A Possible Solution To The Worlds Problems A RESOURCE BASED ECONOMY

A Possible Solution To The Worlds Problems A RESOURCE BASED ECONOMY

This post is in reply to the popular post titled (Solution) Free Energy + 20 Hr Work Wk + Zero Taxes = Freedom

I feel that many people are unaware with the inherent problems with the current monetary systems and the way it limits us from the true magnificence we are all capable of.

What is a Resource Based Economy?

The term and meaning of a Resource-Based Economy was originated by Jacques Fresco. It is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. By supplying an efficiently designed economy, everyone can enjoy a very high standard of living with all of the amenities of a high technological society.

A resource-based economy would utilize existing resources from the land and sea, physical equipment, industrial plants, etc. to enhance the lives of the total population. In an economy based on resources rather than money, we could easily produce all of the necessities of life and provide a high standard of living for all.

A new Social Design A Resource Based Economy

Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was No, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.

In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.

We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.

Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfillment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.

At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. Only when population exceeds the carrying capacity of the land do many problems such as greed, crime and violence emerge. By overcoming scarcity, most of the crimes and even the prisons of today's society would no longer be necessary.

A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.

What else would a resource-based economy mean?

Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.

As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. Considerable amounts of energy would also be saved by eliminating the duplication of competitive products such as tools, eating utensils, pots, pans and vacuum cleaners. Choice is good. But instead of hundreds of different manufacturing plants and all the paperwork and personnel required to turn out similar products, only a few of the highest quality would be needed to serve the entire population. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.

With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.

If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. It is only when resources are scarce that money can be used to control their distribution. One could not, for example, sell the air we breathe or water abundantly flowing down from a mountain stream. Although air and water are valuable, in abundance they cannot be sold.

Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.

The Venus Project

The Zeitgeist Movement

Google Video Link

[edit on 6/6/2010 by chrisrand]

reply to post by chrisrand


There are numerous issues with the RBE.

#1: People are brainwashed to think in a box of labels; they equate RBE as some form of socialism, without realizing it doesn't have to be exactly as the Venus Project has laid forth their plan. There is no reason the plan cannot be tweaked to include individual freedom with little centralized planning.

#2: People involved in the RBE movement are dead set on their own way. They relate to the RBE concepts within a box, and do not really understand how to get over the hurdle of working together to really get some workable project up and running.

#3: RBE people have not developed any tangible transition planning to explain how the project could start off small and grow larger. The main thing they want is hundreds of millions of dollars to build a city from the ground up.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
reply to post by chrisrand

 

There are numerous issues with the RBE.

#1: People are brainwashed to think in a box of labels; they equate RBE as some form of socialism, without realizing it doesn't have to be exactly as the Venus Project has laid forth their plan. There is no reason the plan cannot be tweaked to include individual freedom with little centralized planning.

The plan that the Venus Project includes all the freedoms of the individual that are removed by TPB our current economic structures. Because the fundamental principle of the movement is based on the scientific method, the current plan is only a first attempt which can and will be adapted in the best logical methods needed.

#2: People involved in the RBE movement are dead set on their own way. They relate to the RBE concepts within a box, and do not really understand how to get over the hurdle of working together to really get some workable project up and running.

I'm not sure what you are referring to, if you could please elaborate. Currently there are 400,000 members world-wide working together to spread awareness.

#3: RBE people have not developed any tangible transition planning to explain how the project could start off small and grow larger. The main thing they want is hundreds of millions of dollars to build a city from the ground up.

Actually a tangible transition plan has been made by the founders of the movement as well as people individuals within the movement.

Here are some examples

TZM transition plan

Transition plan forum posts

A Resource Based Economy has been possible for quit some time, the only limiting factor is the modern day value system.

[edit on 6/6/2010 by chrisrand]

All I read is…

Phase 1 – Get rid of money
Phase 2 – ?
Phase 3 – Prosperity

Exactly how would this work? I mean if everything is a communal resource then what incentive is there for anyone to work and produce this utopia? If I can get all my food, water and anything else for free why would or should I bother contributing?

The inevitable outcome is that everyone will end up taking this point of view and the system would collapse; the whole idea relies on universal agreement which is contrary to everything we can observe in society.

I’ve only read the thread as I don’t have time to watch the video or anything so maybe I’ve missed something but I fail to see any reason to believe this would ever work.

