Re: Nanotech Restrictions (differences with haves and have-nots in 2050)

From: Michael S. Lorrey (
Date: Tue Apr 11 2000 - 20:25:11 MDT

john grigg wrote:
> Robert Bradbury wrote:
> If you are going to live 2000 years, sooner or later you are going to have
> to deal with the cleaning up the mess of your miss-spent youth (e.g.
> pollution). So a *real* "long-term" perspective includes an accounting for
> the commons, a desire to utilize and allocate resources most efficiently,
> and a desire to uplift others to your level (because its going to get damn
> boring talking to 10^10 copies of yourself), etc.
> (end)
> Zero wrote:
> Agreed. In addition, if the "have-nots" aren't permitted to join the haves"
> you run the risk of envy, which leads to things like looting and burning and
> other behavior by the lumpen masses which tends to annoy the elite. History
> has shown that the prols are not happy eating cake, while he elite dine on
> fine beef.- -Zero
> (end)
> This also hinges on the power difference between the "haves" and
> "have-nots." I would hope that the access to knowledge and technology will
> not be so limited to the public that they are not simply at the mercy of the
> government and corporate elite. I would hope that the continued rise in
> influence, wealth and education of the 'middle-classes' will continue and it
> would seem that this will happen.
> In 2050, there will still be "haves" and "have-nots" but the definitions
> will have changed. This has been talked about on the list before,
> certainly. A 2050 "have-not" may have a lifestyle that only a
> multi-millioniare has now, and yet will feel frustrated by living when
> looking at the "haves" who can afford certain services and luxuries that
> they cannot.
> I am curious to know what the list members think will be the real
> differences between the "haves and the have-nots" a half-century from now?

This is very good thinking John. I've been saying the same thing, but I
am sure that there will be liberals in 2050 decrying how the poor are
getting poorer and the rich are getting richer, even though the average
poor person has a full and rich diet, lives to an average age of 200,
owns a fully immersive virtual reality media system, works from home via
mental implants connected to the web. The fact that they can only afford
mass transit launches to space and have to wait a few weeks longer than
the average person for cloned transplant organs will be seen as
scandalous and needing a presidential commission to get to the bottom of
why these people are being taken advantage of this way.... It seems to
be a perpetual theme among the redistributionists.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:14 MDT