I don't see it as post-capitalism, just a change in what constitutes the most efficient means of production. Cuts out middlemen.<p>If rent-seeking accounts for an increasing fraction of economic activity (a big IF, but let's assume it's true for the sake of figuring out consequences) then it will eventually surpass the inefficiencies of small-scale generalist production and we'll break into "communes." Scare quotes because there's no reason they have to be anti-technology, anti-capitalism, anti-trade, anti-government, or any of the other scary associations that follow the word around.<p>Especially for "unskilled" (or otherwise marginalized) labor, this sort of a model would seem to make sense. Employers would be forced to beat the value proposition of "work x days a month, do whatever you want with the remainder, your ability to secure food and shelter is guaranteed unless you screw up big time."<p>There's a ton of work to be done before it's a viable alternative. Hell, I bet it's even going to get VC funding someday (better to sell the shovels, right?). Neat stuff, but right now I'll just watch from the sidelines. Robotic farming (GVCS), DIY circuit board / chip manufacture, DIY chemical industry (stock up on popcorn when they get to Haber or Frank-Caro), 3D printing of structures... am I missing anything? Is there a mailing list I should be on (FBI forgive me)?<p>EDIT: We should talk about the big sticking point, which will be "how would one replace or compensate specialists that haven't been marginalized by capitalism yet and don't contain bunches of 'hippies,' for lack of a better word"? In other words: doctors. This is why I'm on the sidelines for now ;)
I question the post-scarcity assumption. If you described how people live now to someone who lived 5000 years ago they would think we live in a post-scarcity world now. We have such abundance now, yet we still have "poor" people and humans still want to consume and control more. It's human nature to want more. Maybe in the far future people will want their own planets and anyone who doesn't have one will be considered living in "poverty". I don't think it will ever end unless the biology of human nature and the animal brain changes.
This post is basically a copy/paste of the latest book of Rifkin:<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Marginal-Cost-Society-Collaborative/dp/1137278463/" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Marginal-Cost-Society-Collaborati...</a><p>Book, which is by the way very good.
The premise of this piece is that we are close to satisfying the demands of society and that we'll be living in a post-scarcity world. But everyone I know wants to vacation on the moon (i.e. we have an unlimited capacity to consume new things). At current prices, just my 30 closest friends going to the moon for two week every year is about the same level of consumption as the total global economy.<p>We only live in a post scarcity world if you believe that humans have a limited capacity for consumption. Everyone who has bet on that thus far in history has been proved wrong, so capitalism or no, we need to deal with scarcity.
I just dont see it happening, that those with great capital resources would allow themselves to be undermined in such a way. The innate human power structure is such that those with the most resources make the rules. (Feudal, mercantile, and democratic)<p>I would suggest reading the second half of "road to wigan pier" which will both provide history and an excellent critique of this style of thinking.
I have a feeling that anything other than "free market capitalism" is going to be shunned around these parts. :)<p>Great read. And the predecessor as well.
<a href="https://medium.com/@cjdew/the-obsolescence-of-capitalism-340ad9fafd8f" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@cjdew/the-obsolescence-of-capitalism-340...</a>
Capitalism - that word again. I don't think it means what you think it means.<p>PS: Post-capitalism implies capitalism was or is present and unless the author wrote this piece in Hong Kong or Singapore he should not even remotely apply that word any present or past "economic system"<p>PPS: Much like democracy.