Edit - Ah, I’ve just read the FAQ on the Venus Project website and their answer to the question “How would one choose a home?” is:

An example of the wide range of choice available in a resource-based economy is the way one selects a house. For instance, a man and woman may visit an architectural design center and sit in front of a clear hemisphere approximately six feet in diameter. The woman describes the type of house she would prefer and her areas of interest. The house appears as a 3-dimensional image in the center of the hemisphere. It rotates slowly to present a view of the interior and exterior. Then the man describes his major interests and preferences and suggests a larger balcony. The 3-dimensional image is adjusted. When they have finished requesting changes, the computer presents various alternatives to consider. They will also enter a sensorium to experience a walk-through of their preferred design and continue to make changes.

This isn’t an economic theory, it’s not even an attempt at an economic theory.

Edit 2 - Oh GOD! This bit is even better!

Q – “For reasons best known to geneticists, some people inherit different colored eyes from those of other people around them. In a grand overall vision of social and economic reform such as The Venus Project, what about those few who will always exhibit aberrant behavior under any system?”

A – “You must remember that Jacque has been at this almost all of his life, and so have I for the last 33 years. He encountered these questions early in his youth. That’s why he joined the KKK and the White Citizen’s Council and worked on ways of turning them around. He was successful at this.”

Successful?! Ah yes because the KKK are now well known for skipping around inner city Detroit handing out daisies to all the black children! Utter tosh. Oh and the author goes on to completely deny the impact that genetics have on behaviour!

www.thevenusproject.com...

Question 84



This is pure day dreaming rubbish.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Mike_A]

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Mike_A]

Maybe I am dense here, but I fail to see how this form of an economy, can solve any of the current crisis that face our system right now. In essence that's kinda how it works now . Whoever has the most resources available has the most power. How is this any different than what you propose?

What happens to those who do little or nothing? Would they receive less or none of the benefits that the others do?

what you have discribed is not an economy. there is no value upon which to base an economy, there are no borders to define an economy, and there is no delineation between producer and consumer, thus no trade, thus no economy.

I must say this is a rather lame economic theory if I can poke that many holes in it in just 7 lines of text.

Originally posted by Phedreus
what you have discribed is not an economy. there is no value upon which to base an economy, there are no borders to define an economy, and there is no delineation between producer and consumer, thus no trade, thus no economy.

I must say this is a rather lame economic theory if I can poke that many holes in it in just 7 lines of text.

For a minute there I thought you were referring to our current system. You do realize the economy is perpetual debt correct? There are only pledges to pay in this stage of the game. So which would you rather have? A pyramid/ ponzi scheme where your paper currency is substituted for TP, or something to base real value on? Anything less than a RBE is a scam. We're stuck promoting the lowest bid on products and services. This is the exact reason we're still using oil for anything other than manufacturing, and why people commit suicide to avoid bunking with 80 people working 14 hour shifts/ 6 days a week. Not to mention some of these are factories are poisoning our kids.

reply to post by chrisrand


I am a member of TZM. While there are 400k people signed up on their sites, their goal's are stagnant. There is one person controlling the direction of TZM and they haven't figured out how to get people involved. Transition plans abound, but every one I have seen thus far are planning the ultimate system in detail. While this is great, the movement needs more than a one pronged approach. It needs real working businesses that subscribe to the ideas of TZM and automate the business using the movement to succeed. To date there is no real tangible transition. The plan is get a crap ton of money and build a concept city from scratch.

I personally like the idea of an RBE...if the TZM community can realize they must work within the current constructs of society and develop a transition model one business at a time, then it will have a chance at success. That or either (like the leader of the TZM wants) wait for a total financial collapse and ask people to build a dream city.

reply to post by chrisrand


You basically describe a one world communist utopia.



You're plan makes no rational sense. Assuming we did have a BRE, what's my inventive to work? .. I'm sure as hell not going to help develop technology, or work in a factory, and you can forget about seeing me in a field.. I'll sit down by a nice beach and wait for someone else to bring me my food.

All economies have "Incentive" and there is none in yours.. which is why every Communist country could never truly have Communism.. no one will work for free, so in countries like Russia and China, Communism thus gave them an incentive: Work or die. Incentive to keep your life in exchange for 18hr days in a cold factory.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by chrisrand

 

You basically describe a one world communist utopia.

The only possible way all the people on Earth could live in peace is by end the meaningless separations and classifications and unite as one race one people and move forward from their.

