Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Sunday March 23 2014, @11:32PM   Printer-friendly
from the Where's-my-20-hour-work-week? dept.

Papas Fritas writes:

"Jeremy Rifkin writes in the NYT that the inherent dynamism of competitive markets is bringing down costs so far that many goods and services are becoming nearly free, abundant, and no longer subject to market forces and while economists have always welcomed a reduction in marginal cost, they never anticipated the possibility of a technological revolution that might bring those costs to near zero. The first inkling of this paradox at the heart of capitalism came in 1999 when Napster enabled millions of people to share music without paying the producers and artists, wreaking havoc on the music industry. Similar phenomena went on to severely disrupt the newspaper and book publishing industries. The huge reduction in marginal cost is now beginning to reshape energy, manufacturing and education. "Although the fixed costs of solar and wind technology are somewhat pricey, the cost of capturing each unit of [renewable] energy beyond that is low (PDF)," says Rifkin. As for manufacturing "thousands of hobbyists are already making their own products using 3-D printers, open-source software and recycled plastic as feedstock, at near zero marginal cost" and more than six million students are enrolled in "free massive open online courses, the content of which is distributed at near zero marginal cost."

But nowhere is the zero marginal cost phenomenon having more impact than the labor market, where workerless factories and offices, virtual retailing and automated logistics and transport networks are becoming more prevalent. What this means according to Rifkin is that new employment opportunities will lie in the collaborative commons in fields that tend to be nonprofit and strengthen social infrastructure like health care, aiding the poor, environmental restoration, child care, care for the elderly, and the promotion of the arts and recreation. "As for the capitalist system, it is likely to remain with us far into the future, albeit in a more streamlined role, primarily as an aggregator of network services and solutions, allowing it to thrive as a powerful niche player in the coming era. We are, however, entering a world partly beyond markets, where we are learning how to live together in an increasingly interdependent, collaborative, global commons.""

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 24 2014, @01:13PM

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 24 2014, @01:13PM (#20195)

    (Seriously? How many people live in a desert in Vegas or Phoenix? They just don't belong there...)

    I use somewhat less water than normal because I have a dishwasher, don't water my lawn, and don't have a pool, but I still shell out about two bucks per day. Somewhat less than two hundred bucks per quarterly bill, a hundred something at least.

    Interestingly, if you lived in Phoenix, you'd probably have a lower bill. I watered my lawns when I lived in Phoenix and probably spent about $40-50/month. Where is it that you live where there's plenty of abundant water, yet you are charged so much for it?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday March 24 2014, @01:59PM

    by VLM (445) on Monday March 24 2014, @01:59PM (#20220)

    80% of the money goes to the sewer. In the desert I suppose you can just pump it out into sand and let it blow away, but gross as it sounds a lot of people downstream drink out of our river, so they put a lot of work into processing it. Also the DNR and outdoor recreation is a major force here, and you can't get tourists to fish in a cesspool, so they may be going a little overboard, its an idyllic little river around here and they'll make us pay anything to keep it that way. I've boated on the river but I wouldn't drink out of it, not even on a dare, even if people downstream get their tapwater from it.

    I'm not entirely sure why we pump out of wells instead of drinking from the river, but I'm glad we do it!

    I would imagine there's no small amount of charging whatever the market will take, which is probably very constant, and the usual corruption of course.

    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 24 2014, @02:52PM

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 24 2014, @02:52PM (#20261)

      I would imagine there's no small amount of charging whatever the market will take, which is probably very constant, and the usual corruption of course.

      You never answered where you live. I live in NJ now, and from what I can tell, a large part of why everything costs a lot more here (particularly taxes) is because of sheer corruption, which appears to be much, much worse than in AZ where I used to live. Even my water bill is much higher, and I don't have a lawn to water here like I did in Phoenix.

      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday March 24 2014, @03:19PM

        by VLM (445) on Monday March 24 2014, @03:19PM (#20278)

        Closest big city would be Chicago a couple hours away.

        I'm beginning to think its "from each according to their ability to pay" at least for residential. I would imagine commercial/industrial cost of water more accurately reflects the true cost. Also I suspect there might be some price fixing going on.