@SolarCross
Ok so you did pull it out of your arse.
Or you're thinking out of your ass ?
- Post scarcity, can't mean scarcity of anything as that will NEVER happen. It has to mean scarcity of basic necessities, which is chiefly food and water. People really don't need anything else, everything else is luxury. A post scarcity society is one where starvation pratically never happens. The West has been post-scarcity since the 1900s at least, with odd exceptions during the upheavels of world wars.
Actually it can happen, we're heading towards an age of space exploration and colonization, so access to amounts of resources more than we could ever use. And we have this little thing called fusion technology in development which would make sure we have all types of resources we need.
A post scarcity world is one where we never run out of basic materials. Basic material include minerals.
For the west, the west still has 100s of thousands and millions of homeless people. You're anything BUT a post scarcity economy.
- mass automation, isn't a binary either you have it or you don't, but most things are already made in factories utilising high degrees of automatic processes. There is obviously room for more automation, but in the west and especially far east "lights out" production is already here.
Automation so far is in basic and intermediate production processes, and doesn't cover all of them nor does it cover the service sector.
An economy with full mass automation doesn't have a thing called Blue collar workers. Everyone still has those thus no one is at that stage yet.
- interconnectedness. I interpreted that to mean communication technology density but it seems you had a more mystical idea of that word. The west and east have extemely dense and pervasive communication activity, internet, motorways, rail networks, air routes, postal networks. I can buy a widget from Hong Kong over the internet and have it delivered to me within a week. That's some pretty dense interconnectedness taking the historical perspective.
I thought i explained it very well and in simple form but 'll try again since you obviously didn't understand it.
A society that has billionares and homeless people living in it is not a highly interconnected society because there is still a large gap between its members. The more interconnected the society, and thus the social structure is; the smaller this gap is. That is, what ever happens in society will always inevitably affect everyone in it, and thus justice and fairness can be guaranteed because the lack of them would inflect severe damage on the given society.
Basically, as i said earlier, a society that is internally highly interconnected and interdependent.
- nationalistic. This tends to come out more in times of war and strife which for the west and east hasn't been for some time. Clearly people were more nationalistic during the World Wars than today. That might be taken as "good" thing though.
Nationalistic doesn't necessarily mean militaristic. I already explained it.
nationalistic to a degree where they care about each and every other member and element of their nation and are protective over it
- educated. Taking a historical perpective the education levels anywhere in the west is huge. If anything there may be an over-production of educated people.
So obvious and notable by the surplus of idiots roaming all over the west. And by the constant decline of skilled labor and educational systems all over the western world; that you need to import skilled labor and experts from else where.
Seriously, get over yourself. All anyone need is to take a look at the local news of any western country today to see the decline of intelligence and growing lack of educated and informed people.
All this is by-the-by as you have not given any causal reason why any of the these qualities would incentivise abandoning money.
Because it would be meaningless. Thats the point of post-scarcity economies. For fucks sake even sci-fi writers realize that at one point in the future, abundance will make money meaningless.
If anyting educated people want more money than uneducated people for example
No, educated people want more money to get more things. Money is used to facilitate the exchange of goods and thus you need more money to get more goods. If there is an over supply of a certain type of goods, the price goes down. If there was an infinite supply of a certain type of goods, the prices will drop to zero. So if you have access to infinite resources (infinite here doesn't mean you'll have the entire universe, but rather more resources than you could ever possibly use), and with a highly if not fully automated processing, production and delivery system in place. That means there will be an infinite supply of goods in all fields, thus money becomes meaningless due to the massive surplus in supply.
We will inevitably reach this stage, and not in the far distant future, but literally under current rates of scientific and technological advancement. Human civilization would likely reach that stage by the end of this century.
Further progress happens because;
In such society, the only thing distincting people would be there intellectual achievements and pursuits.
We already are moving towards such state of affairs and all the technologies needed are being developed as we speak. Along side with all other conditions needed being pursued in mutliple places.
Except perhaps in some western countries where the policy seems to be to maintain the population as dumb and unaware as possible so the ruling elites can maintain power without any trouble.