|
|
|
|
|
by AnthonyMouse
4843 days ago
|
|
Even "resources" primarily only cost money because of the labor it takes to discover them and then remove them from the ground and refine them. In theory there are some things that are genuinely scarce (e.g. energy or specific elements) but so what? Most of them have substitutes, and the fewer labor costs have to be paid the more substitutes become viable. Have the robots mass produce wind turbines or solar panels out of low-scarcity materials, or mine space, etc. Even in the most pessimistic case where you have a valuable scarce resource with no substitutes then you have something to tax which will produce revenue that can be used to supply necessities to the public. |
|