- human form,
- resources used by humans
- or wildlife
[back from tea [(11/03/2018) 21:36]]
So there is a problem, pinning it down so that it can be defined clearly is no easy task. If it isn't defined clearly then no solution can be properly implemented. The world is full of people with solutions: but few of these solutions have relevance to real world problems: they are solutions looking for problems. That's the wrong way round.
The basic problem is one of logistics: provide the right product, in the right condition, in the right quantity, to the right people, at the right time, in the right place at the right time.
Basic expectation is that employment in retail will diminish, in terms of working in bricks and mortar stores. These stores will mostly become showrooms, display centres. Sales will mostly be online, and employment will therefore increase in terms of courier services. Letter/mail boxes will increase in size to receive large parcels. Whilst won't be able to pick item up from showroom, the item will arrive at the persons home before they themselves arrive home. Though initially won't expect or be able to supply better than within 48 hours.
The central planning system will be the internet: the so called big data. However it is relatively clear the people currently dealing with big data are less than competent at interpreting such data. Popularity contests do not properly represent the views and values of the people. Just because have traffic passing a building doesn't mean that the traffic is a market. Likewise just because people visit a website or view an individual page doesn't mean people are a market or have any liking for such page. It certainly doesn't represent a mechanism indicating the need to supply more of such stuff. Peoples curiosity will eventually taper, they will have identified a source of rubbish and move on, and yet the evidence would have suggested people liked the rubbish. It's the all swans are white versus problem. As Karl Popper pointed out, we have to do more than accumulate evidence to support an idea, we also need to seek evidence against the idea, we need the imagination to consider alternatives.
Central planning for example is typically rejected on the basis that the USSR was a centrally planned military dictatorship, and that was bad. Cats have four legs, dogs have four legs, therefore all cats are dogs. And thus all central planning ideas are bad, with false assumption that free market capitalism is good.
Free market capitalism however has no social conscience. Society however has to have a social conscience, it is what makes it a society. A capitalist society is therefore a contradiction of terms.
For certain society needs to be dynamically adaptive to survive in a dynamic world. Society was largely created to provide a buffer against the vagaries of the natural world. Then capitalism threw us back into the maelstrom of chaos. The natural tendency of the universe towards increasing entropy (disorder). Though life tends to resist such disorder, with life, information and wealth considered as negentropy.
beats me I've written more than one paragraph, and therefore lost in my own thoughts.
[11/03/2018] : Original