On Apr 2, 12:23 pm, "Taylor" nospam.com> wrote:

I spoze that's how you'd look at it, moving the elderly and welfare
queens out into rural apartment blocks. But it'd save a ton of
taxpayer money, to have the seniors provide the childcare, while the
moms provide the senior care.

It would also make more real estate space available in the cities for
productive staff working for business in the urban core. Their
commutes could be a lot shorter.

But I know three professional women who've made a lotta money working
online, but off a satellite dish from their homes out in the Ozark
boonies. From time to time they must drive or fly to conferences,
corporate boardroom planning sessions or whatever, but otherwise work
in a back bedroom with a nice view of the woods out the window.

Now spoze they ramp this up, and put an entire office, such as
Superior Forestry has at Tilly AR. Their webpage helps support their
continental business arranging tree replanting contracts for
agribusiness, The forest Service, and the transnational paper
outfits.

they do this in a 2000 sq ft office that looks the same as any you'd
see in any high rise, with the same smiling receptionist, copier
machines, printers, computers, and bigwigs. But- everyone wears blue
jeans, and the office sits in a commercial one story building on top
of a ridge with a nice view of the mountains. And when they get off
work, rather than hassling with traffic, they drive home on the same
kind of steep twisty 2 lane blacktop you see in the new car ads on
TV.

If you added five more floors, everyone could live in the building and
not commute at all. Right now, they dont mind the drive. but if gas
gets to 20$ gallon...

Superior Forestry is not communist; not conventional capitalist
either. There's no over paid CEO. Its a limited partnership. There are
a wide range of operational designs from communist to capitalist
depending on the competence of the membership. The standard dualistic
debate framework (liberal/conservative, capitalist/socialist) just
does not fit any more.

There's a trend among upper income corporate management class women-
who see that all the men of their station are already married to sexy
bimbos, for them to surf the fertility clinics to select from among
thousands of Y chromosome lines that are far more promsing than in the
balls of the men they know, or the posters here. They already have
corporate healthcare to cover the pregnancy & birth, and some offices
now support in house childcare.

The next step for these women is to do a ground up analysis of their
situation, and to design a social and economic system they think
maximizes the benefit to their kids rather than the profits of
investors. I already see some Lesbian couples moving out here, in part
because they think it is healthier for their kids. They also want to
get away from deadbeat, loser, stalker dads. I dunno if their
assessment of the character is correct, but its not upta me.

But if the per capita cost of living is halved with two women sharing
a house, then they cut it to a third by having 4 women with their kids
share a larger place. Incrementalism leads to the apartment block,
which is large enuf to home school, but also has enuf kids so that
socialization develops normally.

I dont doubt the entrepreneurial instincts of corporate management
women will see an economic opportunity in forming their own business,
then getting the investment to build on a rural site, and get even
more long term investment from the global community who figure out
that the remarkably talented kids they raise will be moved into the
business just as has always been done by alpha male management. But
whereas the boss's son, has always been known to be an idiot, because
his mom was an airhead sexy bimbo, these women will only be mating
with the most promising Y chromosome lines.

The result is a limited partnership, sub chapter S, or whatever that
deliberately plans to have even more talented staffing for their
capitalist organization in the next generation. But they wont have to
offer high salaries. They will grow their own, and that will make them
*VERY COMPETITIVE*.

Alternative energy includes alternative human energy. i can see where
it mite compete with robotic energy, but the scenarios offered always
seem to assume that robots would be as predatory as the alpha male
authors of these scenarios. For what purpose? Why would robots need to
exploit people? No, the problem people will have, is trying to find
some reason for their own existance. The standard ego game between
Jesus and Satan as to who can get the most souls is asinine and
juvenile. Robots wont need souls either, just energy, and it wont even
take that much. Robots dont need central heat and air either.