A perfect world?

I’m dying to hear what you guys think about this:
are we actually moving toward a world where poverty just... ceases to exist? And I don't mean some "charity case" scenario where billionaires or massive corporations like Amazon suddenly decide to be nice to us—that's not it. I’m talking about pure, raw technological evolution reaching a point where it can actually provide a dignified life for everyone—basically, a world where most people could actually live out their wishes.

So, here’s my specific question regarding how you all interpret this: I was reading some economist's work lately—he’s arguing that by the end of the 21st century, we’ll have successfully met all basic human needs. He claims people will basically transform into a society of scientists and artists... where everyone just does whatever they feel like because life won't be dictated by the constant, crushing struggle to find food or just survive. Everyone gets to pursue their passion. The thing is, he didn't actually explain *how* we get there. So, how do you think we actually solve the problem of meeting those fundamental human needs?

I don't know. It sounds good on paper, but we’re well into the 21st century and I'm certainly not seeing any signs that the economist's theories are actually playing out in reality...
The concept is nice, but people have been dreaming up worlds like this for ages (Google).
What can I say? Theory is one thing, reality is another.
If only it were possible. But human consciousness hasn't reached that level yet. Whether it's the 21st century or 2099—we'll see. Maybe eventually...

Exactly.

The issue is that our standards are constantly shifting... Nowadays, we define prosperity as having a solid career, a six-figure salary, a nice car, the ability to travel, and being able to fund a child's education all the way through a PhD...

Fifty years ago, success meant having a reliable place to live and enough food on the table, and a century before that, it was simply about finding something to eat every single day.

I wonder, what will people consider essential a hundred years from now?...

Fifty years ago, the big struggle was just having a roof over your head and enough food to eat, and a century before that, it was just surviving the day without starving.

True enough. We aren't starving—at least not us folks in the Northern Hemisphere—but honestly, God help us with the junk we actually consume. Here in the States, things are decent enough if you don't look too closely, but go outside and really check it out, and you'll see most food barely has any color, shape, taste, or smell left in it. I mean, seriously, in America, a liter of Coca-Cola is cheaper than a liter of water???

We’re all crammed into these massive, crowded, stinking cities now, even if our apartments feel like luxury compared to the past. It used to be the exact opposite, right? People lived out in the country with clean air and nature, but life was just brutal and penniless.

We gained some stuff and lost some other stuff along the way. All things considered, I guess we’ve got it better than our ancestors did, don't you think?

are we actually moving toward a society where poverty won't exist?

No, we are definitely not making progress there. Just look at the numbers; even in the West, society is fracturing more than ever, with the rich getting obscenely wealthier while the poor just sink deeper. The net worth of the average American is basically $0.

Like you pointed out, the whole definition of being "poor" is pretty subjective. One survey says 80% of Americans feel poor, yet at least 50% of Americans own a smartphone. Clearly, even the ones struggling have one of those lying around. 😁

So maybe the real question we should be asking is: where the hell is the middle class going? They're supposed to be the backbone of any democratic society, but here, they've almost vanished, kept alive by nothing but a facade of credit and debt. Things are moving in a similar direction in the West, just at a slightly slower pace. It's harder to find a job, harder to keep one, and real estate is ridiculously expensive... all in all, the "music" is playing a much higher price than it was 10, 20, or 30 years ago.

Maria Thomas9 said:...according to him, this applies to the 21st century: reaching a point where primary human needs are met, allowing people to transform into scientists or artists. Everyone will simply do what they love because life won't be dictated by the struggle for food or basic survival anymore.

