[lit-ideas] Re: The World as We May Know It
- From: Teemu Pyyluoma <teme17@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:55:18 -0800 (PST)
John, it would be lot easier to answer this if you
provided the reasoning behind Bell's conclusions. I
couldn't find anything from atimes.com
But anyway, judging from the list I guess she is
saying that economic status will increasingly reflect
population and natural resources. In some ways I hope
she is right, but I'm afraid she is not.
Here's why. We got democracy, well-fare state,
universal education, etc. at about the time that the
great masses became important resources needed to
fight wars and manufacture goods. Many have suggested
that this was no coincidence and I agree.
But technology is chancing. The actual amount of work
done is decreasing as a component of productivity.
Productivity today has to do with knowledge and
technology, and I don't see any reason for that trend
to reverse. That is overall we will need fewer and
fewer people to actually manufacture the stuff and
services we use.
Even in China where labor costs are close to zero in
comparison to say USA, the new car factories are
heavily automated. At first glance this seems weird,
why substitute capital for labor with such low labor
costs? But you need the newest machinery to produce
modern cars at all, no man can weld steel with such
sub-millimeter precision that the robots achieve.
Economically speaking, what matters is the new Indian
middle class for example, not the the fifty something
times larger group of Indians on the whole. Or take
warfare, the most powerful military in history has
what three hundred thousand troops?
The part about this that worries me is that those
controlling the economy, production and military will
increasingly not give a damn about most of the
humanity.
On the brighter side, the resource usage is becoming
more efficient. Given the political, economical and
environmental (in no particular order) forces energy
efficiency will be an order of magnitude better in
thirty years, it is so bad now due to increasingly
bygone era of cheap oil that it can only get better.
More from the sci-fi front yes, but nuclear fusion may
finally work in thirty years, and I also wouldn't
count on trade increasing at current pace. Strictly
from efficiency point of view, it makes no sense as
such to transport stuff any longer distances than
necessary, and with the way every single piece of
technology keeps getting smaller and more flexible, I
wouldn't be entirely surprised to see microfactories
pop up. That would mean that say the shoes you buy
would be manufactured on demand in the backroom of the
shop, for example. See
http://www-leti.cea.fr/commun/AR-2002/00-csem/02-claessen.pdf
for an introduction. Fascinating stuff, and sounds
pretty feasible to me.
Oh and my crystal ball also says that by 2036 both
Ukraine and Turkey will be EU members, and Russia's
membership is the hot topic.
Cheers,
Teemu
Helsinki, Finland
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
