|
Two current GD threads, linked in a non-obvious way.
Computers and technology increase worker productivity. If demand for goods remained static, that would mean fewer jobs. The reason that hasn't occurred is some of this growth created additional demand for new goods.
If increasing demand for goods keeps people employed, then anything permanent is an obstacle.
Detroit is crumbling because the entire system - not just the stuff in it - is designed for planned obsolescence. Every city will see the same phenomenon. An event will cause the core to collapse. That decay will spread like ripples on a pond to the outlying areas until the ring of viable city eventually becomes too expensive to function. At that point, either the city will be abandoned altogether, or perhaps some developers will bet that the central urban core is viable for redevelopment.
If your stuff doesn't last, don't be surprised. NOTHING is supposed to last.
It's not sustainable. We can't even keep recycling old stuff into new stuff, because the demands at each iteration require new inputs, and more jobs require more growth.
The solution is a reduced workweek. "Hard work" as measured in the US paradigm is a bad thing. If you work 60 hours a week to afford a fancier car, you are part of the problem.
Workaholism is not a virtue.
|