The reality is that technological progress is driven by the pursuit of profit. This actually makes meeting our fundamental needs harder, even as technology advances. Since you can't squeeze massive profits out of basic necessities, the system makes them harder to access by manufacturing artificial desires instead.
For instance, when a modern American feels "thirsty," they grab a Coca-Cola. When we feel "hungry"—though most of us have never known true hunger—we head to MC Hammer. Instead of breathing pure air, we inhale cigarette smoke and other pollutants.
Modern man has become a slave to manufactured wants, while in impoverished parts of the world, people suffer from shortages that are artificially created.
Even back in the last century, there was enough food on this planet to feed everyone—more than enough, really—yet millions still died of starvation. It’s because, by the standards of big capital (meaning profit growth), saving the hungry just isn't profitable.😉

I’m totally with you there, swiftcobra15—

But here’s the kicker: did anyone actually address *how* they plan to fix this? I mean, how do we stop people from constantly struggling just to meet their basic needs—you know, food, shelter, the whole "trying not to starve" deal? Because if you really sit down and think about it, if humanity ever actually solves those survival hurdles, this planet is going to hit its absolute peak potential. We're talking 6 BILLION people who aren't bogged down by survival mode, finally free to dive headfirst into science, art, or whatever they're actually passionate about... the level of progress would be absolutely insane. But—and there's always a massive "but"—it all hinges on one tiny little detail: how on earth do we handle the primary needs?

???

What absolute nonsense!!!
Honestly, we’d all just lose our minds from sheer boredom!! We actually need some productive labor in our lives :-)
Not everyone was born to sit around doing nothing or engaging in pseudo-intellectual drivel
Someone has to actually get things done, people!

man, if things worked like that, we’d be living in a world where people wouldn't HAVE TO

Look, Patrick Long45, you’re talking about a world where people wouldn't be FORCED to work just to survive—instead, you'd have the freedom to do whatever the hell you want. Like, if you actually had this weird obsession with digging ditches, go for it! But nobody would be dragging you out of bed by your collar because they're starving. It's about choice, man. All that mindless, back-breaking manual labor we deal with today? Technology would just wipe that right off the map, leaving us free to actually pursue the stuff we're passionate about

At least, that's how I see it playing out

I honestly don't follow your logic, my friend—though I say that with all due respect—but I truly believe we would run into a massive systemic collapse very quickly... because when you don't *have* to do anything, eventually you won't *want* to do anything, and someone, somewhere, actually has to get things done. I genuinely can't wrap my head around how those basic human needs would ever be satisfied without any incentive
and besides, brilliant ideas rarely spring from idleness—they come from necessity—yet here we are, talking about a total meltdown again
It’s just distasteful, and thank God that hasn't happened to us yet!

Man, wouldn't you love that? Sure, maybe you could coast for the first few days or even months, but I bet you wouldn't last a single year without having something to do.

And let's be real—even then, those "genius" ideas wouldn't just pop up because you're sitting around being lazy; they'd come from actual necessity (I mean, imagine traveling by sea, the sheer prestige, the looks people give you when you've literally invented a spaceship or discovered some insane new wonders, etc.). There’d be motivation, period. Plus, it's way easier to actually get stuff done when you aren't constantly stressed about deadlines, shitty working conditions, rent, or just trying to buy milk and bread for the kids...
Also, think about this hypothetical scenario: if out of 6 billion people, 5 billion are just rotting away while that 1 billion is busy researching, searching, and discovering... then mathematically speaking, the number of breakthroughs and inventions would be infinitely higher, which means the benefits for the human race would be massive. Right?!

There’d still be a crew of people who *need* to work, but honestly, you'd easily find plenty of folks who'd actually *want* to do it. Like a police force or something.))

Does anyone actually know how they handled that whole issue in the Star Trek universe? Like, can someone there just lie around the house all day doing absolutely nothing, or do you still have to contribute somehow?

So, just imagine—hypothetically speaking—if out of six billion people, five billion are basically rotting away and that one billion is actually out there researching, searching, and discovering stuff... then by the laws of pure math, wouldn't the number of breakthroughs be immeasurable, making the benefits for the human race massive? Wouldn't it?!

Man, you must be part of some club for wide-eyed, overachieving young scientists or something. Wake up, man; most people on this planet couldn't care less about science, discoveries, space, or any of that other crap. Ever heard of that? You obviously went to a prep school (or are still stuck in one), right? Try walking through a vocational school or a local trade district once in a while just to see what actual life philosophies look like 😁. Even most high school kids aren't that far off from reality.

