JD,

"And even in today's highly productive economies we still see persistent scarcity in areas like housing, care, land and access to services."

Well, I've only ever been talking about physical goods and what I've said is so obvious that JD needs to introduce non-sequiturs like care, and services. Basically proving my point.

Additionally, are we really running out of land? Wow, desperate men clutching at straws. And housing is in short supply because of policy not because we don't have the resources to supply it. Whatismore, saying things aren't perfect everywhere hardly shows that things aren't vastly better generally. Never let perfect be the enemy of better.... unless presented with a proposition you don't like but can't refute honestly.

Aries,

"You have shot yourself in your foot by the statement

" ... all things being equal ... "

I'll explain more. There are all sorts of things that could delay or potentially even stop the inexorable move to superabundance.... The Chinese release and new improved virus and governments make the same mistakes as last time; new governments so alter economic conditions as to kill the incentive to efficiency and probably a bunch of others that no one's even contemplated.

But the fact is, based on passed experience and the clear trend lines that you so want to not see, things are pointing in just one direction. Dismissing the data because it is counter-intuitive and doesn't suit other ideologies, is the opposite of clarity of thought.

What I find hilarious is that experts throughout the world are now addressing this issue - I've mentioned a few above - yet the experts here are sure it'll never happen based on ....reasons.

This is a retreat, mhaze.

//Well, I've only ever been talking about physical goods.//

If that is the scope of the argument, then very few people would dispute it. Technological progress has often reduced the labour required to produce many manufactured goods.

But that is a much narrower claim than the one you originally made.

Earlier you were defending the proposition that work will eventually become optional and money largely irrelevant because of "superabundance".

That conclusion depends on far more than the abundance of manufactured goods.

//JD needs to introduce non-sequitors like care and services.//

Those are not non sequiturs. They are exactly the kinds of things people spend much of their income on, and they are central to whether scarcity persists in everyday economic life.

If the discussion is about whether society moves toward a world where work becomes optional, then housing, care, land, energy, services and infrastructure access are directly relevant constraints.

//And housing is in short supply because of policy not because we don't have the resources to supply it.//

That actually reinforces the point. If policy and institutional arrangements determine whether housing is abundant or scarce, then technological capacity alone does not guarantee a post-scarcity society.

In other words, the argument has shifted from a very large claim about the future structure of society to a much narrower observation about the productivity of manufacturing.

I told you all years ago that I think the best way to fix housing is to go back to what we did 50 years ago, essentially caravan parks, just assemble relocatable homes straight off a production line instead with shipping containers full of components from China.

It's not so much about keeping Aussies employed as much as it's about fixing a problem.

Hey mhaze,
Here's the full information about how the U.S. bombed the elementary school in Minaj, you won't find this information on any mainstream media article.
http://www.youtube.com/live/ZGazMbUn1-I?t=2135

"This is a retreat, mhaze.//Well, I've only ever been talking about physical goods.//"

Show me where I talked about anything other than physical goods.

Show me where any of the links I provided talked about anything other that physical goods.

The fact that you failed to understand the concept of superabundance doesn't mean I retreat when the penny finally (FINALLY) drop with you.

The whole notion that it can be anything other than physical goods is so daft that its laughable. How do you have a superabundance of services. What? Two waitresses per table. Two accountants doing your books.

Its insane and inane and shows how little you understood this and how little you considered it before weighing in to try to discount it.

"Indeed, AC. It's a common trait amongst those who prioritise performance over truth-seeking"

So we see AC and JD seeking to sooth each others butt-hurt.

We have AC who thinks the path to truth is via fake AI YouTube videos.
And we have JD who runs off to Grok whenever he needs someone to offer him some solace.(its actually not a someone but JD doesn't seem to understand that either).

Both heavily reliant on AI and now soothing each other. A certain symmetry there.