Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Amaterasu
But you assume all would go along. I wouldn't. I just cannot accept such a system so close to my own ideal, but so locked and closed minded to taking
any other direction.
Huh? How do you mean?
And that's the fault. What do you expect, the whole world to follow?
There's no issue with "following." In fact, You would only have to follow if You CHOSE to follow. As long as You are within the three Laws. Add the
energy and offer both a structure to consider and a website for input - and the rest takes care of itself. No One has to change. No One has to
answer to anyOne else, either.
Nobody's ever gotten more than a third of the world to follow along. It doesn't matter if you have the perfect system. Communism was the
perfect system in its day, it failed. Fact is a good majority of people will never follow along for no other reason than it not being their own ideal.
And like it or not, without a leader, it can never become more than a cult stuck in one state or city or nation, never going beyond that. Why? Because
most people need an image to follow if they are to trust a movement.
Yes, many scarcity solutions have failed. But how many would be against a better life for Themselves and Their families? How many would be against
freely available foods? Organic farming? Being able to follow One's bliss? I tell You, there is no following at all.
thing is, you're not offering a structure. You're offering your opinion of a structure.
No. I'm offering a structure. My opinion is that it offers what is needed in abundance, but it is still a structure.
Some people's living standards will rise, others will not simply because of who they are and how they live.
You are unclear on the concept. ALL people's standard of living will rise - IF They choose it to. There is no way to AVOID this with abundant energy
flowing. Suddenly that $10 that bought a bag of rice buys 15 bags of rice... If One wanted two bags of rice when one cost $10, One will get two bags
- and then maybe some vegetables that before they forewent. Or, the standard of living may be chosen and They only buy the one bag and make do as
before. But that is Their choice.
We read about such people all the time. lonesome people who sit on their chairs so long their flesh fuses with the fabric. It's their choice to
not want to fix their solution and not want anyone else.
And again I say that most of those people are the way They are because They don't have the opportunity to be what They really want to be.
Do you expect the Pakistan tribal regions to desire your way?
Well... Since My way allows Them to live as They wish - in a tribe, in modern society - their choice - and also retain the option of assistance
should crops fail or other disaster should strike if They chose tribal, why should They CARE negatively? As I said, They do not need to change. They
needn't "support" or "not support." It's merely available to Them.
need for money won't dissipate on its own.
Yes, eventually it will. As the cost of energy is taken out of the production of everything all down the line, there reaches a point where everything
is there for the taking. Money just represents that scarcity: meaningful energy expended. When We can meaningfully expend energy all We want to,
nothing will cost anything.
Somebody is going to take your energy system and make it more efficient somehow.
That would be awesome.
Probably the left-overs of the people who were hiding it. They're going to demand something in exchange.
What would They want to demand? They can have all the food, clothing, shelter richly provided, and money is worthless. With the Betterment Ethic,
They will get LOTS of prestige and fame and appreciation for offering a better way to extract the energy that already made Them and all on this planet
rich beyond compare.
The sheer unity of mind and ideology needed to build just one space ship in our own modern era is extremely difficult.
True, but if designs were open source, better ideas can be offered, and leaders will emerge from the creative milieu. And things will be built. (If
You doubt that, examine such projects as Linux - which has NO CEO, NO leader, NO board of directors, stock holders, or anything. Yet what one Human
offered many took forth and made better and more comprehensive. No One paid any of Them a dime. But They sure got a lot of strokes for the additions
They effectively ARE on your system.
LOL! Not even! Until everyone can wake in the morning as Each desires and plan the day according to Their bliss, no One (except the elite) are "on
Friend's spouse works for NASA and when the government shutdown was imminent, they were ready to work without pay. They are on your ideal. But
look at them. They are hated by some, called liars by others, and can't even get a real space plane built. Why these problems?
Because People in those organizations have lied and manipulated the public. Any therefore associated with Them will wear the brand. (And most people
will work for nothing if They believe in Their work - if there is some bliss to be had.)
Because it's tiresome. It's tiresome being weighed down by government timelines with your own personal skills, and the civilian opinion of
So what if there were no government and timelines? If the goal was to the fastest end without sacrifice?
The system you propose cannot work because all humans do not have the same minds.
Considering that My system leaves open all but three Laws, and complete choice as to how richly to live - for everyOne, that is clearly NOT why it
won't work. It may not work, but I say, since it requires little to nothing from virtually everyOne - while encouraging betterment - and accommodates
any and every kind of mind, it is not for the reason You give here that it wouldn't work. (I haven't found a reason yet...)
