Competitive-Finding7 t1_iqvyw3c wrote on October 3, 2022 at 2:35 PM

Reply to comment by dalledoeswalle in When will our lives get better collectively. The clock is ticking!! by ObjectiveDeal

Why the downvotes, this is spot on.

Clean_Livlng t1_iqwanjt wrote on October 3, 2022 at 3:54 PM

Because things have gotten a lot better than in 2012 in terms of world poverty.

https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty#historical-poverty-around-the-world

So, as we've done in the past, it's likely these new technologies will be used to benefit a lot of people. Especially if money can be made from charging people for access to new technology.

e.g. We can buy hand sanitizer, cellphones, internet access, computers, rocket packs, 3D printers etc.

Do you still think it's spot on? New technologies don't instantly benefit everyone in the world, but over decades they do.

SteppenAxolotl t1_iqytf77 wrote on October 4, 2022 at 2:19 AM

>e.g. We can buy hand sanitizer, cellphones, internet access, computers, rocket packs, 3D printers etc.

That largely depends on who you are and where you live.

Just add 0.01$ to 1$, 1.90$ or the 2.00$ cutoff and you're no longer in extreme poverty, but you're still grindingly poor. You can buy a cell phone for $4, but you're still grindingly poor. How much does the quality of your life change if you go from 2.00$/day to 3.00$/day. Those are certainly changes, are they meaningful changes given you're looking at a timespan covering most of a working life time. Is a cell phone and some hand sanitizer sufficient if you're born in extreme poverty and you die in regular poverty.

Clean_Livlng t1_iqzdnmy wrote on October 4, 2022 at 5:27 AM

>How much does the quality of your life change if you go from 2.00$/day to 3.00$/day.

A lot. If you're in a place where you're earning $2 a day and surviving on it, going to $3 is a massive improvement. You might even be able to put on weight instead of gradually losing it.

An extra $1 can be life itself. But you'd still be poor.

Yes, improvements in technology won't reach every single person on Earth and thee will still be those in poverty. But we're talking about things gettign statistically better. There are fewer of those people suffering now than there were, due to us making it better.

"things have gotten a lot better than in 2012 in terms of world poverty."

This is true, right? of course it is. Just because things aren't perfect right now, doesn't mean we're not heading in the right direction. It doesn't mean we can't celebrate our progress.

There is also a lot left to do, because people do still live in poverty and things gettign better overall doesn't help them if they're still in poverty.

We have evidence of us improving lives through technology, and the proportion of those whoa re in poverty decreasing over time. Based on this, I think it's reasonable to think that further improving our technology and creating more abundance through it will allow us to bring more people out of poverty.

My point is that there are fewer people in poverty now than in 2012, and that they were incorrect in saying that half the world is starving. Half used to be starving, but we've made significant improvements since then.