In Upload, Greg Daniel’s most recent TV show, you can buy yourself a dope afterlife.
Nathan Brown has a rich girlfriend, so he gets to go to Lakeview and enjoy, well, a sick lakeside view for the rest of his digital eternity. Your average human being who ain’t loaded, however, can’t ensure much post-mortem. They might get to “live on” so to speak… but they’ll have limited data, which means limited time, pleasure and resources.
Like the Freedom Mobile version of the afterlife.
It’s a depressing scene when they show you the afterlife poor. Honestly, I’d rather just take my chances and hope for the real thing.
This raises fascinating questions, but I want to talk about one that I think is especially relevant to our day – and one that I think the writers of Upload don’t have the right angle on.
Specifically, I want to ask this: is inequity inherently evil, and either way, is it avoidable? If it is bad, how do we deal with it?
[sidebar: note that we’re not talking about inequality but inequity – the unequal distribution of wealth]
Real Life Monopoly
A free-market economy (like what we have in the West, mostly) is built to reward those who contribute the most value, at least in theory.
Some complain that this naturally leads to inequity – unequal distribution. And they’re right. Over time this will lead to a Pareto distribution – a select few get the majority of the wealth. Like a game of Monopoly, getting rich usually leads to getting richer.
That could be problematic. Especially because significant relative inequity tends to lead to social issues, including male homicide.
But the distribution itself tends to fluctuate. Many people who are in the top 1% now won’t be there in a year. So it’s not quite what people think. It’s not always the same select few always keeping themselves up top and others on the bottom. That’s good news.
On the other hand, this setup can be tough for those on the bottom. It’s real easy to get stuck there with the odds stacked against you. This is a real problem, and I don’t think the solution is as simple as just work harder, although that is a part of the solution.
I also wonder if some inequity is necessary for justice. Some people contribute more. They’re really smart, really hard working… and they get what they put in. That seems fair.
I know it’s not that simple. Things get sticky when it’s something like healthcare… or an afterlife. Just because someone works harder and is smarter than everyone else, should they get first healthcare priority? Should someone who doesn’t work be rewarded with equal treatment, even if they barely pay taxes? These are fair questions.
Upload seems to suggest that if something like an afterlife is in question, everyone should get an equal share. For something like the afterlife, I might be inclined to agree. But for the larger economic problem of inequity, I don’t think it’s that simple.
Don’t make hard work even harder
You don’t want to de-incentivize those who are contributing. A just system means that those who are smart and competent and hard-working and patient and who otherwise exhibit high-value qualities (note: these could change) should be rewarded. Contrary to popular opinion, this benefits everybody. Everyone’s happy that only the super-competent become neurosurgeons when their dad needs brain surgery. We’re also happy to pay them in kind.
Issues arise when those who have power and wealth never share it (especially if it is in excess), or if they take advantage of those less fortunate.
I might be jealous of George Clooney and wonder why people who play pretend for a living make so much more money. But as long as Clooney is generous and doesn’t sleep with my woman, I think I can be fine with it.
It’s imperfect, but our system does tend to reward good behaviour. Generally speaking, a weasel who can’t be trusted won’t be, since he’ll be found out, removed, and perhaps never trusted again.
Rich and famous people who do good are loved. They should be. Both for their work and for their benevolent, generous use of the resources they receive. People love to crap on companies like Amazon but the fact is they are doing a lot for our world. Check out Captain America doing something awesome in real life.
We are each a gift, if we want to be. Hopefully, the system continues to work out the kinks and we can be the best gift we can while being held graciously accountable. Not cancel culture accountable, mind you, but accountable no less.
The idea of uploading my consciousness to a digital afterlife is hilarious… but something I will probably never, ever be game for. Not even for fun. My vision of heaven is much better, so I’ll take my chances with death.
But I also love this world we’re in, as broken as it is. Sometimes more than others, for sure. I’d rather make a difference now than put hope in a man-made imitation. And that difference does not involve forced equity just to remove power imbalances. Let those who have power use it well, be rewarded, and share with loving generosity.
That’s one thing Nathan Brown (back to Upload) is trying to do. So while I’m not big on a fake afterlife (cool premise though), I’m interested to see what happens and how he solves the distribution problem.
How would you?