Some are greedy by birth, others caring by birth, others like myself creative from birth, others uncaring to emotions and only seeking their
own glory by birth (this being psychopaths).
"Greed," again, becomes meaningless in abundance. Here, here's a story I was told once:
A Human from the 20th century somehow pops into the 25th Century Star Trek universe. Hume is given a house and shown how to use the replicator. Hume
got so excited and when the dignitary left, Hume got to work. First Hume created gold. LOTS of gold. Hume filled a room full. Next Hume thought
gemstones - diamonds, emeralds, rubies - would be cool. Out poured the gemstones, filling another room.
Furs and pearls, and silver services and on and on. Room after room, Hume filled. And when Hume was all done...with a house so packed with riches
that even the living spaces were inaccessible...Hume looked upon Hume's fortune and wondered, "Why?"
Not long thereafter, Hume put all that stuff into the disposal unit. There was no point.
And like I said, by simple random chance, some people just want to watch the world burn.
Well... Less by random chance and more by having endured abuse in this life. Well, I guess it's random that One is born into abuse...born to no
opportunity...born suppressed and enslaved. Yeah, that will lead One often to less open, loving behavior. But again, fear of a few keeping the vast
many suffering seems insane...
You're system doesn't change these people. It demands they adapt for your own ideal. All governments do this, it's just that some governments
ask much less of you, and that's why your system cannot work.
No... You're right that My system does not change these People. It changes no One. Except in the standard of living available to choose. It makes
NO demands. I don't even claim living better will be forced. One can continue living as One in poverty now lives - no One stopping One. But the
CHOICE to live better will be available.
Everything damages the body. Right now, billions of particles are hitting your dna. Some, by random chance, hit it and damage it. You cannot
avoid this fact. It comes with being in the universe. Some things do it a little bit more than others, but in terms of chances of hitting it, it's
just quite too low to care. Aspartame does do damage over time. As does drugs like pot, Cigarettes, red meat, burnt food, unwashed fruits, blowfish,
and many others. Some of these are legal, others are not. That's special interest of course. But we accept as humans that we are dieing, and that what
we eat is causing it mainly. Doesn't change the fact that some people just don't care.
You are woefully uneducated about the pariah plant. ALL studies done with good science (and there have been many) suggest very strongly that the
pariah plant cures cancer, controls glaucoma, relieves stress, and much much more - and does NOT deteriorate the body - even from smoking it.
To pass off Aspartame as if it was on par with cigarettes (which, by the way, They have NEVER, in 50 years + of studies, found a link between tobacco
and cancer. Fiberglass filters and cancer? Yes. Carcinogenic chemicals tobacco is steeped in? Yes. Organic tobacco? Not one.) - to pass this off
as if it was on that same level is disingenuous.
And if some don't care, that is their prerogative. But MOST do care or would if They had all the information - They just have little information or,
Well there you go. Sucralose does nothing to me. It's the much needed replacement for aspartame. But it hurts you. I shouldn't be blocked from
using it because it hurts you.
Yeah, I have no issues with You consuming Sucralose. As long as You're fully informed...
For example: From www.vegan-nutritionista.com...
Sucralose is made by chemically altering the structure of sugar molecules by adding chlorine atoms in place of hydroxyl groups.(Everything You
Need to Know About Sucralose, International Food Information Council ) Sucralose is therefore chlorinated sugar; a chlorocarbon.
Chlorocarbons are poisonous; they're used in bleach, disinfectants, insecticide, poison gas, and hydrocholric acid.
(www.holisticmed.com...) Because it technically started as sugar, sucralose can be marketed as "made from sugar."
To find and avoid the sweetener, you have to actually be on a mission to do so, and read every ingredient label.
Why would you want to go to all the trouble to avoid sucralose?
The US FDA approved sucralose in 1998, but it has not yet been approved in most European nations. In the pre-approval stage, the FDA conducted
short-term tests that actually found the potential for toxicity, but it was approved anyway.
According to the "New Scientist" November 23 1991 edition on page 13, the pre-approval tests conducted on animals (you know how much I hate these
tests) showed toxicity:
Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage)
Enlarged liver and kidneys
Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus
Increased cecal weight
Reduced growth rate
Decreased red blood cell count
Hyperplasia of the pelvis
Extension of the pregnancy period
Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights
Additionally, the government doesn't monitor health effects after the initial tests. There is no warning information of potential side effects on the
labels of the sweetener's products.
