this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
77 points (93.3% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35947 readers
2067 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

In such a case, will the concept of money be wiped out from existence ?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 60 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Depends on how much of our needs would be covered. Not needing to work to survive is different from not needing to work to live a comfortable life which is again different from living a luxurious life.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

As someone who wholeheartedly supports Universal Basic Income, it should not let a person live a life of luxury. UBI should buy away all the poor though

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Nah, I want Star Trek style post-scarcity.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

And I want a Star Wars style lightsaber but let's be realistic

[–] deafboy 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Our perception of poverty and luxury would rapidly change. Food and roof over head alone would quickly be considered inadequate.

Just look how in the rich parts of the world we consider running water, sewage, electricity and internet as something non-negotiable. In some places those are still luxury.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Which is why jobs will still be a thing. You can climb the ladder of luxury all you want.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 40 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Buddahriffic 3 points 8 months ago

The economy in Star Trek is probably the simplest problem they've solved.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Well, if you knew that for the rest of your life you would have a home, clothing, food and water, internet and some spending money, what would you do with your time?

Many people would probably just relish doing nothing productive at all, like most animals in nature do when they have no immediate needs.

All that free time would probably inspire a renaissance of art and philosophy, probably personal education too, after all, you can do plenty of thinking on various topics if you have all day to do whatever you are in the mood for. But ultimately we would still need a real outlet for our creative and constructive urges, a way to meaningfully occupy our time.

Ultimately we would need a true common cause again that everyone can share in, like Starfleet in Trek is for mankind. A new frontier, exploration and discovery like humanity has not known since we first started sailing our oceans to seek out the unknown. And not just for elite astronauts, for everyone.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 months ago

Would depend how it's achieved. The most realistic way would be through mass automation, but the question is now "who owns the machines that produce everything?" A minority controlling these means of production would mean the rest of the world is at their mercy. If they manage to maintain their ownership (though a fully automated defense force, I guess), they can have the rest of the world doing whatever they want... But what do they need these people for then? All they are is a threat, as they are prone to revolt. Genocide seems like a handy option if the elites are sufficiently ruthless, but it would be hard to put in place; there are many people in the world and they can be inventive when fighting for their lives. Beside, there would probably be several such elite groups, still divided in different country; one who starts building large armies and stacking weapons might attract hostility from their neighbors. Providing the people with their needs to pacify them? Sure, but what if they want more? Or what if they make their own automated armies with the free time they have not worrying about starvation? Keeping them occupied seems safer. Why not invent some bogus job that doesn't actually need to be done and have them believe they still need to earn their living? That could solve the problem from the elite's point of view. So basically, no change for the people.

With collective ownership of the means of production and an egalitarian spread of wealth, it could be cool tho. People would just do whatever they want, many would still probably undertake collective project, either to further better life of for the fun of it. There could still be forms of conflicts about how some things are managed and by whom, tho...

[–] theywilleatthestars 21 points 8 months ago

We'd be forced to anyway

[–] z00s 14 points 8 months ago

Star Trek would happen

[–] JayObey711 9 points 8 months ago

I don't think that everyone will stop working just because they can. Even if everything even non essential goods would be provided for everyone, we would still produce luxury good, arts and services. So it would in the best case evolve into something like market socialism where everyone profits of of the chance to never have to work again. In the worst case we would be stuck with a system where few hold these unlimited resources and make people work by holding back essential goods despite being abled to provide for everyone. In both situations I think money would probably still play a role.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

The art we made would be amazing... and we'd instantly see life spans and QoL skyrocket.

Working is bad for your health.

[–] stanleytweedle 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Someone would start to make or do something for fun. Someone else would see it and want one. A market is born. They try bartering for a while, that gets too complicated, then someone remembers money worked pretty well for exchanging goods and services.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not necessarily. Lots of people already release their "fun" things they make for free. If you had all your needs taken care of, you could release anything you made for free a lot more easily.

That being said, there will always be limits even if you don't have to work, there are only so many major sports teams that can be owned by a single person. There can only be so many stays per night at fancy hotels in a particular city.

