If the rate of change of supply is greater than the rate of change of demand and we have a substantial value of supply then we have essentially achieved post-scarcity

if you can work at 0.8 speed and not get fired but if you work at 1.5 speed you gain nothing what will you choose?

i.e. : If I have 10x more chickens than humans and the rate of human consumption is Y and the rate of chicken growth is 2Y then i've achieved post scarcity

Depends on how much I care about the business

in a market socialist climate you would effectively eliminate such behaviour as the workers would be working towards their own business cause

'Worker Capitalism' in essence

there always is a limit to economic growth though, either it be political bloating or inability to communicate and trade past a interstellar distance there alwas is a limit

As i've said prior there is 'effective post-scarcity'

and i've outlied how it can be achieved

But sure, if such were the case I would be happy to contend with the previous iteration: Left wing market anarchism or some form of mutualism for the time being

not to mention people's wants are relative, today its hell if you cant have the internet or water in your home. But that would be welcome conditions compared to 500 years ago.

If you grew up with your own planet and an army of servants you will see that as the base line and want more if possible

Sure, but a lot of these needs can be quantified under a capitalist mindset

actually this video explains it very well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kt7883oTd0

If certain goods are simply status objects and status disappears wouldn't the demand for the goods also disappear?

if you grow up with a baseline and that is always how you lived your life you will see yourself as impoverished if you fall below that

We are currently already producing 1.5x the world populations demand in food supplies

but then again if you can own planets and armies, then would scarcity be an issue at that point?

(Side note: Isaac arthur makes some cool vids, shame I haven't seen a lot of them, I'll check this one out)

my point on that is that people always want more, if you have "planets and armies" of your own that is the base line, there is no loose extra resources that just sit there unused, they are used by those with the means to produce or collect them. that extra .5 food is being used by the people with the means to make it. If you take it and give it to people without, the people who produced it will stop because it does not benefit them. Its like saying "you can pump water for yourself but if you try pump more to fill your pool we will take it and give it away" why would you try fill your pool to no avail? its a waste of time so you wont pump it, now that extra 0.5 has gone *poof*

it no longer exists

"the problem with communism is eventually you run out of other people's money"

Right, I acknowledge that the system cannot be transformed viably until every resource reaches post-scarcity

but it cant, there are no extra resources not being used, even if wastefully we only make what we want at that moment

Of course there are: *looks to space*

plus most of the issues are labor related with labor costs and efficiency

the machines arent going to make massive stockpiles to never be touched again they will use them to make more machines and infostructure

Right

Which can fuel itself through acquiring more resources

as well just by how reality works some things will always be more scarce than others, just by there being more hydrogen than oxygen in the universe "post scarcity" is impossible

my point is that only once you can maintain that constant gap between supply and demand with an substantial excess in supply and a large rate of change of supply exceeding that of the rate of change of demand then it would be effective to switch to communism as at this point you wouldn't be 'running out of other peoples money' if you're accruing labour from automating systems.

Post scarcity literally is referring to the inability for our demand to exceed our supply

no its a scifi word

Which is why I try to make it very clear that I see it as a effective end-goal

post=after, scarcity
due to some things always being more scarce than others there is no post scarcity.

And under the claim I've made which hasn't been countered yet I see it is as possible

Then let me rephase to 'effective post-scarcity'

whereby the supply exceeds the demand and the rate of change of supply exceeds the rate of change of demand

this is the logical conclusion of human advancement in labour

All we've done is devalued product in favour of new product

eventually all product will reach net devaluation given the criteria is met