From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Thu Nov 14 2002 - 23:59:06 MST
Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>### You can have your cake and eat it, too, if you give guaranteed survival
>but only those who prove they want it. Full-time work for 1500kcal/day
>assures no mooches come but then no sane people die, either.
>
>
But what the heck is "work" when increasingly large groups of people
have no skills that are not subsumed by or made irrelevant by
accelerating technology? There is no need in advanced countries for
everyone to be in full-time work of any conventional kind. I don't see
where make-work to satisfy outdated prejudices improves anything or is
particularly extropic. Personally, I believe a great deal of good
could come from a society with such real material abundance that no one
"works" except on that which they are truly interested in. Go into
most major corporations and it already looks as if there is a lot of
pointless make-work going on.
>Vote for "The Poorhouse", a part of my plan to save the world!
>
>No need for a minimum pension, to survive you need food and shelter, not a
>cash handout.
>
An abundant society offers a heritage of a lot more than merely food and
shelter. But I don't believe this should come from government fiat
either.
>
>If there are people willing to die of hunger rather than work for food,
>well, I will not shed any tears after their passing.
>
>
>
I would have a serious problem with those who would let people die of
hunger in the middle of abundance just because they did not satisfy some
group of people's scarcity based prejudices.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:07 MST