Alternative to money?

reply to post by scientist


sorry i must have taken that wrong, i've been having a bad day and i'm a little short tempered and yes it is for a no system society but a peaceful no system society. i'm not saying trade exactly i'm saying a communtiy helping each other, to an extent like communism. but this would really only work in a small community.

[edit on 4-12-2007 by coryblood]

Originally posted by coryblood
reply to post by Ironclad

 

so you are trying to tell me that someone who is born into a family with no money, therefore they can't get an education, wants to be poor and lazy and a person born into a rich family will remain rich because he is hard working even if they just sit around all day? don't say that the poor people could use a musical or artistic talent because not everyone has a talent like that, yes they have talents but it might not get them any money

[edit on 4-12-2007 by coryblood]

The world is full of Un-educated Millionaires & Billionaires.

Yeu have a skill, an idea, an invention, and have the drive to capitalise on that Skill, Idea or Invention, then you can make it, reguardless of Education.

All I am saying is that everyone can make something of themselves if they have the desire, the mind to do so & the Relentnesness & drive to attain their goals.

I make my money painting pictures.. I hardly need an education for that "although i do have an education".

I was not borne into a wealthy family, infact quite the opposite. It Dosen't matter weather you are borne ritch or poor. If you don't have the drive & desire to succeed, you simply will not.

When I said poor people are lazy, i actually meant that people who resign themselves to their status without trying are the lazy ones.

Now, what are you saying?

That because I worked hard for my money, that i still don't deserv it, simply because the guy next to me dosen't have what I have & dosen't want to work for it?

Should I be giving my work away for free & start living in a little hovel somewhere, to make me equel to the ones who don't want to succed?


Capitalism dose work!! I don't give a rats arse for anyone who says it dosent (they are the ones who don't want to work, but they still want what the wealthy have & if they can't get it, then nobody should have it".

The Idea of Capitaisation is to take an idea & make that idea work for you by getting other people to buy your idea. And there is nothing wrong with that!!!

[edit on 12/4/2007 by Ironclad]

a cash-less society is very possible, but not in this generations mind-set. Like one said earlier. "what if i wanted an apple" in such a society you would just simply pick the apple from the tree, because apples would be in plentiful quantities. In a society where all repetitive jobs were replaced by useful machines there would be no expensive cost because of the existence of Free energy.

A cash-less society would have to be a society above the animal kingdom in sense it would be a society that 1. does not fear one another. 2. a society in which has solved all re-occuring issues of survival (food, water, health-care, etc. etc.). 3. A society in which the infrastructure is moderately incorporated with secure technologies.

Originally posted by Obsurion
a cash-less society is very possible, but not in this generations mind-set. Like one said earlier. "what if i wanted an apple" in such a society you would just simply pick the apple from the tree, because apples would be in plentiful quantities. In a society where all repetitive jobs were replaced by useful machines there would be no expensive cost because of the existence of Free energy.

A cash-less society would have to be a society above the animal kingdom in sense it would be a society that 1. does not fear one another. 2. a society in which has solved all re-occuring issues of survival (food, water, health-care, etc. etc.). 3. A society in which the infrastructure is moderately incorporated with secure technologies.

K, so machiens do all the repetitive work.

But there are still going to be areas wich require that some people be of less value to others.

There can be no such thing as a sociaty where every single person is equel. And if a person doing a task of lower stature that a machine can't do, then that person is not equel to those around him (Why then would he do that job, if there is no beneit for him in doing it)?

I wouldn't trust a machine to give me a Massage, or cut my hair, or Babysit my children. If everyone is sposed to be equel in a Utopian sociaty, why then would some people take demeaning jobs. (for the love of being looked down on)?..lol

A boat Captain gives the orders, why would anyone in an equel sociaty want to take a lower position we would all want to be the captain..heh

Why would the police & millitary put their lives on the line in when they are getting the same rights & rewards as everyone else?

Utopia dose not & cannot exist in Human Sociaty. Humans are not Hive Creatures & cannot act like them, no matter how much we try to condition ourselves.


[edit on 12/5/2007 by Ironclad]

A human society without money is not only possible, but in my not so humble opinion, inevitable. Civilization cannot continue as it presently does for much longer. Changes are coming. It is up to each one of us as individuals to decide whether those changes will be brought about the easy way or the hard way.

Based on what I've been reading on this site and hearing on the evening news, any number of things could quite possibly knock out the infrastructure, thus doing away with our current monetary systems. Thats right folks, all it takes is an apocalyptic event of some kind and you can kiss the current economic state of the world goodbye. And good riddance too if you ask me.

In order for a society without money to be effective, human beings will need to go through a change of heart. Greed would have to be abolished which is something that cannot be done with laws and legislation. It has to be a change heart and mind and society as a whole would have to become more spiritual or at the very least...more loving, generous and co-operative. If that were to happen, a system of barter and trade would be very effective as long as the laws of supply and demand were being held in proper balance.

It can work. But it will take a lot of co-operation within the human race. but in order for that to happen, I'm afraid that the Grand Master of the Universe will probably have to shake us from our present economic lifestyles. Otherwise, the human race is not likely to let go of its love of money.

wow, this thread is more vague and optimistic than most threads about religion.

