It’s not volatile labour markets or income inequality that are the issue.
It is the fundamental valuation mechanism that markets are built on, that values scarcity over abundance.
In one sense, it is sensible that markets give zero value to air, because everyone has what they need.
In another sense however, that simple example exposes the fundamental problem with markets in an age of technically enabled abundance.
Markets must value any universal abundance at zero. No other outcome possible.
Markets are meta level incentivised to destroy any existent universal abundance and replace it with a marketable scarcity.
Markets will always have the majority at the edge of survival. I don’t agree with a lot that Robin Hanson says, and I have to agree with him on that.
All major advances in complexity in evolutionary history are characterised by the emergence of new levels of cooperation – with attendant stabilising strategies.
If we as a society are to survive, we need to take that next step into cooperation, empowered by universally available technology, that takes us beyond markets and beyond exchange based transactions.
Look at your own life. Are the time you felt best times you were paid for, or times you were giving?
Kaplan only has half a story – he is missing the big issue!