And what kind of **benefits for the human race** are we even talking about if all our basic existential needs are already met?? All those innovations, once the initial satisfaction of basic survival kicks in, would just become pure *l'art pour l'art*—or whatever the phrase is—basically just a desperate attempt to stave off total, crushing boredom.

Look, imagine Santa Claus brings you this miraculous machine with a big, bright red button. All you have to do is imagine whatever you want, hit the button, and voila, it appears. I guarantee you that after three months of fulfilling every single possible and impossible whim, you'd grab a huge sledgehammer, smash that magic machine into a million pieces, and go right back to your normal life.

So, just enjoy what you've got right now (you don't have much of a choice) 🙂

When I talk about "benefit to the human race," I'm definitely not just talking about meeting basic survival needs. Like, why is it that people who already have mountains of cash still feel this desperate itch to grab even more? Why? I'll tell you why—it's because they're chasing respect, trying to prove they’re somehow superior to everyone else. It's motivation, it's competition... all that stuff is swirling around in the same pot, and from that mixture, you get this deep-seated human drive to prove oneself.

The bottom line is—there's no shortage of motivation out there.

As for the folks working in service industries, like hair salons or clothing retail—if they didn't have to grind just to stay afloat, if life was essentially handed to them, I don't know how society plans to handle that, but it certainly wouldn't work like this. There still needs to be a sense of craft, expertise, and actual WORK. And I don't mean "work" in the sense of being terrified that if you don't show up tomorrow, your wife and kids won't have food on the table. No, I mean that once we solve the issue of basic existence, everyone can live with dignity. Labor would be largely automated, requiring only necessary human intervention.

And look, I'm not talking about some "magic red button" that grants every whim, because you totally missed the point there. If it were that simple, life would be a total breeze. To get something, something else has to be spent, but first, you have to produce and acquire that thing in the first place... you know what I mean? You need a functional chain of events. Solving the problem of basic existence would fix the fundamental struggle, but it wouldn't kill the concept of work entirely. Get it?

All those ridiculous, half-baked schemes people push have nothing to do with this. We aren't discussing some utopian fantasy here; we're talking about what scientists—and I'm not talking about some fringe leftist types, but actual, authoritative global experts—are predicting.

I actually dug up a book on this; it's by Adolf Dragičević, specifically regarding Political Economy (from the law school in a major US city), so this isn't just me rambling. Plus, the guy is an academic, so he's not just making things up—he's relaying established professional viewpoints.

Look, I’ll tell you why, because they want respect from others, right? They want to prove they’re better than the rest of the crowd. Motivation, competition... it’s all just different flavors of the same thing, dear blank rei, and it all boils down to that basic human drive to prove oneself.

Just take a look around you and try to count how many people actually have those things driving their lives. I honestly don't think you'll find more than 20% of them. 😁

As for the folks in hair styling or the garment industry, it's not like they're just gonna slack off and live for free, you know? I don't know what the official plan is, but there's no way it works like that—there has to be actual skill, a trade, actual WORK involved. And I don't mean work in the sense that if you don't show up tomorrow, your wife and kids start crying because there's no food on the table.

Give me a concrete suggestion then—how do you "force" someone who refuses to work to actually get moving without using survival as the motivator? Besides, the level of support you're talking about—where it's not quite "NO FOOD ON THE TABLE"—has already been reached here in the States: we've got welfare, child benefits, charities providing clothes, soup kitchens... Sure, you won't be driving a car, surfing the web, or scrolling on your phone with that kind of help, but those aren't exactly survival necessities, are they? 😁 (Or maybe they are?

Anyway, I found this book; Adolf Dragičević, specifically regarding Political Economy (from a law school in a big city), so it's not just some random rambling, and the guy is an academic, so he's really just relaying established expert views.

