Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About EssKay

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,119 profile views
  1. I’ll take your word for it. It just seemed counter intuitive to me that dealing with the CO2 problem in the way you suggested would be more efficient than just reducing our use of fossil fuels
  2. You must have missed my earlier posts in the thread. I was replying to a question on where the money comes from in this highly optimistic post scarcity scenario. My own worldview is much more pessimistic. I don’t think the potential benefits of AI and automation will be shared with the plebs (not without a fight anyway)
  3. I’m usually against derailing a thread (there seems to be a lot of that on here these days), but honestly, this subject seems to have been done to death. In summary: Yes traditional bricks and mortal retail is dying on its **** Yes that’s due to the convenience of online retail and the cost advantages of trading online No it isnt inevitable but will require major changes in the way we view bricks and mortar retail for it to stand a chance of surviving With regard to the last point - business rates need to be completely reformed, and we all need to think about the savings we get from shopping online vs the benefit of having thriving towns with more than just flats and kebab shops
  4. Sorry - but that’s complete rubbish. The truth is the hypothetical council tenant in your scenario will have enjoyed massively subsidised housing costs for 20 years - during which time they will have had no realistic prospect of being able to afford the mortgage on a “normal” home of equivalent size (or probably *any* home at all). Not saying that’s right, but its economic reality. At the end of that 20 year period, if they have managed to scrape together a very small amount of capital (probably less than the deposit on a “normal” equivalent home) - they are then given the chance to purchase that home for a pittance. As others have said, it’s a deeply flawed policy that reduces council housing stock and unfairly advantages anyone lucky enough to have managed to get into one. Better imo to keep the council house stock and let someone else benefit from the subsidized rent after they die/no longer need it.
  5. That sounds mental. How can it possibly be more efficient to use solar power to extract atmospheric CO2, compress it, transport it and then pump it underground vs just using the solar power for electricity generation and burning less fossil fuels.
  6. We definitely can’t burn it all with impunity- but we won’t “run out of atmosphere”. The composition will continue to change if we don’t significantly reduce our dependence on fossil fuels - resulting in increased temperatures and more extreme weather patterns. The atmosphere will still be there though.
  7. In the transitional phases it would be through a Citizen’s income. In a true post scarcity civilisation though there would be no need for money.
  8. I agree that people psychologically benefit from a sense of purpose, but if you take your argument to it’s logical conclusion, in a true post scarcity world we would have to artificially manufacture “work” for people to give them that sense of purpose. Isn’t there an alternative to that? If you free people from the shackles of work, couldn't they will find meaning and purpose in other things - human relationships, their communities, contemplating the mysteries of the universe/nature of existence?
  9. We were talking about a “post scarcity” world - i.e. where technological development has reached a level where there is no *need* for the majority of people to work. Resource extraction and manufacturing are automated, there is abundant clean energy (e.g. from fusion) and you need a very small number of people (perhaps none at all) to maintain it all. An advanced technological utopia basically
  10. That sounds like you think “work” in of itself is a worthwhile pursuit. Not a protestant by any chance are you? Now granted, I don’t buy the notion that in a post scarcity world everyone will suddenly pursue worthwhile creative/intellectual goals leading to a renaissance of the arts/science/culture. A large majority will probably do sweet FA. Is that necessarily a bad thing though?
  11. Sounds great. How much investment is needed to develop the foundational technologies for this Green New Deal though? And where’s that money going to come from?
  12. Depends on your worldview and level of optimism I guess... We’ve had quite a few discussions on Automation and AI on here over the years and my view hasn't fundamentally changed. I’d love to take the optimistic view that we’re headed for a post scarcity, “star trek” like utopia - where the benefits of AI and automation are shared equitably for the benefit of all mankind, and people are freed to pursue whatever interests they may have without having to worry about food, shelter, energy, the basic necessities of life. I have a feeling that it isn't going to play out like that though - and recent developments aren’t doing anything to make me more optimistic. Look at what’s happening in the world - increasing polarisation of western societies around extreme right and left wing viewpoints, the complete abomination that is China’s social credit system, increasing resource scarcity and mounting evidence of a looming climate crisis. And all the while the accumulation of wealth amongst a smaller and smaller group of people at the top continues unabated. Against that backdrop, isn’t it more likely that the benefits of AI and automation will be hoarded by that small group with the rest left to fight for the scraps?
  13. Interesting article on austerity and “the making of a millenial socialist” from the New York Times (ignoring the fact that the guy at the centre of the article is actually Gen Z...) The key quote for me is this characterisation of the young “Either they are left-wing or they aren’t political at all” Two generations now (3 if you count the tail end of Gen X) who on the whole feel so marginalised by modern capitalism that they are increasingly embracing socialism. Their prescription seems to be “Fully Automated Luxury Communism - the notion of a post work society in which labor is largely automated and workers live off a massively increased minimum wage” Given the history of communism - I can’t help but think that’s a naive pipe dream.
  14. Increased taxation is clearly the way its going to go given the reaction at the last general election to the revolutionary concept of making people pay for their own care. Your second point is an interesting one. Are we now at a point where continually advancing medical science to keep people simply existing is counter productive? Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for extending the amount of time people can live full, active lives, but recent advances seem to be simply stopping people from dying whilst making them more and more dependant on increasingly expensive care
  15. Good luck! Brave move but I’m sure it’ll result in some lifelong memories/experiences to cherish. Beats slogging away in the U.K.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.