[btown]

Something I often think about is whether having a job - the agency to by one's own hand change one's prospects in life, to "provide for one's family" - is our equivalent of this "less confined space." In a post-automation post-scarcity world, despite boundless entertainment and resources (things that would make rats perfectly happy)... would ennui still drive people towards self-destructive behavior? And in fact, would the optimization of that entertainment (see: usedopamine.com ) actually prime people's brains towards addiction, towards whatever form the next opioid epidemic might take? We understand so little about our own minds and how they might respond to the world we are ushering in.

[miketery]

Post scarcity? Where, when, and for who? Our current economic models don't work for that unfortunately.

Edit: I should add there are a couple post scarcity instances in recent history. Establishment of America, and post WW2. These also coincided with the least income inequality. But those periods don't last.

[gizmo686]

In what ways were the Establishment of America, and post WW2 post scarcity?

US inflation adjusted per capita GDP is higher today than at either of those times. While I do not think GDP is a great metric, I cannot think of any metric where we, as a society, have less "stuff" to go around then before.

[lostlogin]

It’s not the amount of stuff, it’s the inequality.

[jfnixon]

Interesting hypothesis. How does it explain the doctor in the article, or the lawyers, entertainers, and other wealthy people who wind up addicted?

[lostlogin]

It probably doesn’t and the uptick in the deaths of comparatively advantaged groups doesn’t fit the model well. Addiction and distress have well documented links with things like unemployment rates correlating well with ODs and deaths. However despite wealthy people featuring in the article the vast majority of the deaths, ODs and incarcerations aren’t in the group you describe.

https://www.google.co.nz/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/artic...

[jfnixon]

Fair enough. Still, I'd suggest that the wealthy group indicate opiates scratch an itch which is probably unrelated to inequality. Even if we drastically reduced inequality, that itch would likely still exist. I'd also find it interesting if there was a comparison of the per capita ratio of wealthy addicts to poor addicts. It seems entirely plausible that a causal, not simply correlative, link exists between unemployment/poverty and 'bad' addictive behaviors, but something is hooking highly functioning, wealthy humans on opioids, too.

On a tangent, while I've never had chronic pain, I've had friends who have, and I know it can destroy anyone's life. I don't want to see the abuse of effective pain meds by some lead to difficulties in obtaining pain relief for those who really need it. Someone in chronic pain has enough to handle without worrying about maintaining access to appropriate medication.

[toasterlovin]

Right, but "post-scarcity" is about stuff, no?

[andrei_says_]

If you look at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the need for meaning / meaningful contribution is extremely important.

I’d say that jobs in the context of survival are useful, but we as human beings also need a sense of accomplishment, of being useful to others beyond the value associated with mere profit.