Well, why didn't you just say where you're getting your inspiration from right away? 😁 😁 People like Adolf were the ones who designed the old socialist systems that, well, eventually fell apart. And they failed precisely because of their attitude toward labor. People were handed apartments for nothing, cheap food, dirt-cheap utilities, and jobs with ZERO PRESSURE (just ask any mom what the work atmosphere was like back in the socialist era). And what did that get us? It got us a massive NOTHING, not the explosion of creativity you're dreaming about. It turns out most people will put in the bare minimum if there's no pressure. If you don't believe me, just ask anyone over 45. Or go walk into a government office or a state-run agency and see what it looks like.

And check the publication date on that Dragičević book. I'd bet anything it was 1989 or earlier. 🙂

"Take a look around you and count how many people actually have that (whatever you just listed) as their main driving force. Honestly? I bet you won't find more than 20% of them."

Look, everyone on this planet is just out here trying to prove themselves—they want respect, they want people to go wild for them. It doesn't matter if it's a top-tier scientist or some random guy working at a local diner spinning tall tales about his hunting trips just to impress the crowd; everyone’s doing it, just in their own weird way. Everyone is chasing that hit of recognition—how they go about it might differ, but the underlying hunger for validation? That's universal!

"Give me a real, concrete suggestion on how to 'force' someone who has zero motivation to actually WORK, without relying on basic survival needs."

You can't force them—I'm with you there—but let's be real: most people are desperate for recognition. And once they can't get that fix just by stacking up cash, they'll pivot to something else to feel important—whether that's diving into science, making art, building the most insane house on the block, or being the best damn mason or pizza chef in town just to hear people talk about them.

Once again, solving basic existential problems doesn't magically fix human motivation. We are hardwired to chase something higher. You mentioned cell phones earlier—well, even if you solve the primary needs, something else will just take the place of the phone. There will always be something else to chase.

It isn't some brainwashed piece of propaganda—better yet, consider that a chunk of it is just 200 pages of fluff while the other 500 pages are actual, legitimate academic literature you'd need for an exam. You either have to read it yourself to see for yourself, or just take my word for it. Besides, the guy wrote this back in '96 and '97 when he already had forty years of serious scientific research under his belt.

everyone on this planet just wants to prove themselves, you know? they want respect, they want people to go absolutely wild for them.

Look, I get it, we’re all driven by ego to some degree, whether it's a little bit or a whole lot; we all want to be *someone*, so yeah, we can agree there. But my point is that most people aren't actually trying to build themselves up through, I don't know, actual constructive work or anything useful. I hope that makes more sense now. It’s pretty gutsy—maybe even straight-up delusional—to base an entire economy on the desperate need for people to show off, especially when most of that "showing off" just involves smoking certain brands of cigarettes, driving a specific luxury car, owning a beach house in Malibu, or being a member at some exclusive country club...

they'll have to turn to science, art, building the perfect home—masons, making the best damn pizza.

Man, I wish it were that simple. But you're forgetting that even today, people still have plenty of free time on their hands, and most of them just blow it watching the news, binging Netflix, grabbing beers, or gossiping about neighbors. Plus, just because someone decides to bake a pizza for existential reasons doesn't mean they won't also happen to make the best pizza in town, right?

Please weigh in on this: SOCIALISM
*******
People were handed apartments for free, cheap food, low utilities, jobs without any pressure, and what did we get? We got a big fat nothing, not exactly the explosion of creativity you're dreaming about.
*******

Regarding Dragičević, you can find his entire body of work right here on this site



Do you really think he was sitting around rewriting Political Economy every couple of years?

Benjamin Rodriguez2 said:Give me your take on this: SOCIALISM.

People had free housing, cheap groceries, low utility bills, and jobs without any crushing pressure... and what was the payoff? A massive big NOTHING.
Regarding Dragičević, you can find his entire body of work right here on this site.

👍 Candidate for greatest shits. 😁 😁 😁

I totally agree that most people aren't out here trying to level up through actual constructive work—but look, once they hit that point where they need to satisfy their basic existential needs, they’re gonna have to find a way to "prove" themselves, whether they like it or not. And because of how things play out, that’s inevitably going to be through things like discovery or science...

