Thread: Things
View Single Post
Old 31st July 2020, 03:53 PM   #461208  /  #10
Zeluvia
Send Cash or Drugs
 
Zeluvia's Avatar
 

Read my posts with the following stupid accent: Evil Duckess
Quote:
Originally Posted by MondoVman View Post
Would you support an economic theory that included reducing world population by 99%?

Not by the deliberate action of killing people. I am more in favor of the Universal Basic Income idea and the liberation of women. Since people would spend that income supporting themselves, it would be an economic driver. Also, even when people aren't working, they tend to do things. Those things they do could also contribute to the economy, even if it isn't "paid" work the way we think of it.


There was a book I read once where a guy said that unless people were at the point of starvation, they wouldn't take crappy jobs. I can't remember the book now, but it was also written at the beginning of the industrial revolution, and it referred in particular to coal miners and factory workers. It was an Englishman, Sir something or other. Although I think that is still true, it does point out that the system is coersive by design. We might be able to find other ways to make it work.



In the book "The Relentless Revolution, A history of Capitalism" she makes the point that it was technological advances in farming that kicked tenant farmers off land and created the large pool of very poor people who were willing to take crappy jobs to avoid starvation. It's not like this is a new thing, but the scale is huge.



Both Smith and Marx envisioned technology advancing to the point where there wouldn't be enough productive work for everyone, because they both were writing at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Neither envisioned the population explosion we have today.
__________________


Last edited by Zeluvia; 31st July 2020 at 03:58 PM.
Zeluvia is offline   Reply With Quote topbottom