
Machine Money and People Money – What’s the Future of Work? - prostoalex
https://medium.com/the-wtf-economy/machine-money-and-people-money-29b497eeb9d0
======
arcanus
Great essay. The article touches on one interesting rub about 'post-scarcity':
despite the name, even in post-scarcity economies some elements remain
absolutely scarce (barring sci-fi tech outside of an obvious short term
horizon, like a star-trek replicator).

In particular, what he describes as 'people money' are artificially scarce
goods due to the lack of automation implicit to them. As an example, consider
cars (which would fall under machine money), which at least in the USA are not
prohibitively expensive and largely obtainable to all functioning adult
citizens. Contrast this with a Ferrari, which is artificially scarce.
Interesting enough, the performance of any given Ferrari, while admittedly
substantial, is by no means justifiable for its price. One could buy a
Corvette, for instance, for a fraction of the price with very similar
performance. Rather, the Ferrari has an artificial scarcity due to limited
production values and strong branding.

This largely falls in line with his reasoning in the essay. Human perception
being what it is (often based on relative appraisals of one's well being) you
can have a situation where everyone needs for nothing (in a traditional
hierarchy of needs) but nevertheless feels as if they are 'behind'. I know I
feel societal pressures (mostly self-inflicted) from my peer group to make
more money, brag about expensive vacations, etc.

My question is: how much of this is productive? Previously, these activities
were necessary to ensure a functioning society, but increasingly they are
turning a sort of consumption perpetual motion machine. While quality of life
increases are still occurring (in the first world, the third world growth out
of poverty are wonderful), they are likely diminishing seldom truly correlated
with societal value. Hence why one sees sports stars and financial types
making absurd returns, despite not obviously resulting in economic (or even
cultural) growth.

I would love to see a post-scarcity society where high functioning individuals
could dedicate themselves to science, research, art, etc. I'm not convinced
that these positions are increasingly per capita, nor that they will be even
in a 'machine money' free society, as we appear to be headed. That is a pity,
if true.

~~~
SubiculumCode
I'm a post-doc still waiting to earn enough to just pay my way. Keeping up
with my peers just means manage to keep my apartment.

~~~
arcanus
Yep. Exactly the sort of thing I am talking about. After my phd the jobs in
industry (which were much more applied) offered me 2x or 3x more than a post-
doc. To say nothing of finance, where it would have been closer to 4x.

------
SubiculumCode
_" Paul argues that the right name for what many are calling “Universal Basic
Income” should be “the citizen’s dividend.” This concept traces back to
ancient Athens, and in America to the writings of Thomas Paine. In Paine’s
conception, the dividend was based on shared ownership of natural resources —
and this is just what we’ve already seen done in a country like Norway, in
Alaska, and in a notable experiment during the 1970s, in a small town in
Manitoba."_

I often describe basic income to my friends here in America as a National
Inheritance earned by our forefathers for building a great and rich nation.
This is to help people realize that this isn't charity..It the dividends from
the stock of being an American.