"It’s very brave (if not outright insane) to base an entire economy on the need for people to prove themselves—people who mostly just try to flex by smoking specific brands of cigarettes, driving certain luxury cars, owning a beach house, or having a membership at some fancy country club..." says Benjamin Rodriguez2

That is exactly the point! Once all that stuff becomes universally accessible, it stops being a status symbol. Those people will lose that edge—that sense of exclusivity that everyone used to envy. We’re heading toward a total leveling of the playing field, and instead of banks, gas-guzzling supercars, or country club memberships, the new hierarchy will be driven by science. The elite will be the ones who actually know things and make discoveries; they’ll become the true "stewards" of humanity. This will force even those people who currently spend their lives chasing shallow clout to become scientists if they want any real recognition.

"Man, I wish. But you're forgetting that people still have plenty of free time today, which most of them just blow on newspapers, TV, beer, gossip, and whatever else. Plus, just because someone bakes a pizza for purely existential reasons doesn't mean they can't end up making the best damn pizza in town, right?"

True, they blow it, but you gotta ask yourself *why*?
They blow it because those status symbols they need to climb the social ladder—like a nice car or a massive paycheck—are still out of reach. The bottom line is that money is still the tool people use to grab respect, admiration, and recognition, but according to maybe Dragičević, that whole system is supposed to change.

As for the pizza thing, sure, someone forced into it by economic necessity might actually bake the best pizza ever, but my point was more about the idea that even people who aren't intellectually gifted will eventually find a way to feel valued and earn their own version of Recognition.

You're wrong about socialism;
In my opinion, the only real upside to socialism was that it tackled the most basic existential problems—nobody went hungry. But that didn't trigger some explosion of creativity, and here's why: people couldn't just sit around doing nothing. You couldn't stay healthy without working while still getting a house and food handed to you. There was COERCION involved. And human psychology is such that when you're working under any kind of pressure or compulsion, you feel stifled, restricted, UNFREE—and that absolutely bleeds into the quality of your work.
The way I see it, once those primary needs are met (if that ever actually happens), there’s going to be this initial wave of laziness and total inaction. But eventually, people will realize that work is what gives life meaning and purpose. Once they're truly free and unrestricted, they’ll realize they can achieve real recognition through their labor.

Regarding Dragičević, I haven't read his recent stuff, just that one book from '96. And honestly, he doesn't dump a bunch of hard facts, data points, or those dry economic charts on you—that's more what Professor Vranjican does. Dragičević spends his two hundred pages being strictly theoretical, analyzing the past, present, and future without getting bogged down in the weeds, and in my view, without any heavy ideological (socialism/communism) baggage. Grab the book if you can get your hands on it.

Well, let's keep this little dance going then 🙂

I mean, sure, I agree that most people aren't exactly out here trying to climb the ladder through hard work or anything, but once they actually have to deal with their basic survival needs, they’ll be forced—whether they like it or not—to find some way to "prove" themselves, and that’s going to end up being through things like education or science...

Scientists? You really think the masses are going to become scientists? Or innovators? Honestly, I’m terrified that most people just aren't cut out for that kind of stuff, and look at me, I'm the first to admit it 😁 Even a university professor once confessed to me that he can barely keep up with the truly IMPORTANT scientific papers in his own incredibly narrow niche... Now, just imagine all those Americans without college degrees (who make up about 93% of the population) trying to decode the human genome, messing around with nanotechnology, or inventing entirely new programming languages.... Yeah, good luck with that. I'm not saying you need to be an Einstein to write a research paper, but you still need a decent amount of IQ to pull it off.

That automation you're talking about? It’s already happening right now, at least in developed nations, and the fallout is pretty much always the same: fewer opportunities for anyone who isn't highly educated or intellectually gifted. I mean, who do you think is out there voting for Le Pen, Heider, the Republican Party, and the rest of that right-wing crowd? It's exactly those people—the ones left without jobs, without any real future, and without the tech skills to pivot. Their roles were swallowed up by technology, and whatever scraps are left are being picked up by Chinese people, Indian people, and everyone else. Germany is already sitting on several million of them, and despite throwing massive amounts of money and effort at the problem, they just can't get them employed. It’s a depressing reality, but honestly, nobody needs them.

