Utopian future will not work

Utopia will be when the machines use VR to lure us into them so they can suck our juice.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Bone75
How is it slavery if you're getting everything in return?

How is it utopia if I am forced to do something?

It won't be Utopia for us, but it will result in Utopia for our kids.

Can you say the same about our current system?

originally posted by: Bone75
It won't be Utopia for us, but it will result in Utopia for our kids.

Can you say the same about our current system?

Neither one is going to be Utopia for anyone.

originally posted by: Lysergic

Utopia will be when the machines use VR to lure us into them so they can suck our juice.

I like your warm and fuzzy vision of the future. I'll bring us a sixer.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How it started;



WE SEEK SINGULARITY.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Good question! Found this Trekkie source tackling that question. Many good answers in there based on excerpts from shows and movies. It seems that federation credit was provided towards alien cultures. Obviously, done through trade agreements.

So the make believe world of Star Trek had money after all. Dirty capitalist swine.

Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

originally posted by: eNumbra
Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

And completely not in the parameters set out in the Original Post.

No money, no motivation.

The Eloi didn't have to work for anything.

Just remember that.

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Good question! Found this Trekkie source tackling that question. Many good answers in there based on excerpts from shows and movies. It seems that federation credit was provided towards alien cultures. Obviously, done through trade agreements.

So the make believe world of Star Trek had money after all. Dirty capitalist swine.

Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

Thank you!

So what happens when you get rid of it? Motivation goes out the window.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
The Eloi didn't have to work for anything.

Just remember that.

And captured by the Marlocks for food.

Sounds delightlful.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Good question! Found this Trekkie source tackling that question. Many good answers in there based on excerpts from shows and movies. It seems that federation credit was provided towards alien cultures. Obviously, done through trade agreements.

So the make believe world of Star Trek had money after all. Dirty capitalist swine.

Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

Thank you!

So what happens when you get rid of it? Motivation goes out the window.

This was already addressed, self-motivation still exists. Doing things that fulfill oneself are the ultimate goals of human beings, it's why we take vacations, it's what we do when we retire, it's go we spend our weekends. You only think people won't self-motivate because you're stuck in the work-a-day mindset. You're placing an inherent value on money that doesn't exist; people work for money because they must - working to live rather than living to work.

If all the basic needs of human life are met, you'll see an entirely different world.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: eNumbra
Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

And completely not in the parameters set out in the Original Post.

No money, no motivation.

You mean where OP decided to redefine utopia as "moneyless"?

a reply to: eNumbra

But those examples all rely on currency.

This thread is about a utopian future not working because no currency/reward means no motivation to do thing like working.

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: eNumbra
Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

And completely not in the parameters set out in the Original Post.

No money, no motivation.

You mean where OP decided to redefine utopia as "moneyless"?

You can't have a utopia with currency/rewards. Currency adds to greed, crime, wars, wants etc. It would just revert to "I want more/better."

And you can't have a utopia without currency/rewards because it would make motivation bottom out.

a reply to: eNumbra

Loligoth meets Steampunk!

Or just Mad Max.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: eNumbra
Nobody said it didn't. Currency is a means of facilitating trade, it represents a value but has no intrinsic value.

And completely not in the parameters set out in the Original Post.

No money, no motivation.

You mean where OP decided to redefine utopia as "moneyless"?

You can't have a utopia with currency/rewards. Currency adds to greed, wars, wants etc. It would just revert to "I want more/better."

And you can't have a utopia without currency/rewards because it would make motivation bottom out.

Again, all the basic needs provided, you'll see a very different world.

But at this point it seems like you've defined utopia as a categorically unreachable point - yes, greed and corruption exist, they do not exist because of money however, they exist in spite of it. Various mentalities feed it and while money doesn't help it's not the cause.

Utopia won't fail because of money, it will fail because there's no actual such thing as utopia, perfect strifeless existence simply doesn't exist, but we can strive to eliminate as much of it as we can - that would be utopia.

a reply to: TerryDon79

This may be the saddest thread I've ever seen on ATS. And as gently and respectfully as I can, I have to say that I think it perfectly represents that mindset that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

People do not live to work... we work to live... in a society which has monetized pretty much everything and demands that we serve others in order to survive ourselves. Not exactly the feudalism of yore, but a new corporate/government feudalism that exacts every pound of flesh it can.

People do lots of things simply because they enjoy it for one reason or another -- and most have nothing to do with money, but those things often make the world a little better place for others. Money is only good for what you can spend it on... and some things cannot be bought.

a reply to: eNumbra

I completely disagree.

Currency/rewards are the only reason there is greed. Greed is just wanting more currency/rewards than you already have. Take them away and you literally want for nothing. But in doing so you compromise motivation to the point of chaos.

a reply to: TerryDon79

So the essence is that there would be no incentive to do work if things such as basic-income were to come true.

So my question is this: motivation to do what exactly?

I think you forget that when parents ask kids to do a certain chore, it's not just because they (absolutely) don't want to do said chores themselves, it's because they spend 40+ hours a week doing #ty jobs, not having the time or motivation to do said chores after work or in the weekend. The same can be said for the majority (if not all) things U can list that there "wouldn't be motivation to do so" in this utopia.

If people didn't have to spend 60% of their time dedicated to jobs they don't really want to do, they'dd actually be more motivated to do valuable and productive work in their personal lives. This is factually true as plenty of studies have shown.


As for "who will create and maintain the robots/automatisation": There's a huge difference in work between flipping burgers or working in a assembly factory and writing lines of code on a computer from the coziness of your own home.

Also when people feel they live in a society that actually has a social and humanitarian embrace, not forcing them to work, but instead giving them "free" money because there's no need for cold, hard labor anymore, the mentality will change alot.

If you didn't have to do -insert #ty job- 40 hours a week, but still got payed, would it really be that crazy to assume most (enough) people would donate several hours a week to do the work that still needs to be done? Even in this thread someone replied: "If I didn't have to work, I'dd probably go crazy", but it just doesn't make any sense.

If you didn't have to work and were going crazy, what's stopping you from waking up at 8AM on a monday and, instead of driving to your forced work, you went to visit your elders instead. What about you going camping/fishing with friends every Tuesday the rest of your life? What about doing all house chores on a Wednesday, voluntary work (homlessness, caring for people who need it (disabled, ...) on a Thursday and parties all night during the weekends?

I find it crazy that people assume having 100% leisure time could be a negative thing. You can still do work, there's plenty of social work that needs to be done untill the end of time. But instead of being forced to work in an unfair and unbalanced system, you get to chose what work you do, as much or as little you like.

I think there's very little, to no, arguements to be made against the improvements in social and economical living standard a basic income would have.

a reply to: Boadicea

You kind of agreed with me there, you know?

"People work to live". I agree. But take the need to work away (motivation) and people, generally, won't do it. (Yes, I know there are exemptions from my hypothetical rule)