One thousand years from now

Not possible, or simply a lie.

The period just after the democratization does not count.

message

infinite

an

The views and neat stuff like that would be nice. I sure do not want to experience the sustained high acceleration during lift off and re-entry.

shelters

Acquire more stuff is usually really about internal issues. =20

Most (big league) economic thinking is about artificial scarcity.

a=20

civilized=20

Sod off creep. I pay for my Usenet access. I will use my bandwidth as i bloody well please.

--=20 Transmitted with recycled bits. Damnly my frank, I don't give a dear

----------

Would you rather pay 25% tax on $100K of annual income, and have secure banks to keep it in, or no tax on $500 of annual income, which might be stolen from you at any time?

John

You're the loser argueing with a killfile and that is about as pathetic as you can get on usenet.

His need for 60 nyms is even more pathetic.

--
You can\'t have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!

Productivity increase as a result of technology advancing to give us better productivity tools has so far mostly benefitted all classes - mostly disproving the original Luddites protesting a mechanized loom.

I wish that the benefits of productivity improvement continue their benefit to the working class, as opposed to the pattern of the past 2-3 decades in USA where income improvement was disproportionately reserved to those in the top 20% and especially benefitting disprroportionately the top 5%.

I blame this in part on "federal budget deficit" that I found to be not a problem for Republicans from the time Reagan increased this with tax cuts unanswered by spending cuts until Obama got blamable for such defecit to set new records. The annual federal deficit is funded by Treasury bonds and similar securities, and my experience is that bond investors have big weight with "The Fed" when "The Fed" has to sell securities bigtime to borrow, and "The Fed" accordingly has to do what it can to minimize inflation - which I sense "Wall Street" to equate awfully with "working class income". Accordingly, I sense that USA median income inflation-adjusted will reverse its post-1973 stagnation when USA gets past deficit spending, like a temporary brief few years later in the Clinton Administration when the Federal budget was either largely balanced or achieving a slight surplus.

I also sense that USA working class income has been depressed recently by excessively loose immigration law and excessively loose enforcement thereof, favored more by Republicans although I suspect also favored by Democrats in order to gain Latino votes.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

I expect magically cheap home-based machines to manufacture whatever goods that families want out of "thin air" or vaccum to run into technical limitations, including use of fairly advanced nuclear reactors to mutate more-common elements such as iron, calcium, oxygen, silicon, helium and/or hydrogen into elements necessary for hundreds of billions of people to make use of products using high-strength alloy steels, lamps using tungsten electrodes and "rare earth" phosphors, and LEDs using elements much less common than what I just named.

I am not expecting most people to enjoy a "McMansion" with a swimming pool and lawn area near or over half their property area a century or two from now. For one thing, modern American society has some need for housing costs to inflate in an ultra-inflationary manner, while cost of "higher education" (increasingly necessary) has done likewise since 1981, and costs of healthcare and healthcare insurance coverage have inflated worse still.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Wrong. I am not the poster that was kill filed, you retarded twit.

But fewer and fewer people do expend fewer and fewer hours on that activity. And since we're discussing a Utopian case - "1% do everything" - we can presume that there would probably be additional poop-management technology come online to reduce that further - the Ed Lilywhite Norton 9000 Memorial Sewer Management System, let's call it.

They missed the "how" parts. Roughly, Leninism was intellectually fixed at around 1900, and was mostly Positivist in nature - people believed they could project large scale social effects in a Laplacian Determinist way. In the relatively wealthy USA then,

40 or 50% were poor; by 1974, that hit a low point of about 11%. It's been hovering there ever since. Please note that poverty rates of about US 1900 levels are typical in emerging nations.

Malthus' work was what Communism was based on. It missed that the Industrial Revolution would whittle away mercilessly at the price of goods, but only if certain financial protocols were observed.

-- Les Cargill

The US stumbled onto much more efficient ways of doing things. Shoot, in the US around 1900, typical working hours were half again or double what they are now.

Accidental (almost) changes in the way things are done have been evaluated by market forces an a pseudo-evolutionary process. In the USSR, much more effort was given to masking market signaling than was given in the US, so stuff cost more.

But for an individual person making decisions about what to do when, the sheer amount of "inherited" information used totally overwhelms what they see and think.

Indeed, French productivity is higher by about the amount you'd expect from lowered working hours. This begins to make it look like hours worked is becoming a non-constraint on productivity.

That's probably part of why John Larkin asked to start with. We've assumed "work in ==> goods out" for a long time - what happens when that assumption begins to fail?

True. But better oil than slaves, eh?

Not so much, no. Defending my position on that is complicated. It happened now and again, but it didn't last.

To an extent, yes - but look at when real breakthroughs really happened. Most were pre-WWII.

There are one whale of a lot of very radical production changes out there - you just can't see 'em. There's a Canadian cable program called "How It's Made". The sheer quantity of machines used for relatively ordinary goods is immense.

If I can guess what John Larkin is saying, it's best shown by your "the engineering is no longer the priority" - why is that? Are we "done"? If so, what does that mean?

1 is a tech problem - assuming we can get past fear of replacements for oil ( and that's a long road ). What is to keep us from allocating large tracts of useless desert to build massive ... nuke plants to *make* oil? What's a barrel of oil so made worth? A lot, I think. 2 didn't so much actually happen to begin with. It's complicated. It did happen here and there, but we have to understand a lot of things to make it all make sense. Roughly, colonialism has evolved into something else. 3 Kinda didn't, either - that's complicated, too. It's true that WWII changed *perceptions* about human relationships to technology, but ... it's complex.

There are certainly lots of ways to fail at this.

-- Les Cargill

Resources available even on Earth alone are for all practical purposes infinite.

--
Andrew

My parents think that this particular advanceement helped them and this is the only relevant measurement. The way anybody else see it, including you and me it is irrelevant. Nobody can define "quality of life" for the particular person, but this person himself.

Antibiotics,

Irrelevant. If broken person wants to be fixed and can pay for it then the price is nobody else's business.

You do buy a new house every time there is a water leak, don't you?

Since no proof has been found, I'll leave it to the fairy tale and propaganda world.

For the purpose of it, definitely."Guns don't kill people"

--
Andrew

I am afraid they have a problem with protection of "Life, Liberty and Property" and voluntary contract enforcement.

Surprisingly many people do not see the difference between no government at all and government doing the limited functions it is supposed to do.

--
Andrew

You *need* food, water and shelter. Everything else is "acquire more stuff". How big is you house you said? Do you have a car? You must have a computer to write here, but you do not need it.

-- Andrew.

This is the reason to choose shuttle over other means of transportation. Acceleration in ascent and especially descent is rather low. Do not remember numbers out of my head, but average slightly fit person will survive without much discomfort.

--
Andrew

You san easily have the same amount of vacation if you agree for the same amount of income.

Good for us. However there are a lot of substitutes. Nuuclear combined with coal would be better and cheaper.

How so? Export of dollars does it, but the amount is rather limited.

Wrong. It does not help. Spending available resources on weapons and ammunition leaves less resouces for productive use.

Whatever the person wants and willing to pay for.

"1" is not going to be depleted in another 100-150 years. I remeber the first end of oil was supposed to happen around 1970. Guess what? It did no thappen. Also ther is no overpopulation despite all predictions.

"2" The faster it will be stopped, the better for U

"3" You can not deplete non-existing things.

--
Andrew

Where did you see secure banks last time? I hope you did not mean modern fractional reserve banks.

--
Andrew