Dragičević has that classic socialist habit of worshiping technology, acting like he doesn't realize the primary reason any company introduces new tech is to save money on payroll, not because they love the gadgets themselves.

Of course, you could argue that people will find jobs developing this new technology. Sure, they will, but it won't be the poor souls who lost their livelihoods because of it. Germany has millions of unemployed people, yet they are simultaneously desperate for thousands upon thousands of specialists in various fields. Don't kid yourself; those millions of people CANNOT be absorbed into those high-tech roles—they simply can't and don't know how to do that kind of work.

Technology brings plenty of perks, but they aren't distributed equally. Bill Gates gets another $40 billion, while others get a pink slip and welfare checks until they hit retirement age. 😁
Maybe Dragičević has some brilliant suggestion on how to "level the playing field." What, some new "proletarian dictatorship"? 😁

Even now, it's obvious that rapid technological growth is widening the gap in society—the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer (and that goes for pretty much any developed country). It's the exact opposite of what you want (and what I want), which is what Adolf predicts.

To be totally honest and blunt, I think either this Adolf guy is
a) a massive dreamer or
b) a huge naive fool or
c) has absolutely no clue how the real world works or
d) is just a smart guy selling snake oil at a premium.

bankei_ri said:Alright, let's keep this back-and-forth going then! 🙂

Scientists? Innovators? You really think the majority of people are gonna be cutting-edge researchers or inventing the next big thing? Honestly, I’m terrified by that whole idea—mostly because most people just aren't built for that kind of heavy lifting. I mean, look at me... I’m the first person to admit I don't have the mental bandwidth for it! 😁 So, I was chatting with this university professor the other day—real high-level academic stuff—and he actually admitted to me that even within his own tiny, hyper-specialized niche, he can’t even keep up with all the major scientific papers being published. Like, seriously? He’s literally drowning in his own field! And then I start thinking about the math here... just imagine all those Americans out there without a single shred of higher education—and we're talking like 93% of the population—suddenly deciding they're gonna decode the human genome, master nanotechnology, or invent entirely new programming languages on the fly. Yeah, right. Give me a break. Look, I’m not saying you need to be the next Einstein to write a decent research paper, but let’s be real for a second—you still need a baseline level of IQ to pull that off. You can't just wing it.

Look, this automation stuff you're talking about isn't some futuristic sci-fi nightmare—it’s already happening right here in the States, and honestly, it sucks for a lot of people. The reality is that automation is basically gutting job opportunities for anyone who didn't get a high-end degree or specialized tech training. You want to know who's out there voting for Trump, Heider, the Republican Party, and all that right-wing chaos? It’s exactly those people—the ones whose jobs were swallowed up by software and machines, leaving them with zero prospects and zero tech skills. They lost their livelihoods to technology, and now, the scraps that are left over are being snatched up by Chinese people, Indian people, and everyone else in the global workforce. Even in massive hubs like Germany—I mean, look at the scale of places like Germany compared to us—they’ve got millions of people like this just sitting around, and despite throwing massive amounts of money and effort at it, they can't find a way to get them back into the workforce. It's a brutal truth, but the hard reality is that the modern economy just doesn't have a place for them anymore.

Look, Dragičević has that classic, old-school socialist mindset where he basically worships at the altar of new tech—it’s honestly ridiculous. He acts like technology exists just for the sake of being "innovative," completely ignoring the elephant in the room. In any real American corporation, the only reason they're dumping millions into new software or automation isn't because they love gadgets; it's about the bottom line. It’s about slashing payroll and cutting heads to save a buck. Technology is just the tool they use to trim the fat on wages, but Dragičević talks about it like it's some holy grail of progress. Give me a break.