[–] stanleytweedle 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even with biological needs satisfied human society creates social\cultural 'needs' that people will fight\work just as hard to acquire or maintain. 'Keeping up with the Jones' can create demand for literally anything. Unless we each get a genie that grants our every wish, we'll find something to compete over and markets will develop around those.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Universal Basic Income should buy away the poor and make sure everyone is comfortable. Bartering with earned money is still allowed.

[–] AbouBenAdhem 2 points 8 months ago

Historically, barter only tends to appear in communities used to a monetary economy when something temporarily disrupts the currency system. The more common pattern of commerce within communities not previously accustomed to currency is that goods are given in one direction at a time, and incur an informal social debt that may be eventually be repaid with reciprocal goods or by some other means entirely (e.g., support during community disputes).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

Time will become the currency if other resources are unlimited.

Time keeps moving forward, and you cannot go back to the past.

[–] TeoTwawki 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I'd stop spending all my time on trying to survive and poor all my hours into work I want to do instead of have to do. I have a ton of stuff I'd actually want to do that are very definately work but I can't make a living doing it, so I don't!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Finally we'll get to some serious space exploration and and other scientific breakthroughs. I'm sure there is plenty of crap to compete with out there.

[–] postmateDumbass 5 points 8 months ago
[–] deafboy 5 points 8 months ago

Speculating about the disappearance of money would be like speculating about disappearance of a thermomether. Even if every specimen were to be destroyed, someone would reinvent it.

Even if all basic needs are to be taken care of, somebody would always come up with something more. Other people would naturally want it. That would quickly lead to a realization that there is something like a value, and also a need to measure it somehow.

Could be pieces of seashells we exchange directly, or a massive database of who makes what for whom, but the result is the same.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We'd all hold hands and sing kumbaya 24/7/365

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Somebody yell them to shut up, I'm trying to sleep here!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

these people had a beautiful idea:

https://www.thevenusproject.com/

This plus benevolent AI = utopia. and we could be building it now, but capitalism is going to kill all of us instead. arm yourselves if you want to see life on this planet last another century.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

everyone will get the same fixed wage, so they can buy what they want, but don't deplete everything by stockpiling too many

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

I think this a misconcept about Universal Basic Income, or atleast my vision of it atleast. UBI should only buy away the poor and make everyone comfortable. Jobs would still be available, as UBI should not let one live a life of luxury, so you can go out and live the life you want if you have the drive. But if someone else doesn't have the drive and just wants to coast by they should be able to without worrying about dying.

Let's just make the baseline for everyone comfortable

[–] AbouBenAdhem 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

What (if anything) does the state tax, and in what form do they require payment?

[–] TootSweet 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What makes you think we "need" to work now?

[–] Account5600 8 points 8 months ago

Food, water, a roof over your head....

Gonna need money, which is obtained through work

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Maybe most of us would be on Basic Assistance

[–] APassenger 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We need teachers. Many would do it, but they want respect and support.

So I'm guessing they'd need money.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Let's be realistic, if humans continue to exist we're going to be raised and educated in AI powered pods

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] credo 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That movie is called Logan’s Run.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Time to grab me some Soma and check out who is on the carousel tonight!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bin_bash 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Them we are making more children ....

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’d be bored as hell. I enjoy my job and get a lot of satisfaction from it, so I’d probably still work.

[–] Dozzi92 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I tell people I will work til I die, partly as a tongue in cheek jab at how bleak the future looks, but also because I find my job to be a good way to occupy my time.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Which is to be expected. You can still work you just would not need to in order to survive. I would be a librarian if I didn't have to worry about income to feed, clothe and shelter myself.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt 1 points 8 months ago

Yes money would be gone. That would have to precede not needing to work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

My guess is that the answer will be unintuitive. For many people regular work schedule is what the rest of their life is built around. If you remove the need for work eveything else falls apart too and this would derail the lifes of the vast majority of humanity. Ofcourse there's some number of people that do have interesting hobbies and other projects that could take the place of their previous job but for many people this is not the case and they would now just be sitting around with nothing to do and no purpose to their life.

If I had to guess what the optimal situation would be it would be something like UBI + less work. UBI would give you the peace of mind to not have to constantly stress about your personal finances which would then allow you to choose a job you actually like doing and instead of doing it 8 hours a day 5 days a week you could perhaps work only 3 days or every day but just for 5 hours or so.

load more comments
view more: next ›