your life worse. So life under capitlaism has trained everyone to mistrust that kinda thing. People have simply never lived in a world where anything like that was likely to improve their lives. So pessimism is a reasonable response to the conditions we find ourselves in. However a better world is possible.

              • Alterecho@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                hard agree. I think the only way we can improve our lives and the lives of those in our communities is to unflinchingly believe in the fact that we deserve better, and we can get better