Are we Nearing "The Age of Plenty?" and Possible Ramifications

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
That's an interesting graphic, and it shows considerable improvement (although around 20% to 30% 'extreme poverty' is still a lot of people). It's not clear how those figures are calculated (e.g. if the 1.90$ per day figure is adjusted for inflation, for official or local exchange rate, etc). However, from that, it does look as if have-nots will eventually become haves by some official measure...

Thanks - it looks like I may have been overly pessimistic!

In the UK, poverty is usually defined as having less than 60% of median income, which is good in as much as it ensures some attention will always be focused on helping the least well off 'out of poverty', but not so good in as much as popular opinion may eventually cease to see it as what most regard as 'true' poverty (e.g. absolute poverty), so that the seriously impoverished may get relatively less attention. It's a tricky business...
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
child-mortality.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: dgiharris
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,446
803
71
Chicago
✟121,700.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
What would be possible ramifications if machines could produce 90% of humanity's needs with minimal human oversight?

What adjustments would/could we make to our various economic systems to deal with the possible ramifications?

Is it all doom and gloom?

Very simple: another revolution.
Human will take jobs back from robots.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
27,997
19,441
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟488,914.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
I am speaking of the global aggregate.
Thats mostly because the other countries are catching up to the western world. Once they reach the level of the western world, they pretty much encounter the same problems (first world problems, so to speak)
 
Upvote 0

dgiharris

Old Crusty Vet
Jan 9, 2013
5,439
5,222
✟131,531.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Whats going to happen is that the only ones profitting from this will be the rich. The poor will no longer be needed and can fend for themselves in the slums.

that is one alternative, but I would argue that if we enter the "Age of Plenty" there is no need for slums at all.

If 90% of everything we need or could want is provided by machines and automation, this effectively means that only 10% of mankind need to work. To better make my argument, let me take this too an extreme and go back to my Star Trek-esque black box that can magically make any material, product, or technology to include other black boxes :p

If everyone has a black box that can make any material, product, food, or technology why would there have to be slums? Why would there have to be famine or want of any kind? There simply wouldn't be. So then, what sort of socio-economic-political culture/society would develop if this technology were available?

I submit, we would form currency and place value on things that are not material. Arts, music, movies, entertainment, discovery, exploration, human interaction, education (just for the sake of education), etc.

Now, lets go back to 90% automation... so some humans need to work, effectively 10% of mankind can provide "plenty" for the remaining 90%.

I propose that society could adopt a model like this

model 90p.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
27,997
19,441
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟488,914.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
that is one alternative, but I would argue that if we enter the "Age of Plenty" there is no need for slums at all.
Need for slums? Slums dont come into existence because someone says "you know what we need here? A slum, filled with lots of crime and disease".
 
Upvote 0

dgiharris

Old Crusty Vet
Jan 9, 2013
5,439
5,222
✟131,531.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Need for slums? Slums dont come into existence because someone says "you know what we need here? A slum, filled with lots of crime and disease".
You are using the semantic "need" as in desirable, that is not the full definition of the word.
Another semantic of "need" is situational, sometimes the situation will warrant a certain or possibility or outcome.

If you have a system of severe economic disparity coupled with lack of resources, then use, you will "get" slums.

The reason I used "need" the way that I did is because if you have a situation where there is essentially infinite resources, then the only way you will get a slum is through malicious and inefficient socio-economic systems and/or by design.

There is a dark side to humanity that seeks to define their self worth via comparison to others. That is, they aren't happy unless their situation is "better" than others. I submit that for some, they "need" slums. They need to feel superior so they need others to live in squalor... In any event, that is more of what I meant
 

Attachments

  • model 90p.jpg
    model 90p.jpg
    155.4 KB · Views: 2
Upvote 0

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
27,997
19,441
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟488,914.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
You are using the semantic "need" as in desirable, that is not the full definition of the word.
Another semantic of "need" is situational, sometimes the situation will warrant a certain or possibility or outcome.

