At 01:29 PM 2/20/98 -1000, Jim Dator wrote:
>The last series of interchanges have been the main reason I joined (and
>have remained lurking) on Futurework.
>
>I just don't see that there are now enough needed jobs at sufficiently
>high wages to give everyone (at least in the post-industrial world) a
>living income. Many, perhaps most, people are currently kept employed not
>for their labor, mental or manual, but for their purchasing power. But
>easy and extensive consumer credit, with no expectation (or need) for pay
>back is still necessary, but not enough.
Maybe not, although since the world is more productive than it has ever
been, my guess is that such a large proportion is going to the rich, the
speculators, the drug dealers ... that may be the major reason for the
phenomenon.
The population increase certainly does not help and urgently needs
attention, but the world's elite continue to press on regardless.
>In my view, this is bad now, but will get much worse, and worldwide.
I agree
>
>Separating "work" entirely from access to goods and services, and
>permitting/enabling people to live meaningful, satisfied lives without
>"working" seems one of the biggest challenges of the present, and
>foreseable future.
yes, at least in part
>Trying to create more jobs is futile and degrading.
yes -- and worse -- the more "jobs" we create the faster we degrade the
earth's resources
I muse that if all humans on earth were to "do nothing", simultaneously, for
just 5 minutes, the earth would have a maximum chance to recover (all humans
would die of asphyxiation).
So perhaps, although we are literally incapable of "doing nothing", the
optimum solution could yet lie in that direction ?
Comments??
>
>Is that what many of you have been saying in these last exchanges? Or
>not?
yes
Colin Stark
