I’m not sure your 2nd point is that controversial. Many clear examples of companies manufacturing scarcity in order to create profits - light bulbs being an easy example.

That’s not manufactured scarcity, that’s planned obsolescence. Those are different things.

Yes, sure, but the two kind of go hand in hand. Media copyright, for example, is manufactured scarcity.

That’s built on the naive assumption that people won’t seek power in a post scarcity world.

That's like saying that capitalism has the naive assumption that people won't try to achieve post-scarcity. It is not a meaningful statement.

Why do you believe there is such an assumption? Elon Musk assumes people will try to achieve a post-scarcity society and he’s nonetheless gone from living in a YMCA to being the richest man on Earth.

Do you really think he stayed at the YMCA for any other reason than "he wanted to"?

He comes from money, and would have had no problem living anywhere he liked.

Just read his wikipedia page:

> In 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded web software company Zip2 with funds borrowed from Musk's father.

If the YMCA story is supposed to signify "rags", then it's a carefully constructed image and nothing else.

Again, the assumptions don't tell us anything meaningful. If, hypothetically, we did achieve post-scarcity and pushed out capitalism in doing so, so be it. If that were to happen and then "bad actors" took back control of the capital, returning us to capitalism, so be. These models don't have to be ever-present, they don't have feelings, they are only descriptions about the state of the world at a given moment in time. Whether or not these forces described are in play is irrelevant.

Irrelevant to whom? It certainly seems relevant to the point the parent was making.

Irrelevant to what defines these models. The parent was taking the conversation off-topic.