by rangerone314 » Sun 04 Dec 2011, 19:00:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'O')ur (current) role in the western world is to consume. Can't go on for much longer though. How long can we make a living out of opening doors for each other?
Underlies the structural problem when so few people are needed to produce all the food for a nation of 300+ million. We all have to trade stuff around so that the entity with a bajillion metric tons of grain can distribute that grain, and receive value for it, while insuring that everyone has access to a reasonable caloric ration of food. We trade for and with cash, of course, but the monetary velocity has to be sufficient to get all that grain out of the silos and into people's bread.
So we open doors for each other, or build odd gadgets, or sew funny looking clothing. When the economy tries to stall out, the government freakz and starts pumping cash like nuts. 280 million hungry primates, accustomed to excess food, and decently armed will make a catastrophic mess of things, very, very quickly! That result must be avoided.
So, as much as I'd like to say it can't keep going; I have to admit, it most certainly can as long as there is even a trickle of natural gas to make fertilizer, and diesel to run the tractors and trains. The veils of usefulness for some of the things we do may fall; which will be a blow to our egos, but those in power will not allow the peasants to have reason to risk life and limb for a bowl of rice.
A good hypothesis, but it does rest on the assumption that those in power are capable of much better judgement than those who were in power in much older civilizations, like Rome or Persia or the Byzantines. I've seen little to warrant such faith in their judgment.