As far as communism, it is nothing like it.

Communism still needs a stratification of government meaning some people will be more important than you and have false power over you, greed and crime will still exists.

Communism relies on mass labor, where as the Venus Project will, over time, do away with 95% of the meaningless remedial jobs that exist strictly to perpetuate the system.

Communism still belongs in a monetary system that is the root cause of most the problems in this world.

For an example of that, think about the Gulf Oil Spill, if we weren’t in the monetary system they wouldn’t be asking “do we have enough money to spend on cleaning it”, or “how much will we lose from cleaning it more speedily”, but do we have the resources. And of course we have enough resources, just not the monetary incentive to do it. Which leads me to my next point.

Is The Venus Project a Utopian society?

The Venus Project is not a Utopian concept. We do not believe in the erroneous notion of a utopian society. There is no such thing. Societies are always in a state of transition. We propose an alternative direction, which addresses the causes of many of our problems. There are no final frontiers for human and technological achievement - it will always undergo change. Even if we can design a society having all of the modifications to improve the lives of people and protect the environment we will still be at the beginning of the next phase. We are always in transition and learning new things.

The survival of any social system ultimately depends upon its ability to allow for appropriate change to improve society as a whole. The patterns we choose determine whether or not there is intelligent life on earth. In closing, to achieve this new social design, it will require much voluntary, unselfish participation for its realization. The future does not depend solely on The Venus Project. We only propose a direction. Our future depends on the decisions we make today.

You're plan makes no rational sense.

It makes no rational sense to a person who is uneducated in the movement, which is why I am here informing people and answering questions. Please refer to the links I have posted.

Assuming we did have a BRE, what's my inventive to work? .. I'm sure as hell not going to help develop technology, or work in a factory, and you can forget about seeing me in a field.. I'll sit down by a nice beach and wait for someone else to bring me my food.

All economies have "Incentive" and there is none in yours.. which is why every Communist country could never truly have Communism.. no one will work for free, so in countries like Russia and China, Communism thus gave them an incentive: Work or die. Incentive to keep your life in exchange for 18hr days in a cold factory.

To answer the question of incentive look at my example from above about BP as well as the official explanation.

All of these questions and more are covered on The Venus Project's web page

Please watch the Zeitgeist Addendum and Future by Design

I look forward to as many questions as you guys have its a good thing for you to learn and myself to become more solidified in the movemen

Originally posted by Mikey Sly
What happens to those who do little or nothing? Would they receive less or none of the benefits that the others do?

All of your basic needs will be met. Food water shelter. And they will be met with abundance because manual labor will be replaced with automated facilities.

Any one who wants to do little or nothing will be able to do little or nothing. But how long can one do little or nothing. What will happen is that people will discover themselves and be able to live their passions.

Think about it this way. If you won the lottery and you could do anything you want what would you do. Im sure at first you would just relax and do nothing of much. But think about it, with out the forced labor you will be able to do anything that truly drives you.

Travel will be a popular activity. Building relationships and getting in touch with nature will be popular. Basically anything you want to do will be possible with out the drudgery of indentured servitude.

Originally posted by highfreq
Maybe I am dense here, but I fail to see how this form of an economy, can solve any of the current crisis that face our system right now. In essence that's kinda how it works now . Whoever has the most resources available has the most power. How is this any different than what you propose?

There will be no stratification of power. No one person will hold any power or have any more resources.

There will not even be a formal system of governance so that no one will have any form of false governmental power. Instead of voting on a politician in to office supposedly fix our problems, we will vote in ideas. There wont be an politicians, only people with the skills needs to fix problems, ie scientists, sociologists, technicians.

Originally posted by chrisrand

Originally posted by Mikey Sly
What happens to those who do little or nothing? Would they receive less or none of the benefits that the others do?

All of your basic needs will be met. Food water shelter. And they will be met with abundance because manual labor will be replaced with automated facilities.

Any one who wants to do little or nothing will be able to do little or nothing. But how long can one do little or nothing. What will happen is that people will discover themselves and be able to live their passions.

Think about it this way. If you won the lottery and you could do anything you want what would you do. Im sure at first you would just relax and do nothing of much. But think about it, with out the forced labor you will be able to do anything that truly drives you.

Travel will be a popular activity. Building relationships and getting in touch with nature will be popular. Basically anything you want to do will be possible with out the drudgery of indentured servitude.

