posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:54 PM
I understand this idea of self sufficiency, and I like it, and I've thought about it.
But I think it fails to take into account specialization (and disspecialization). For instance, the idea that this system could eliminate
unemployment is bunk. The least talented, most stupid, most irresponsible citizen will still find a way to be unemployed, because nobody will want
them doing even the menial of the community jobs. Let's say there's another guy though, who's stupid and talentless but relatively responsible,
eventually it would simply make sense that he take over someone's responsibilities so that they could focus on that which they are good at. A simple
understanding of game theory will tell you that over time, this entire process would unwind like this, and you once again, would have those least
useful to the community working in the fields day in and day out, while others are indoors. Doesn't this make the community better off? At what
point is any individual worse off? What can you reward people for their work with? If you reward the physical laborers highly then inevitably,
incentives will cause a smart individual to find a way to farm more efficiently than all of your laborers combined with one machine that only he knows
how to work. What happens then? What happens when an outsider of your community would like that machine and would be willing to pay your community
Inevitably what will happen is once again, you will have begin to see classes emerge, just like in World of Warcraft or an MMO, there won't just be
citizens or community anymore, you will have specialized crafters, soldiers, diplomats, farmers, etc etc etc. That gives birth to even more
specialized classes such as "plow manufacturers, wheat farmers, infantry, navy, diplomat to other community X, diplomat to other community Y.
Sure it might be an interesting and somewhat better world, but leisure would remain unchanged in my opinion, and you'd eventually end up more or less
back where you started.
So what's the solution? I seriously cannot think of a solution to this question of what is the ideal way to reconstruct after a political/economic
collapse. Everything seems to revert back to specialization and class stratification, even if its in the best interest of the individual and the
community. I'm an Economics major so perhaps I am blind in this regard, but it seems that what we have now ISN'T SO BAD. Sure there are a few
people at the top that have gamed all of us for trillions, and there are corporations that have grown like a deadly virus to be so massive that they
can put everyone else out of business, but for the most part, the whole idea that some of us our wage-slaves makes me laugh.
If you are a wage-slave, ask yourself why? Why aren't you a managing director of M&A at J.P. Morgan making millions a year. Investment Bankers can
work 120 hours a week, weekends included. that is a 6am - 11pm job on the rare occasion, and sometimes they have to pull all-nighters. Their job
requires a bit of creativity, raw intelligence, the drive, energy, and responsibility to be able to pull hours like that, and to top it all off they
have to be relatively sociable. Ask yourself why you haven't applied to J.P. Morgan for a job...
Suddenly 9-5 doesn't sound so bad does it? Sure the JP Morgan guy can afford a Bentley, and probably owns a huge house, but is he better off than
you working 9-5 at McDonalds? One could argue that sure he is because he could work 9-5 and make more than the guy at McDonalds, but that doesn't
account for the fact that the investment banker doesn't choose his hours, has 2 weeks of vacation a year and works weekends.
What we all want is to be rich without working. The unfortunate thing for all of us is that it seems the only way to do this is to be the very
clever, competitive, and cut-throat people we seem to despise on these boards: be the CEO's or the managers, or the international bankers, or the
restaurant-owners, or whoever it is you think is "not subject to this wage slavery".
And so then we find that the answer to our problem is the problem. The only possible answer is the problem itself. So when 1 = 1 or 2 = 2 does it
really make sense to rip down half the equation to try to find the answer to 1 = ? or 2 = ? In other words, if we know that the problem really is this
simple, does it make any sense to try and "restart everything" other than to delay finding out what we knew all along.
We aren't wage slaves, we're jealous it seems.