more to the point disincentivising or limiting pension provision tends to cause property bubbles and the kind of scenario much of the UK, USA,Canada and Aus/ NZ is facingNot really. People would just buy a house.
Last edited:
more to the point disincentivising or limiting pension provision tends to cause property bubbles and the kind of scenario much of the UK, USA,Canada and Aus/ NZ is facingNot really. People would just buy a house.
And it seems also like it's eroding the Swedish rental market, as well.more to the point disincentiviing or limitign pension provsion tends to casue property bubbles and the kind of scenario much of the Uk, USA,Canada and Aus/ NZ is facing
I think he meant "comfort ableism" in which the group/faction in question refuses to make any significant effort, risk, or sacrifice, instead expecting the government to mitigate those problems.I beg your pardon?
Well here the point is just making new bodies. Economic ratings are moot if we run out of people.I think he meant "comfort ableism" in which the group/faction in question refuses to make any significant effort, risk, or sacrifice, instead expecting the government to mitigate those problems.
And he has a point, if the cost of the subsidizing childrearing of certain social classes is such that it outweighs the productivity of any potential offspring of said classes, then there's no point in implementing said policies.
If automation is as all powerful as some has been raving about, then population decline isn't a problem. A post scarcity society can be achieved simply by having the majority of the population worrying themselves out of reproducing.Well here the point is just making new bodies. Economic ratings are moot if we run out of people.
All of this but also ban the internet, because the internet actively disincentivises people from interacting in real-life and forming organic relationships with one another.Ban Televisions.
More seriously:
Get rid of the current American style, survival of the fittest, winner takes all, profit over everything else capitalist system. Replace it with something that pays workers a decent income rather than treat them as wage slaves earning as little as the employer can get away with, and which has workers working shorter hours. Make it so people can raise a family, own a house and car etc on one income while still having quality time together.
Low cost housing. Houses are for living in, not an investment opportunity.
Free/low cost healthcare and education
Cheap childcare, including extensive before and after school clubs, for those whose parents want to go to work.
Provide plenty of recreation facilities and activity/sports clubs to help keep the little buggers entertained and to allow parents to socialise with each other at the same time.
Either cheap cars and fuel or an extensive and cheap public transport system.
A post-scarcity society is not possible, simply because resources are finite. They always have been, and they always will be. Even the strongest particle accelerator would take millennia to make a single gram of solid matter (gold is the example usually given). Automation will not permanently get rid of jobs either, it will just create new jobs elsewhere, in different sectors of the economy. This has always occurred, and always will, as regards technological advancement. When the printing-press was invented, many an amanuensis or scribe retrained as a printer or printer's devil, to give an example.If automation is as all powerful as some has been raving about, then population decline isn't a problem. A post scarcity society can be achieved simply by having the majority of the population worrying themselves out of reproducing.
All of this but also ban the internet, because the internet actively disincentivises people from interacting in real-life and forming organic relationships with one another.
A post-scarcity society is not possible, simply because resources are finite. They always have been, and they always will be. Even the strongest particle accelerator would take millennia to make a single gram of solid matter (gold is the example usually given). Automation will not permanently get rid of jobs either, it will just create new jobs elsewhere, in different sectors of the economy. This has always occurred, and always will, as regards technological advancement. When the printing-press was invented, many an amanuensis or scribe retrained as a printers and printer's devil, to give an example.
Ironically, it seems we are actually running out of human resources, right now.We pretty much live in a post-scarcity today and have since the Green Revolution, and honestly it have not created the utopia people imagined, it just resulted in new resources to run out of.
Ironically, it seems we are actually running out of human resources, right now.
Calhoun later created his "Mortality-Inhibiting Environment for Mice" in 1968: a 101-by-101-inch (260 cm × 260 cm) cage for mice with food and water replenished to support any increase in population, which took his experimental approach to its limits. In his most famous experiment in the series, "Universe 25", population peaked at 2,200 mice and thereafter exhibited a variety of abnormal, often destructive, behaviors including refusal to engage in courtship, and females abandoning their young. By the 600th day, the population was on its way to extinction. Though physically able to reproduce, the mice had lost the social skills required to mate.
That experiment can mostly be explained by mouse mating habits and pheremones, you shouldn't put too much stock in it.Personally, I sometimes wonder whether the phenomenon of advanced societies failing to reproduce might actually be a universal constant, kind of like a form of social entropy. There’s John B. Calhoun’s famous ‘mouse utopia’ experiment that he did in the 60s, where he created enclosed spaces where mice and rats were given unlimited access to food and water, enabling unfettered population growth, essentially simulating advanced, first-world standards of population density, standards of living, and comfort, except for mice. Here’s what happened afterward:
There’s more on the experiment on Wikipedia. Apparently homosexual behavior started to become common among male mice lol, along with other deviant and anti-social behaviors like cannibalism, and social withdrawal of some mice. It seems the total lack of external stress factors (no predators, unlimited food and drink, comfortable shelter), combined with high population density, leads to the rise of certain social pathologies, followed by social collapse and even extinction – at least for mice. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the relative comfort, security and safety found in advanced societies has similar effects on humans. It seems a certain level of stress and discomfort might actually be beneficial for society.
The only way I could see this happening would be a massive religious revival. Plenty of countries offer generous subsidies and programs for having children, and yet it can't get it anywhere near replacement level. Thus, you'd need a cultural shift towards having kids, which I think only religion could do. How you'd get a religious revival in the west this side of 1990, I know not.
I still think it's worth taking into consideration. Urban, industrial society is less than two hundred years old, which is a blip in the grand span of human history, so we could very well adapt to the new conditions over the next few centuries, but I think a mouse utopia situation is, to quote Joe Rogan, entirely possible.That experiment can mostly be explained by mouse mating habits and pheremones, you shouldn't put too much stock in it.
Industrial society yes, urban society no. Ancient Antioch had population densities higher than modern Manhattan for instance.I still think it's worth taking into consideration. Urban, industrial society is less than two hundred years old, which is a blip in the grand span of human history, so we could very well adapt to the new conditions over the next few centuries, but I think a mouse utopia situation is, to quote Joe Rogan, entirely possible.
The thing is, he designed those habitats to promote those behaviors.Personally, I sometimes wonder whether the phenomenon of advanced societies failing to reproduce might actually be a universal constant, kind of like a form of social entropy. There’s John B. Calhoun’s famous ‘mouse utopia’ experiment that he did in the 60s, where he created enclosed spaces where mice and rats were given unlimited access to food and water, enabling unfettered population growth, essentially simulating advanced, first-world standards of population density, standards of living, and comfort, except for mice. Here’s what happened afterward:
There’s more on the experiment on Wikipedia. Apparently homosexual behavior started to become common among male mice lol, along with other deviant and anti-social behaviors like cannibalism, and social withdrawal of some mice. It seems the total lack of external stress factors (no predators, unlimited food and drink, comfortable shelter), combined with high population density, leads to the rise of certain social pathologies, followed by social collapse and even extinction – at least for mice. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the relative comfort, security and safety found in advanced societies has similar effects on humans. It seems a certain level of stress and discomfort might actually be beneficial for society.