DisparateDan t1_j6wrxg1 wrote

Yeah, I think that is the point I was trying to make - bringing about a cultural shift in a group, against the perceived interests of the group rather than the group that wants/benefits from the change.

Similarly with UBI - how do you motivate a government to subsidise the cost of living in a widespread way when it's obviously a huge expenditure?


DisparateDan t1_j6whts2 wrote

I think the two things go hand-in-hand. Without social/cultural changes we're basically relying on technological 'magic' to make our existing lifestyles more sustainable, but the engine which drives technological advances is mostly driven by economic forces, which promote more consumption rather than less.

There are also many complex linkages between the two. For example, if society wants to discourage individual commuting by car in order to reduce the impacts of mass car ownership, society must also provide a reliable and affordable and sustainable transport alternative, which is a technical solution, or an alternative to commuting entirely, which is a social/cultural one.

Alternatives to commuting are work-from-home culture, which is mostly/typically in the realm of the private sector, or some kind of UBI.

In cases of cultural change, the alternative needs to be more palatable to the populace in order to be adopted. Given your example, if you think about the reasons for long-distance travel, how do you convince someone going on vacation who gets 2 weeks per year that it's better to take a week to arrive, or persuade an employer that it's acceptable for their employee to disappear for a week between destinations?