If you have a system of severe economic disparity coupled with lack of resources, then use, you will "get" slums.

The reason I used "need" the way that I did is because if you have a situation where there is essentially infinite resources, then the only way you will get a slum is through malicious and inefficient socio-economic systems and/or by design.

There is a dark side to humanity that seeks to define their self worth via comparison to others. That is, they aren't happy unless their situation is "better" than others. I submit that for some, they "need" slums. They need to feel superior so they need others to live in squalor... In any event, that is more of what I meant
Well.. you suggest that everybody should have a "magic black box" that gives them all they could ever require.

As long as those black boxes cant create new black boxes, there is no need to provide the poor with black boxes except charity. It would be far more profitable for the rich to keep the black boxes for themselves.

Its human nature that is malicious, and nothing can change it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dgiharris

Old Crusty Vet
Jan 9, 2013
5,439
5,222
✟131,531.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Well.. you suggest that everybody should have a "magic black box" that gives them all they could ever require.

As long as those black boxes cant create new black boxes, there is no need to provide the poor with black boxes except charity. It would be far more profitable for the rich to keep the black boxes for themselves.

Its human nature that is malicious, and nothing can change it.

This is the problem...

effectively, if the rich have everything they could ever want... then why do they care if other people have everything they could ever want???

Our current mindset of "rich and poor" need to be drastically changed to account and adjust for "The Age of Plenty".

There are negative ramifications as well. The ability of the few to hurt the many grow exponentially with technology. If we engineer a repressive society in a technological age in which there doesn't have to be any repression, then you dramatically increase the odds of terrorist type activities that could hurt thousands if not millions to include the rich...

From a Utilitarian standpoint, it just isn't good.

Let me try a different argument. Literacy is something that was previously only available to the rich. Now, over 80% of the world is literate. Wealth as we define it today can be something similar if/when we enter the Age of Plenty. There simply won't be any need for the rich to define their wealth and status by using materials, resources, technology when those things become ubiquitous.

Imagine having the resources to just build your own orbiting space station using nanobots and AI and an asteroid (courtesy of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Why would you care if someone else had the ability to do the same when there is essentially infinite resources???
 
Upvote 0

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,663
6,531
God's Earth
✟263,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
This is the problem...

effectively, if the rich have everything they could ever want... then why do they care if other people have everything they could ever want???

"It is not enough that I should succeed, all others must fail" - Gore Vidal.
 
Upvote 0

Nithavela

our world is happy and mundane
Apr 14, 2007
27,997
19,441
Comb. Pizza Hut and Taco Bell/Jamaica Avenue.
✟488,914.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
This is the problem...

effectively, if the rich have everything they could ever want... then why do they care if other people have everything they could ever want???

Our current mindset of "rich and poor" need to be drastically changed to account and adjust for "The Age of Plenty".

There are negative ramifications as well. The ability of the few to hurt the many grow exponentially with technology. If we engineer a repressive society in a technological age in which there doesn't have to be any repression, then you dramatically increase the odds of terrorist type activities that could hurt thousands if not millions to include the rich...

From a Utilitarian standpoint, it just isn't good.

Let me try a different argument. Literacy is something that was previously only available to the rich. Now, over 80% of the world is literate. Wealth as we define it today can be something similar if/when we enter the Age of Plenty. There simply won't be any need for the rich to define their wealth and status by using materials, resources, technology when those things become ubiquitous.

Imagine having the resources to just build your own orbiting space station using nanobots and AI and an asteroid (courtesy of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Why would you care if someone else had the ability to do the same when there is essentially infinite resources???
Literacy became a tool of the masses because forward-thinking politicians decided that mass literacy would be advantageous for their state.

I'm having problem seeing our current rulers (the big corporations) having a similiar mindset. They need consumers, and such a magic black box would be the end of consumerism. They would give away their only leverage and make themselves obsolete.

I just don't have a rosy view of the future and human nature as you do, I guess. Propably because I watch more news than TED talks.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums