Interesting monologue... I share with you the feeeling that knowledge is a (almost) unlimited resource we should use to continue exponential growing, but you should pay attention on the other side of the problem. The simple way to view it is to think to two different plane of the economy, distribution and creation. The first one, creation, is always connected to knowledge, IMO. You find a way to obtain a result (good, service) with less resources (example: using solar power (photovoltaics) and an electric motor you can move a rock with a lot less effort than pushing it by hand). Most important, knowledge is infinitely duplicable (someone else can use the same idea without having to do the same effort of the first having it). Knowledge adds up, and grow (as water that full a reservoir) and spreading its total value raise (and so gain gain for the first one to find it, but its total value can not, because is limited from total of all wealth of rest of world, the other people). But important thing is: total wealth is bigger due to new knowledge (same work, more results, or same result and less work, or something in between). The second plane, distribution, is the most understood. It is described by how much of total wealth you can grab. Most of this plane is dominated by some type of power (access to resource, access to information, violence, deception, etc). The value of anything is due to its scarcity (you pay nothing to breath, there is enough air for all, until we will have poisoned enough!) and so any industry based solely on profit stop to grow when the desidered level of profit can be reduced (I will not produce all widgets people wants because law of diminisihing returns). Why to say this? Because even if the resources are limitless, you will have some type of blockade to avoid them to be really available. Most of people work only on distribution plane, never on creation plane (think of advertising, burocracy, most of zero sum finance, and so on). The few who do, often are overwhelm by one or more of the big majority (the smartest, the luckiest, and so on). Second, even if resource are limitless -and you have to prove it, burden of proof is your, IMHO- that do not mean that are (all) reachable. Thinking in time, if growing of use (demand) is quicker than growing of availability (supply), you will have shortage, and someone who want to mine it (and his interest is to mantain that scarcity forever). IMO, economy should be a way to overcome that scarcity, but for most people is a way to exploit it, because is simpler to exploit existing (move wealth, operate on distribution plane) than create something (most of innovations today require very smart people, and often they're a lifelong quest, and often one (wo)man cannot suffice to achieve). How can you surprised that the world is moving as it is? How to change the rules is beyond my wisdom, even if I believe we should, and if we do not our current welfare will not last... However, until we cannot start to teach economy taking in account that the same actions (rules) can have opposite effect according with belief (environment), ie according with target -gaining overcoming scarcity or gaining creating it- the whole building seems silly, to me. The main point is: we are not teaching to tell apart between who gain creating wealth (and so return to the system, the big cake, more than it take, his slice of the cake), and who only gain moving wealth from someone else to himself (ditribution player: who try to take a bigger slice of the cake without growing it -zero sum game- or shrinking it -negative sum game- ) we will not teach how to evolve. What do you think?
First of all thank you very much for your really instructive and interresting answers. It's always a pleasure to read such thoughts. I must tell you that you made my knowledge move forward by clearly explaining this difference between Creation and Distribution... I didn't how really to answer you well so I chose to slice (my way^^) your answer and respond to every slice Thank you, and as I just did, thank you again for your answer. From a factual point of views we can say that humans have done and will make errors... and as such the Proper Education Always Correct Errors (P.E.A.C.E) concept bring an ever continuing movement toward knowledge or that just by the fact that we need to correct our errors we move forward and make discoveries...I think that even maybe knowledge is a trap. In a sense that as the Pandora Box, as soon as you open it there is no end to it. Each step bringing is own risks and rewards... but sadly risks always realize themselves in the long run as history proves it ( plan crash, tchernobyl etc etc... ). But as it's open how to close it ? Secondly, the question is will knowledge summarize all the rulez of the universe ? to the smallest to the biggest in all forms/state ? I strongly doubt it... Even trying seems to be a crucial waste of time... ( only my opinion ).
... There you nail one of the problem that should have been solve a long time ago... How patenting works, how knowledge is really duplicable and transferable under some juridictions... from sand^^ Knowledge is exponential. No reservoir can grow exponentially in all direction in constant motion and furthermore some knowledge may be gained but then lost to be refund again... is it new ? I am really sorry but I don't understand this part : "spreading its total value raise (and so gain gain for the first one to find it, but its total value can not, because is limited from total of all wealth of rest of world, the other people" What do you mean ? in particular gain gain for the first one to find it, but its total value can not ??? So by wealth we mean resources right ? V But bigger isn't the right word... In constant exponential growth is a better term... 7B people... How many Einstein-like around ? What will they bring ? Will they ? Or choose to stay silent because of the stupidity around, maybe ? ( a quote : If all the stupid people could fly it will be night all the time... ^^ ) Thank you very much Homosalmon. I didn't understand this fact before. It's what I am doing in trading... nothing to be really proud... but still a funny game . However the allocation done with the rewards of distribution can in fact help the creators... so the circle is round ? aie aie... What's nice about trading it's that it's based on acces to information . That's the interresting part... always learning about something you never heard or seen before ! I don't understand : stop to grow when the desidered level of profit can be reduced ? I understand what's follow but I don't see the mean of this one... or can't be reduced ? the smallest fractional unit of any currency has still sadly today an infinite value for a lot of the world population... I don't know how much of the scarcity that we exeprienced is due to these blockade... Legal framework can have such an impact ( North korea vs South Korea ). Clear enough^^ We discuss, exchange knowledge... at least we created today... And the market is the most fun game form of the distribution mechanism... I think that you did it for me... as you saw that wealth is linked to knowledge... and you can agree that wealth is resources... However you are very right on the fact of that both exponential have to grow to a close rate if we want to live well. The miner situation is excellent... for a time he will take pleasure of his tricks ( maybe even his children... )... however the further the stress became on the population ( unavailability of supply ) the higher the risks for him to lose it all... And greed is out there... ahahahha...sorry it's not nice but so efficient... ^^ I can only agree with you... the first thing however to change the rules is to recognize that there is an error in the theory... and then starting to correct it... then what will happen is unknown... but something will happen! Yep... However when you study physics there is no such consideration... The goal is why.. What ever of the personnal ground or even time or political agenda... Nothing count just what's happening there . It said Economical Science... like in science... the apple fall all the time on Earth... however if the wind is strong enough the apple will fly ^^ but how will that biological structure of the cell's of the apple be impacted by the wind ? what's the distribution of the pressure on each cell... lol lol... no end... after the cell they are the atoms.. and co and co and co... But we need to evolve... the game can't change forever... it has to evolve... leaving behind the legacy and move forward... Same DNA but totally different Thank you for asking I wanna fly over the rainbow ^^
Gen 2.1 I had the idea that the variable K can in fact become 0 or even be negative ( it's called stupidity ). Interresting conclusion.
shit, no nobel this year... maybe next ^^ A little pic to make some people think more... the future concessions (No Environmental Impact) : http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/ab1_m04/mars_color_basemap.jpg
If the issue is scarce resource then why is it that the countries with the most natural resources are not the most wealthy and most powerful. Is the there some other resource that is more important that is scarce?