What does it mean to spend 1.8 billion or 8.5 billion?
How accurate a measure of human creativity is money spent?
Definitely less than half my productive effort is directed towards making money.
Most of my attention is devoted to developing competencies and exploring strategies for long term survival (long term meaning thousands of years).
The lower wages go the more people like myself simply refuse to do any more than the absolute minimum for survival.
How can it make sense to have people in need of goods and services, and people available to work, but no effort going into matching those two up?
Money is just numbers.
It works as a motivator only because people believe in it, and only to the extent that they believe in it.
Very few people in western societies now have even the most basic skills for survival outside cities. We host people who travel the world and offer 4 hours work a day for food and shelter. Most of them are kids taking a “gap year” and most of them don’t know one end of a plant from the other, let alone which is used for what or how to care for each of them individually, or are able to do even the most basic of things like cut firewood or clean dishes, let alone any of the skills of hunting or fishing.
Hunter gatherer lifestyles require a lot of space, hundreds of acres per person. Hi-tech agriculture can feed 10 people per acre. We need hi tech.
If we try and go to low tech, that will require massive population reduction, and the probability of any path to population reduction resulting in loss of technology is very high.
So it is clear to me that all paths forward that deliver a high probability of personal survival and personal liberty (for anyone), involve doing so for everyone, and using high tech, and going beyond market based (scarcity based) measures of value (money).
We exist in a very complex system.
That system can go in any direction, in any dimension.
There are some dispositions that are more probable than others, and there isn’t a huge difference between any of them right now.
Human nature is very complex, and multi-modal (within every one of us).
We can each cooperate, if the context is appropriate.
We can each compete, if the context is appropriate.
We can each cheat (lie and deceive) if it seems worth the risk.
We can each work for long term and or short term goals.
We can each hide our motivations if required.
We each do all of those things, moment by moment, context by context.
That is what it is to be a human being.
We are complex.
We are each capable of infinite extension of complexity into higher order abstractions and dispositions.
If we continue down our current path of devotion to markets, then it is clear to me that few, if any, will survive – the injustice overwhelms our will to cooperate, and the system degrades to raw competition at all levels (no restraints).
The only stable way to keep any restraints, is to ensure that we use technology to ensure that all individuals have as much security and liberty as possible (which does not extend to unrestricted reproduction, that is not physically possible – it must end badly).
So to some it may seem strange, that the greatest liberty is secured by accepting that some restraints on liberty are required by the context of reality. A bit like gravity, in learning balance, in a sense.
I don’t see unemployment as an undesirable thing, unless it is linked to an unavailability of sufficient resources to live a reasonable free existence. Therein lies our current conundrum – existing dogma at many levels links the two.
We have to find acceptable ways past that block, and do so quickly. Many exist, and they require high level acceptance and sponsorship to develop and blossom.