Originally posted by Obsurion
a cash-less society is very possible, but not in this generations mind-set. Like one said earlier. "what if i wanted an apple" in such a society you would just simply pick the apple from the tree, because apples would be in plentiful quantities.

that is not an acceptable point of view to me. It's not based in reality. "You just pick the apple from the tree." Sounds pretty simple, and I'm sure it would be nothing of the sort. Who decides how many apples everyone gets? Since money isn't deciding anymore. Ration system? Brute force? First come first serve?

[edit on 5-12-2007 by scientist]

reply to post by Ironclad


i'm not saying you don't deserve it, this thread is about an alternative to money and i was just saying one of the alternatives.

This sounds like a good place too ask the question.
How much money does a person need too live on comfortably?
Would enough money to be able to afford a home, 1 maybe 2 vehicles, pay your utilites and living expenses with alittle left over for what ever you might need or want be enough?

reply to post by UScitizen


People will never be happy with what they already have, its human nature to want bigger and better things. If you can afford to pay for all the essentials like the mortgague/rent and food then you will one day hope to have enough to be able to afford better food or a bigger house in a better part of town.

Just because your house has enough bedrooms for your family to sleep in, doesn't mean you won't ever want a spare bedroom for guests. Humans are never happy with what they have, if they were we would still live in caves and hunt animals to cook by the fire. Instinct drives us to climb the invisible ladder and i can't see the top yet, anyone else?

Perhaps it is a lack macro-economic knowledge. Although, would macro-economics apply to a system without money?
As far as the obvious failure of applied communism, a glance at why is quite illuminating. For one, you cant just skip capitalism and socialism. Marx was describing inevitable human social development not a political opinion or system. That is why "communism" failed. It was applied communism from a capitalist understanding/perspective; which by definition has nothing to do with Marxist theory. The moment communism is being "applied", it is no longer communism.
Ferraris and 52" TV's. I say exactly. What you're missing is that in a society without money, what people value changes as well. Like communism, we cant just skip ahead to a no money society. There species wide developments of consciousness and growth that must preceed that reality. Of course it looks like insanity. You're looking at it from a capitalist perspective. In your example, I'm the neurosugeon and you're the librarian. Cool. Noone forced me to be a neurosurgeon. It wasn't out of ambition for status or money. It was because it was of interest to me. It inspired my imagination. It was because I wanted to be a neurosurgeon. Call in sick to the library everyday if you like. It's not important to me. And please, have some fun in your ferrari - life can be a blast. Understand though that such growth of consciousness and understanding will come from passing through the school of hard knocks. The evolution will have some very dark, ugly periods.
Lastly, "reak" is spelled "wreak".
cheers
-v

Lightmare, you hit the nail right on the head. Of course my thumb was there but i'll heal.. just a quick note on demeaning jobs - I think given the necessary nature of things like garbage collecting and the like, when this type of life comes about, such jobs will be highly respected and people will be grateful to the individuals who tackle more unsavory tasks. ...as it should be today (for some of us it is).

Originally posted by coryblood
reply to post by scientist

 

just take what you NEED and leave the rest for other people. but i know we will never actually see that because people are too greedy, they won't help any one but themselves.

You're missing another aspect of the problem, I think. Setting greed aside for the moment, let's look at your suggestion that we take "what we need". Define "need" in this context. I play World Of Warcraft...doesn't everybody? The graphics in the game can, if cranked all the way up, put serious strain on my current graphics card. Thus, to fully enjoy one of my chosen pastimes, I could say that I *need* a better graphics card...or two...and a faster processor, and more RAM, and bigger, faster hard drives. Is that "Greed" ? I'm only asking for what it takes to do what I want.

If that example is too trivial for you, try this. I drive an old minivan. Am I being "greedy" if I go and take (in your utopia) a brand new, fully-loaded Toyota Prius? I could argue (rather successfully) that such a move would be beneficial for the environment (much better mileage), safer (for a lot of reasons), and more comfortable (which will no doubt make me more productive at my job and a safer driver on the road). On the other hand, you could argue that, in spite of all the benefits to myself and society, that I don't "need" a Prius...my minivan gets me to and from work just fine. Who's right?

Note that in both cases, I'm asking for no more than what is required to do something I already do...I'm not asking for a pocket mainframe PC, or for a Bugatti Veyron to commute in...but according to some people, I'd be considered a greedy (bleep), because they have a different view of my 'needs' than I do.

If we can ever come to a common definition of 'needs', we might actually make "From Each According to His Abilities, To Each According to His Needs" work...but not until then.

in your first example of gaming needs - in the cashless society, go for it. so long as you're using the things you "need" there would be only the constraints of production/availability and consideration for others (consideration is just something I would concern myself with. i'm not implying any law or rule). Same goes for the car... like i said earlier go get a ferrari for all i care. if it's available, it's yours.
it's taking control of a resource/item and not using it; i.e. hoarding, that signifies greed (as best as i can tell...)

[edit on 5/11/2008 by verbal kint]

one other thing, while im thinking of it, production efficiency and quality would sky rocket under a money less system. The incentive to make things that fail, wear out, or generally just suck, would be gone - resulting in our creations' base level of performance being unimaginably higher than we see in today's world of lame economy cars, retarded lighters, flimsy silverware, and computers that can't accurately keep track of 1's and 0's.





reply to post by verbal kint