I am a skeptic of FALC as well. However, each of your three reasons are not equally as strong. In particular, the criticism of Bastiani’s “abundance” prediction regarding raw materials. I haven’t read the book, so I am assuming that your characterization of his position is accurate that he is betting on “space mining” to bail us out of resource scarcity on earth. That is hardly necessary. The real price of raw materials continues to fall, and that has included until now minerals (including sources of energy) mined from the earth. Mining may occur in deposits deeper, less pure and harder to reach (maybe under the ocean) than today, but the share of the earth’s crust that has been exploited for mineral wealth is minor. Yes, there are important costs to be recognized (many of them externalities to the so-called “free” market) but unlike capitalism, FALC would be all about recognizing all costs of production and putting in place proper mitigation steps. And your final reason (not numbered: “it’s communism and it will never work”) is simply an unsupported statement of ideological faith. You give no reasons why the necessary capital investments would only be made by private owners, you simply assert it. Ironically, the unwillingness of private enterprise to fully invest in labor-saving technology is your first reason for doubting a future of FALC. So which is it? The technologies will be invented; engineers will want to design and implement them; and the need for them will be manifest and attractive politically. Why would the world need to wait for “private enterprise?”