Paul Krugman rediscovers Marxism--what's next? Fire? The wheel?

[Spike89]

52. The two are only casually related

Being an entertainer is a service. It can provide an income that can support 100s of families, generally speaking.

The move away from aquarian life to the factories/cities was a tremendous shift that did cause economic uncertainty, but ultimately gave rise to the middle class. Not because the work was harder or intrinsically more valuable, but because of a complex evolution of social and economic (and more than a few legislative) factors.

Sitting at a desk all day was something that didn't pay all that well once--it was reserved for men who "couldn't work" and women. But many of us make a decent living doing exactly that now. Musicians and other entertainers were barely compensated and tolerated more than beggars, they now do pretty well.

The point is that we won't be relegated to mowing each other's lawns, but if we are, then we'll pay people enough to do so. It has been a reality for the last three centuries at least that the amount of labor required to "earn" sustenance has been declining at a remarkable rate. When everyone is starving, farmers are in demand. When the necessities (food and shelter) are available and relatively easy to obtain, the value of service rises.