This would require an immense workforce to maintain the automated facilities. How will that workforce be assured? I would suspect that it would be rather difficult to find the labor to do this when everyone could do something else instead.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by chrisrand

 

You basically describe a one world communist utopia.

You're plan makes no rational sense. Assuming we did have a BRE, what's my inventive to work? .. I'm sure as hell not going to help develop technology, or work in a factory, and you can forget about seeing me in a field.. I'll sit down by a nice beach and wait for someone else to bring me my food.

All economies have "Incentive" and there is none in yours.. which is why every Communist country could never truly have Communism.. no one will work for free, so in countries like Russia and China, Communism thus gave them an incentive: Work or die. Incentive to keep your life in exchange for 18hr days in a cold factory.

Sorry, I have obviously mistaken you for a thinker. What incentive you ask? How about you phrase it another way. What incentive do you have to escort an old lady across the street, or help a neighbor tidy up their lawn while they're stuck in the hospital?

The incentive is to benefit people's lives. That's not communism last time I checked. I call that common decency. Would you rather work in front of a monitor watching prison cams day in and day out for a measly living, or build up our society where we don't require so many f'n prisons? Now here's a chance to think on it...

reply to post by chrisrand


Ohhh I get it.. it's an Anarchist Utopia.. everyone sits around munching on the carrots they grew pondering the meaning of life with their 22 hours a day of fun and relaxation ..

reply to post by Americanist

What incentive you ask? How about you phrase it another way. What incentive do you have to escort an old lady across the street, or help a neighbor tidy up their lawn while they're stuck in the hospital?

None. I will probably never assist an old lady across the street, and if I didn't like my neighbor I probably wouldn't care for their lawn, I'd leave that to someone who liked them, and if they were such an unlikeable person, don't care.

What's your point?

The incentive is to benefit people's lives. That's not communism last time I checked.

The over all objective is no money, thus no compensation for work rendered or service provided.. Communism is a system where the entire community works to the benefit of the whole, a centralized Government is supposed to oversee the direct and equal distribution of supplies, service and wealth (through the construction of infrastructure and civil investment) .. The OP's system sounds like most Communist ideologies, albeit with it's own twists, but like all ideologies they eliminate Human Nature from the equation.

Would you rather work in front of a monitor watching prison cams day in and day out for a measly living, or build up our society where we don't require so many f'n prisons?

..I'd rather put the prisoners down like the sick dogs they are.. hey, no more prisons needed, and no Utopian society will eliminate crime, or the need for punishment.

To the OP Let me ask you this:

What makes you think people desire this utopian economy? .. What makes you think we want a world without war? .. What makes you think people in general don't want to be divided, ruled, told what to do, and are happy with their lot in life? It's Human Nature to have an authoritarian leader.. as it is in almost all tribal animal species. It's also Human Nature to wage war, just as it's Mother Natures job to starve us when we grow to large, and wipe us out with diseases when our cities are to big. What makes you think that the distribution of food to other people so no one ever goes hungry is a good thing? .. In many places like Africa, or Palestine, food and aid is poured in by the hundreds of thousands of tons.. people living in the millions per square mile where the Earth naturally sustains thousands, and little home grown food sources are abound. Or even in Ireland, where the placement of Potatoes, an alien crop to Europe, caused the population to sky rocket by 200% in 100 years, 8 million people before the famine, and it's population has never been close since in 200 some years. Or wars, which are a natural way to keep population in check, an instinctual habit which balances us with Nature.. in wars like WWII where tens of millions died, the population bounced back like nothing happened, but had all those people lived, the worlds population would be twice what it is today.

The only thing I see wrong with society is that we try to stop the nature progression of our species.. we defeat disease, we can ship food anywhere, we strive to stop wars.. so what, we grow perpetually in some unlikely Utopian society?

reply to post by chrisrand

All of your basic needs will be met. Food water shelter. And they will be met with abundance because manual labor will be replaced with automated facilities.

How?

Who will maintain them?

Considering that the current US lifestyle already consumes 2.5 times the amount of resources the earth has available and you propose to make peoples’ lives even easier across the globe how will you power all these automated machines? And don’t just say “solar”.

A few more questions:

How will you decide who gets to live where? For example if both I and another five people want to live in a particular apartment with a particular view, how will you decided which of us gets it?

If there are no barriers to free movement and your needs are catered for wherever you are what happens when the south of France ends up with a population of 2 billion?

