by Outcast_Searcher » Tue 29 Apr 2014, 16:12:30
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'I') think we've become so efficient at supplying the basic needs (and luxury items for that matter) of everyone we simply do not need more makers.
Thanks for making the point I was going to make. Very few factories can make the entire world's supply of things like peanut butter or DVD players. Just like farming is now a tiny part of the first world economy (like it or not) thanks to efficiencies from agro-business.
So for the FIRST world, where people aren't starving due to the government safety net, etc (despite left wings claims to the contrary):
Once there is plenty of wealth to go beyond things like eating and basic clothing and housing,etc. -- then people get to make CHOICES of what they want to spend their money on. It's the upside of wealth (and the downside for the planet, since we choose not to socialize all the costs).
As a male who only shops for clothes at Walmart -- I'm pretty sure things like "Lee's Press-On Nails" are things I could live without. On the other hand, I spend a lot of time, money, and energy on cardboard, playing "Magic The Gathering" -- basically a card game with at least as much complexity as chess, with a social element as well.
I don't see why a myriad of "products" like this (which are really services -- to make us look better or have fun) is more important than. say, getting a hair cut or putting fancy lights on our cars to attract attention.
Now the third world, where people are starving and lack basic medical care -- that's a whole different kettle of fish. If people breed faster than the economy grows -- I don't know how you fix that.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.