[churchill]

Taken to its natural conclusion, your idea is that we should farm our own wheat, thresh it, grind it into flour, make our own bread, and build our own homes. Should we do that?

If jobs can't be exported to specialists who can do it at scale in Asia, Europe, etc. then there should be no specialization at all! Your logic demands that everyone fend for themselves primitively, which will lead to a collapse of the abundance mass production/specialization has created for humanity.

[bawana]

I think the microcosm of an animal is a useful analogy: every animal has functions that it performs within its body. Survival requires the acquisition of resources (food). However we now have the ability to endow humans with the biochemical machinery of photosynthesis through genetic engineering. This would eliminate the need for most food production and consumption. Yet this seemingly huge biological advantage never evolved. Instead, We continue to develop more complex ways to acquire and use resources. This increasing complexity is exceeding the ability of our brains to manage, even as we struggle to build artificially expanded intelligence. There is an optimal amount of interdependent activity (=trade) that maximizes utility. We have experienced conditions on both sides of this optimum. The first step to recovery is recognizing this optimum and defining it, but we continue to deny its existence. Instead we have developed systems that rely on constant growth and expansion- this is weirdly un-earthlike where most systems are cycles in equilibrium.

[horns4lyfe]

You don’t have to take it that far

[porridgeraisin]

| sed 's/natural conclusion/absolute extreme'