Who will do all the menial jobs like scrubbing public toilets or working boring jobs in factories that can’t be magically automated?

Basically anything you want to do will be possible with out the drudgery of indentured servitude.

No it won’t, you are completely dodging the question. Someone needs to do the work to provide all those services and products that you seem to be taking for granted; in your system who is going to become a fire-fighter and risk their life pulling my lazy arse out of a towering inferno for no reward? Who is going to build and maintain the vehicles that makes this free travel possible? It can’t all be done by machines, some has to at least be operating them.

There will be no stratification of power.

Then who makes decisions? Will everything be design by committee? What about laws? Going back to my previous question, if I and those other five people are fighting over the apartment with a nice view who decides, who has the power, to come and break us up and find who was at fault?

There wont be an politicians, only people with the skills needs to fix problems, ie scientists, sociologists, technicians.

But if no one has any more power than anyone else then there won’t be any system of accreditation, no one to oversee examinations and so anyone will be able to call themselves scientists or technicians etc.

This is so badly thought out.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by chrisrand

 

Ohhh I get it.. it's an Anarchist Utopia.. everyone sits around munching on the carrots they grew pondering the meaning of life with their 22 hours a day of fun and relaxation ..

You are far to cynical or negative, I can't tell so I can not begin to answer your questions.

But I will try to address one thing many people are unaware of and thats the problem with their understanding of Human Nature.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS HUMAN NATURE!

I hope that got your attention. There is is only human behavior.

There is no such thing as human nature in the conventional sense of being a set of predetermined, preprogrammed behaviors and values to which all human beings are predisposed. What we are concerned with is human behavior and values, which can certainly be changed. If they could not, we would still be living in caves.

The question we should be concerned with is, "What are the factors that shape human behavior?" We feel that human behavior is just as lawful as any natural phenomenon. Our customs, behaviors, and values are by-products of our culture. If the environment is unaltered, similar problems and behaviors will reoccur. The Venus Project proposes to provide an environment that will bring out the best in human behavior and to extend maximum courtesy to all nations.

Take, for example, the situation witnessed after WWII: even the most respectable families could be seen fighting over scraps of food. When people's basic needs are not met, they resort to whatever behavior is necessary to ensure the necessities of life for themselves and their families. By making the necessities of life available to all in this participatory democracy and through a meaningful and productive education, we can dramatically reduce counterproductive behavior.

From H. G. Wells, "The anti-progressives of the early twentieth century loved to assert that "Human Nature" never altered; to imagine that the men of the Stone Age felt and thought like bank clerks picnicking in a cave, and the ideas of Confucius and Buddha were easily interchangeable with the ideas of Rousseau, Karl Marx or De Windt. They were not simply ignorant, but misinformed about almost every essential fact in the past experiences and present situation of the race."

The New Utopians by Robert Boguslaw: "As Norman R. F. Maier (and others) point out years ago, the term "Human Nature" is characteristically used as a screen to hide our ignorance about man in general. And one of the more elementary oversights made in discussions of human behavior consists of ignoring the fact that the actions of men are set in motion by external as well as internal forces."

As Arthur C. Clark and many other forward writers have pointed out, anyone who brings up the human nature question is naïve.

From the book Looking Forward, by Jacque Fresco:

"When little was known about cultural anthropology, sociology, and psychology, it seemed quite valid to resist proposed reforms by saying, "it won't work. It is against human nature." It is difficult for many people to appreciate the fact that what they call "human nature" just doesn't exit. People are like mirrors; they largely reflect their surroundings. If people were to come into the world with a fixed "nature" consisting of automatic responses, civilization would be impossible. Like the ants, we would live out our lives in patterns that are modified but little with the passing of time. The wonderful thing about us is that we come into this world with maximum flexibility."

Please to everyone reading this post, please watch the films they will help you understand the major problems in our current monetary and value system and why they need to be done away with.

reply to post by Mike_A


Mike_A I am not trying to dodge any questions of yours, its just that you are not yet familiar with the movement and its basic tenants and are instead nit picking at certain points that you may not be understanding.

It would serve you and anyone else reading this to first watch the film posted above, then do your own due diligence and research the websites associated with the movement that I also linked.

All of your questions and more are addressed there.

I would like to ask you a question.

Do you think that our current system is working or that it will bring us all a better way of life?

If not then there must be another system designed to take its place. If you can find me another approach or come up with your own one, I will gladly consider it.