foltaisaprovenshill

Mass depopulation.

dontwatchtv

75% of us will be poor earning "basic income." The other 25% who are working will be living in gated communities and watch the poor kill each other on the news.

klongtoey

originally the idea of humans not having to work was a noble one, the population could enjoy their pastimes and would have food and money without slaving away for it. however, what's happening is that these savings won't be passed down, and only the elite will benefit.

JTMTL

Shorter work weeks. Lower cost of living by building smaller houses. Closely linked small communities that barter between each other and lots and lots of hobby farming. Good food, good people all with a strong feeling of self worth and music and dancing.

madmalloy

I want some of what you're smoking.

JTMTL

you're probably not used to reading productive new ideas. Most current Politicians only criticize.

uberdoober

Food prices drop as self replicating machines can now plant, water, pollinate, weed, and harvest the crops cheaper than any human workforce could. Housing costs drop as self replicating machines can 3D print multistory structures. Humans are left to create music, art, and fornicate mostly for pleasure. The trick is accomplishing this while keeping free speech, privacy, and free ideas in what would be a world where every move was monitored by self replicating machines that are all around us every moment of our lives.

uberdoober

Seal their asses in there with tons of rocks and concrete. Have fun in the sun while the mole people are forced to eat one another while they count their money underground.

jokersmild

This would be great if I could just have a farm and grow my own food and be left alone with my wife and kids. I don't think that is going to happen though.

whereisthemountain

The real American dream: be left alone by the government.

greycloud

governments can form new jobs, we should be having humans going through forests and taking out dried stuff on the ground that makes it susceptible to forest fires. we should be having more fish hatcheries to resupply the oceans with fish. we should have humans working on creating devices that reduce the acidity of the ocean, to take carbon out of the air, and we should be working on all types of similar environmental aids. the unemployed could be the federal employed, and their work is to benefit the infrastructure on which other businesses are built. we should be working to make the world a better place for everyone, there is no economic demand to do so, so have the government do it.

we also need more teachers and scientists. why have one teacher for 30 students? why not have 1 teacher per 6 students? why not have more scientists working on theories, have more people replicating scientific studies to make sure they aren't bullshit? we need more peers for the peer review process, we need more people with more ideas so that further innovation is faster. we need people working on solutions to big problems, like terraforming new worlds, and exploiting resources outside of earth.

we also need less people. perhaps we can figure out some eugenics method that would allow for population decline in a fashion that is acceptable to the masses. we should be trying to improve the human race as a whole, and we need to start prepping some of our people to be able to survive and thrive in a low gravity environment so they can ride ships to new stars and new planets.

capitalism is being killed, not employment. there is always things that need to be done.

pitenius

we should be having humans going through forests and taking out dried stuff on the ground that makes it susceptible to forest fires.

Really .

we should be having more fish hatcheries to resupply the oceans with fish.

Sure .

we also need more teachers and scientists.

Really ?

we also need less people. perhaps we can figure out some eugenics method that would allow for population decline in a fashion that is acceptable to the masses.

You first .

greycloud

agreed, me first. i have no children, and i will not be having children. i practice what i preach. i want the world to be a better place, and i know that this starts with me.

pitenius

I invite you to reduce your carbon footprint to zero. This may improve the world through the elimination of naive ideas. Your suggestions read like a laundry-list of the Lisa Simpson-esque ideas that are popular among statists and generally opposed by conspiracy theorists. I don't know you, but I strongly disagree with you to the point that I think we may be at loggerheads.

Personally, I'd rather see farm wages skyrocket. The denigration of agricultural labor has been the worst achievement of modernization.

greycloud

i take actions to reduce my carbon footprint but am in no position to be able to thrive while having a 0 carbon footprint. perhaps i should go plant some apple trees, it meets multiple objectives of mine.

pitenius

You don't need to thrive. That doesn't particularly help the collective, comrade. Stop being a narcissist.

DoucheBagMcGee

Next is Soylent green, of course.

CarlosShyamalan

Global communism I assume? With no one being needed all humans are reverted back to equally useless, but since their still there the resources will have to be shared equally among them.

llegendary

There is ALWAYS something to do......always.....

goatboy

The same thing that always happens when people get desperate- they break things and hunt monsters. Expect civilization to be broken, its wealthiest members to be hunted down, their things to be scattered as the spoils of war.

luckyguy

The era of most humans being employed is a relatively recent event. We'll go back to the way it once was. Also most humans aren't employed now. It may be that they never were.

mudcatca

AI entities become wealthier than the wealthiest humans, and keep humans as pets

pitenius

I think about this a lot. In the mid-1800s it was not that uncommon for an individual to be richer than the state. That is, they held more than one year of tax revenue. (I first learned about this from Lizzie Borden: her father was one of the richest men in Fall River and his wealth was about 1/2 to 1/3 of the revenue of Massachusetts.) Now, the US has only 403 billionaires. Kentucky had a state budget of $29 billion: only 14 people are richer -- none could pay Kentucky's debt. Pick a more prosperous state (California, Texas, New York), and the situation is worse. The same is true of corporations, too.

I'm also starting to see a bit of a disconnection. Really big money almost never translates into "goods and services dollars". You could almost run two parallel economies -- a dollar denominated macroeconomy and a commodity denominated microeconomy. I wouldn't be surprised if that kind of rift appeared soon. Stepping away from a gold standard seems to have been a necessary step.

Yesterday, someone on VOAT asked if abandoning the gold standard was a problem or a paradigm shift. The consensus seemed to be "paradigm shift". If so, that macroeconomy is "backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government". Which I rarely challenge, but esteem slightly above pig shit and substantially less than copper or silver.