I predict a leaner future. Either it will be because of collapse of food supply change leading to widespread famine conditions, or it will be because of a reconditioning of people to be happy eating less in quantity and in extravagance.
I don’t think the rapid declaration of emergencies and the cascading declarations at every state and local government was a prudent decision. I would like to imagine a dedomenocracy would have come up with a wiser plan of action. A wiser plan of action would be to be much more selective about declaration of emergency and focused in such a way to minimize the impact.
It is inevitable that there will be a point where we must abandon the hope of containing the spread through quarantines. Our best hope of minimizing the number of deaths and of those needing intensive care is to isolate the ones most at risk if they were infected. Instead of removing from the economy those who are suspected as being infectious, we instead remove those who have known preexisting conditions or age.
An economy of automated engineering and automated operation presents a new burst requirement on human labor. We need a labor model that can rapidly dedicate people to solve emergency problems caused by automation and yet that automation is essential for continued operation of the economy or for avoiding some future disaster.
Dedomenology has a saturation aspect, requiring very long periods of work stretching over many days regardless of the concepts of standard working hours such as a 40 hour workweek. When something needs to be tackled, it will employ the dedomenologist continuously until there is some level of completion. There will be an endless stream of assignments that someone will need to dive into the depths of the data ocean and staying there for a long time until the assignment is over.
Despite abundant wealth to support generous welfare benefits, we are fracturing into contentious groups that are turning against each other with increasing malevolence even despite individual’s assertions of conflict avoidance. It is inevitable that humans will recognize communities based on shared traits. The loss of a shared trait of an opportunity for paid work will be replaced with more specialized traits that separate different populations by cultural or familial identities.
The nature of the employer-employee relationship will change fundamentally when a worker enters the older group. One way to describe that change is to distinguish employment from contract work where employment shares a legacy with slavery in the the sense of the employer (business owner) having an obligation to take care the welfare of the employee in terms of providing steady income despite the ups and downs of business cycles. That employment includes employer investment in employee development and advancement. This obligation to take care of employees would cease when the worker reaches the age 55.
My proposed model of a separate older workforce provides the economy with a new pool of lower cost and short term workers. These workers may be older but due to advances in healthcare and public health, these are generally very healthy and capable workers. They can provide the labor for the more risky ventures that occasionally may succeed into building new industries that can eventually employ the more strictly governed younger workers.
Collecting all of these annoyances as expressions of income inequality gives the impression that we have an opportunity to regulate the problem. We can tax incomes, We can demand minimum incomes. This is something we can do. However these actions may not make a difference if the real problem is that some people do things that annoy other people. People will continue to annoy other people.