Oh, I could go on and on.
I have the genes that allow it to be digested just fine. Now here's the thing. What exactly is natural? Because humanity, by all accords, is
"Natural" is a marketing term that has no definition, so, essentially, EVERYTHING is "natural."
We are an alien in terms of how we act with the world and our energy demands. We have to build our own environment just to live, because we are
incompatible with the ones around us. We cannot take from the natural world because we would destroy it.
You are kidding. You must be. Though Humans were genetically created, We take from the "natural" world just fine. Carrots, for example, are
We need to make our own spin off mini-natural world to supply ourselves.
No... Not really.
So when it comes to things being natural, I just don't really see how anything mankind eats, does, or acts like is natural. Natural would be
living in the trees and only 50,000 humans on Earth. But that's genocide and impossible and evil.
Like I said, "natural" is a marketing term with no definition.
You keep mentioning research for a lot of things but just as with VP, I don't think you fully understand. Like I said, go take a chemical
course. Learn the chemicals your dealing with, Learn their active sites and how they react to active sites in the human body.
Don't assume I am clueless about chemistry. Chemistry has little to do with virtual particles. More to do with valence bonding...
And You know, We're back around on a topic I thought I covered a while back. If You had reservations then, why didn't You bring them up then? Truly,
I think I well established that virtual particles include a class which includes a particle and its antiparticle "popping" into 3D space, and most
often annihilating one another in less time than Our theoretical limit of measurement, bound by Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
In fact, it is because of the creative nature that these particles come into being at all that We know that it is Life sustaining. Here are particles
pumping energy into the universe and if We choose wisely, obeying the three Laws (and I ask anyOne to tell me why, if everyOne else around Them made
the same choice - to obey these Laws - They would break the Laws, one or many? How many of Us would look around and say, yeah, if You do it, I'm in?
I will not break these laws. In essence...
I agree to get along.
Can You agree to get along? Can We, Humans on this planet? These "lords" who have had the Humans herded have kept Us divided, conquered, and yes,
Right Now We have the free Interweb, barely. We, Humans here Now. We have a choice and time is running out.
Don't trust research unless you're had a taste of it yourself. I cannot honestly state to trust research in the field of GMO crops because I
don't have any clue what the protein sequences they use are like. Judge not the claims of experts correct until you yourself have had at least a brief
read through of the why to their claims. There are countless examples of fail-tacular "experts". This Paul Revere stuf with Sarah Palin is just the
recent example. I have seen the news broadcasting about "extraterrestrial particles", thinking its life when all it is is literally dirt not from
Earth. Learn for yourself before you assume truth. Some men just want money from it all.
Yes... Money is an issue. Imagine the truth that will prevail when money is no longer a motive... As for GMO... I found these links:
Here's an interesting study:
From the above:
The study found:
a strong association between author affiliation to the GM industry (professional conflict of interest) and study outcome
at least one of the authors was connected to industry in almost half the GM health and nutrition studies analyzed
where there was such a conflict of interest, 100% of the studies (41 out of 41) made a favorable GM safety finding.
studies funded by industry or involving scientists employed by industry are almost certain to produce conclusions in favor of product
CEOs get prosecution all the time. But they just bare with it and go back once they're done. They have too much money for fines or jail to
matter. My solution is to just shoot them with a firing squad. If they die they die, if they live they live. But I'm a bit more on the extreme
I imagine there are some instances - but mostly it's the corporation that get the slap. No one Individual gets nailed. As a rule. And Me? I want
to get rid of the need for money, thereby eliminating Their power over others.
Higher standards in the western perspective are associated with lower birthrates. I can assure you that the world you create would have higher
birth rates because they would have everything they need. In the world you described to me, I would personally desire having 5-7 kids, a nice family
house on a hilltop somewhere, and a little community built around it. In the western world I live in today, if I was rich and famous, I would only
have 2 kids, maybe 3, because I don't trust this world enough to take care of them. I want to raise them to my own standards least they become
Hollywood whores or coc aine heads. But the world you described to me is indeed heaven on Earth. Thus I would have no fear of having many
That may be You. But overall, higher standards of living mean people have other things to do besides work and have sex. As it stands now, the poor
have few options. And with Welfare more or less promoting having children... Well, You can see that money will no longer be the factor in promoting
births amongst the poor (who are poor no longer and can do the things They only dreamed of doing while They plugged away at work and sex).
The world would be so well that if I couldn't raise them, my neighbors and their friends would. Now when the world started exploding in
population size, what would happen a century down the road? How long until you simply have no more room and no more resources.
