[ekorz]

Fret not! It’s not all forgotten. We know how to make structures with fine masonry techniques; it’s just not economical to build modern structures with these labor-intensive and high-skill methods. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_architecture and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashlar

[openfuture]

Fret not! we anyway need to find an economic system that makes these methods economical again (or die trying).

[taeric]

Uh... An underclass that isn't as valued as royalty can easily get you this. Otherwise, there maybe isn't value in stuff like this?

[tablespoon]

> Uh... An underclass that isn't as valued as royalty can easily get you this. Otherwise, there maybe isn't value in stuff like this?

That's one way. Another is a (theoretical) advanced society that directs its surplus value into creating art rather than consumerism or oligarchical capital accumulation.

[taeric]

I mean.... I was (hopefully) obviously going for a cynical take. That said, I don't know how far I can agree with "we could have a society that acts like basically no other society we have ever seen." Do you have anything to base this "theoretical" on?

Similarly, I'm fine with creating more homes for people, even if they are not artistic. When the value is on someone living there, as opposed to others looking at it, it sounds a whole lot differently.

[pcmoney]

Isnt art just consumerism with extra steps?

[idiocrat]

Perhaps just accepted tax evasion schemes.

[hypertele-Xii]

No.

[kozd]

Seems that taxing negative externalities like carbon emissions would be good start

[taeric]

What makes you so sure that modern building doesn't have better numbers there?

[robinsoh]

> it’s just not economical to build modern structures with these labor-intensive and high-skill methods.

Do you find that explanation convincing?