Sure, you can go ahead and claim that people will just "find new jobs" in tech development. Whatever. They will—but definitely not the poor souls who were tossed aside by automation in the first place. Look at the situation in Germany right now; they’ve got millions of unemployed people sitting around, yet they’re simultaneously desperate for thousands upon thousands of specialists across dozens of different fields. It’s a joke. You can try to argue with me all you want, but those millions of jobless folks aren't magically going to snap their fingers and land those high-tech roles—they don't have the skills, and honestly, they don't have the training to do the work. Period.

Look, technology is supposed to be this massive win for humanity, right? But let’s get real—it’s not bringing the goods to everyone equally. It’s a total rigged game. You’ve got guys like Bill Gates walking away with $40 billion while everyone else gets left in the dust. For a huge chunk of the workforce, "innovation" is just a fancy word for getting laid off and being stuck on government assistance until they hit retirement age. It's a joke. 😁
Maybe Dragičević has some genius idea on how to "level the playing field." What, like some new version of a "proletariat dictatorship"? Give me a break. 😁

It’s already becoming painfully obvious that this breakneck pace of technological advancement is just tearing the social fabric apart—creating this massive, widening gap where the ultra-wealthy are basically playing a different game entirely while everyone else struggles to stay afloat. It’s happening all over the developed world, and honestly, it’s pretty depressing. This is the exact opposite of what you and I were hoping for—and definitely not what Adolf predicted would happen.

Let’s be real for a second—keeping it totally blunt and down-to-earth here—I honestly think that guy Adolf is...
Is this guy some kind of delusional dreamer, or what? Seriously...
Is he just a total naive idiot, or what?
Honestly, this guy has absolutely zero clue how the real world works—like, none at all. It’s like he’s living in some weird little bubble where nothing actually matters, you know? Total amateur hour.
Just some smart-ass con artist selling nothing but hot air and broken promises—basically a guy peddling snake oil to anyone gullible enough to listen.

I am right there with you—100%. I’d sign that contract in a heartbeat, but only if we're talking about how things actually stand in America *right now*.

Look, all that deep philosophy, the endless analysis, whatever you want to call it—it’s fine, sure. It’s technically correct, but let’s be real: it’s all built on the shaky assumptions of how the world works right now. I’m not even gonna get into the whole "how did people ever think things like computers were impossible?" thing because we've been there, done that. But here’s the actual reality check: right now, about 93% of Americans without a college degree aren't going to touch scientific research with a ten-foot pole. Why? Because they don't have the drive, they don't have the interest, and they definitely don't have the opportunity. It just isn't in their DNA or their circumstances. But—and this is the big "but"—once we actually solve the problem of basic survival and existence, everything changes. Once people aren't just grinding to stay alive, we'll create a set of conditions that will basically force them into it. They won't have a choice anymore.

Look, I get it—automation is already everywhere, and there’s no denying that tech is eating up more and more of our daily lives. But we aren't talking about the same thing here! We haven't reached that crazy tipping point where humans become nothing more than some peripheral accessory while technology takes over as the primary engine of everything. I totally hear you on those points about a tiny elite getting filthy rich while the rest of us struggle to stay afloat—that’s definitely happening right now—but that's today's reality. I'm talking about what happens TOMORROW. I'm looking at the potential future, not just the current grind.

Look, Germany can't handle it today, but honestly? In the future, there won't even be a reason to hire them. Everything is going to change so fast that people will finally have the freedom to just do whatever they actually want to do.

Look, technology TODAY is just widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots, but maybe Dragičević hit the nail on the head when he mapped this out—he argued that this kind of societal evolution is basically inevitable. And we aren't talking about some weird dictatorship of the working class 🙂 🙂 ; we’re talking about reaching a state of fundamental equality—you know, true equality in terms of what everyone actually needs to survive

And yeah, circling back to socialism for a second—of course things felt uninspired back then because it was all forced equality. Basically, there was zero incentive for the individual since the government just swooped in and took the cream off the top. But in Dragičević's vision, that whole "taking the credit" thing changes—it's not about grabbing cash anymore, but about prestige and recognition. That's the actual spark that’s going to "drive" people to make real breakthroughs

SO, your analysis totally makes sense for how things look RIGHT NOW, but it doesn't account for what could potentially happen TOMORROW