Scarcity is a problem we face living on a planet with finite resources. As humanity expands, resource availability doesn't necessarily expand with it. While the earth still has plenty left to give, it won't last forever. There is hope yet for our species! Though I'm sure you've heard this argument before.
"Take to space? Why don't we figure out things on Earth before we worry about space."
That seems like a pretty solid argument. Really it does. Though it's missing one important factor: Generations beyond our own need resources too. We can't sit around and expect everything to sort itself out once we're gone. That's like passing away and your children finding out you left so much gambling debt their kids will be dealing with it some day as well. Not many grandkids are going to remember their grandparents fondly when they're having to work off the mistakes they made.
On the other side of that coin, what would society look like if scarcity of resources was a non-issue? Would our politics look the same? Would our currencies hold the same value? How would our perceptions of others change when our cultures no longer hold income to be a social status factor? Will technology really be the way we ascend as a species to a peaceful state?
Will there even be a state to speak of? Will government hold different form when property takes different shape? Will we want for the things others have in the same ways? Ok ok, there's a lot of questions to answer here. Sadly, we have no way of knowing until we get there.
It's true Post-Scarcity could change the dynamic entirely with how humans interact with each other. Looking towards the future and solutions to our every day problems takes looking past our current thinking on these problems. It's no wonder not much thinking is being done on this possible outcome for the future.
Social safety nets are the first attempt humanity has had to create a Post-Survival society. We attempt to rule out survival from every day life is a precursor to removing resources from the human struggle. Post-survival's problems are largely based on distribution of resources. Where are resources not going to bring them to those that really need it? Are we taking from others that need it?
Is it moral to take from those who have more to give to those who have less? Are social safety nets sustainable? What's the realistic outcome to a Universal Income? Pretty much every question raised by Post-Survival is rendered entirely useless when we achieve Post-Scarcity. When we don't worry about whether we're taking from others to give to those who need it we remove the moral question from distribution of resources.
When the practical(and moral) question of resources becomes a moot point, then the vast majority of how our society runs will also become a moot point. What is valued in a Post-Scarcity society? How will it effect jobs? How will people trade? Will there be currency still? The beauty is the answers to these questions become entirely perspective based.
If we don't need to trade to survive, then trade takes a different shape entirely. That means the communities who live together in a Post-Scarcity society will trade freely for what they deem to be of value. Most of these goods will boil down to arts and crafts. We will create if we choose to. Consume if we choose to. Life becomes ever more important based around the individual.
Our actions would be ever apparently be choices. Not that it's much different now, but with the questions of community gone we will be more aware of what we as individuals in life truly mean. Thinking along these lines makes Post-Scarcity a rather attractive goal to humanity. There is one thing to remember about this concept though:
We must choose to point our society towards this goal. All of us. Not just vote in those you feel will move us towards that goal. Be proactive in your community. Get involved in sciences.