• Gsus4
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    Without unemployment, without bullshit jobs and with automation, we could probably do all we do today just 1 billion people worldwide, no?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No. The world population has doubled in my lifetime. While I agree that’s too much, I see much faster scientific, medical and technology progress than ever before. I see more chance to be dreamers and explorers, more chances to build a better society. There’s more art, more freedom, and ever higher quality of life. We have been doing much better with more people.

      I don’t know what an ideal number would be, but I expect it’s more than half the current population

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Why do you think all that good stuff is due to more people rather than just technological advancement yielding faster technological advancement? The person tending to an ever growing landfill isn’t an essential component of modern life. The well-functioning landfill might be, but the person is just moving trash around. Replace them with a robot and the trash still gets moved around, will no reduction in art, freedom, or QoL.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          More people gives more opportunity for specialization. Smaller percentage of people required to make life work(shelter, food, water,m, waste management) means more people free to try innovation or art or explration

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            You’re just not addressing automation at all. We have no where close to a billion people specializing in tasks that can’t either currently or in the near-term future be either automated entirely or made so efficient the required workforce would be drastically reduced. You don’t need 4 billion people to maintain (and improve) our standard of living and we’re rapidly approaching the point where many jobs are better automated than done by people.

            If you want people to be free to innovate or make art or explore, the best way to do that is to not have them working pointless jobs for half their waking hours.

      • Gsus4
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        I still think that has not been because we have more people producing. It is because there is a lower fraction of poverty. There is no point in having more people while there are still people living in misery.