1. The population will not "explode."
2. The Human race is poised to travel into space; many will move out to explore the universe.
3. Yes, children will be raised by many - if the parent allows. Which mostly will happen...
4. Resources are orders of magnitude greater than We could use in a thousand years; scarcity is propaganda. The only crucial "resources" They tell
Us We're running out of are energy related: oil, gas, coal. With plenum energy available, those "dwindling" resources will be moot. And on top of
all that, Humans transmuted lead to gold in the 1970's. It all looked feasible to do on a larger scale but that the energy involved to transmute made
the gold cost about a million dollars an ounce. Hardly cost-effective. But with all the energy We want, we can transmute elements as needed.
The government makes 15 trillion dollars every year. The money required to make even the most basic starship, and your tech does allow for warp
drive weather you know it or not, would be in the ever higher trillions.
Yeah...but if money was not involved in the choices to do things, just think of the wonders We humans could accomplish! As for allowing for warp
drive...I believe there are related effects that might be put to use. As I said, We are poised to move into space.
See, the thing about warp drive is it's going to collect a LOT of matter en route to where it wants to go. When it comes back, that warp shell
is going to release that matter in a bright explosive burst of something going many times the speed of light to suddenly only a few mph.
Now this is plain silly. Please provide links to show My assessment is incorrect.
Where are these light bursts? They would be bright enough to light up the sky. Of course, only a fool would come out of warp speed near the
Earth. Like I said, that stuff affects the bodies of mass around it. You are masking your own true mass. But that still means we should see stars that
quickly come and go off in the outer solar system.
Really, this follows the silliness. And I have no clue what you're talking about.
'm sorry, but in the 21st century, I cannot believe that such things, if they existed, would not be leaked. They simply are. The government
paid a lot of money to keep the hush up on the SR71. But even though, the Russians still had even the basic idea figured out in a few years. We should
know if such things existed.
Onions. Layered like onions. With "need to know" firmly in place. There is much that is NOT hidden so much as ignored. And if it is ignored, it
can be plain as day and no One will have a clue except those few with personal experience. There is little that has leaked that They didn't LET
Sorry, but you have to explain where your energy is coming from because it all comes from somewhere. Lets say you used VPs. Those might be
gravitons, that by hitting and getting energy from, you prevent from getting to their proper location. The Earth then falls out of orbit because the
information for its orbit is loss.
Um, again. VP are, by and large, pairs of particles that "pop" into being and annihilate one another, giving off a burst of energy in the process.
THAT is where the energy is coming from. It is "dark" energy. Zero Point energy. The energy in the plenum.
What you describe is the same thing that a molecular engine would use. A molecular engine could ride on the energy used to transmit genetic
messages between cells. But that information then is loss, and cells become uncoordinated. And die.
No it isn't.
Hate sorry, I'm not so sure about. Nobody I know ever hated gays. I never saw anything wrong with it. But I cannot deny that by choosing one
faith, I have to disagree with the life style. Even so, these two sides were always met with the feeling of disgust in my mind. I was born with that
disgust. In many ways, it came about from nothing more than my own choice. That it's simply gross. Go and be gay if you want, but I still find it
gross. I won't try to ban it, I won't try to stop it.
See, now THAT is as it should be. If One is not into something...don't partake. Sadly, some think They have a right to dictate these things to
others. So I applaud You for Your stance.
But because that sense of grossness came about by nothing but random chance, another may grow to hate what is gross by the same random chance.
I can say the same with Muslims. There was a time I actually loved the religion for its culture and its ways. But as I grow older, and learn more
about it, I'm different. I'm becoming more prejudiced. Not because of anything I was told, but out of choice based off what I learn about other
cultures and ways of life. I no longer think all cultures and ways of life have merit. I honestly think some are just plain evil and have no worth
being in existence. Surely you must agree, because you display a hatred of the CEO-type. Not that its wrong to hate corruption. Still, your hatred is
from your choice. Some times these are just random acts. And under your system, well, what stops such a man?
Well, I know several Muslims who disagree fully with the interpretation of jihad and other violent "solutions." They are quite happy to live and let
live. So I cannot paint everyOne in that very broad category as violent and "anti-Human." In fact, I suspect a whole load of propaganda has whipped
the Muslims into a frenzy. I mean, if They could do it to Us with 9/11, They can do it to Others to help instigate war (to Their profit, of
I find ANY belief that supports the three Laws to be valid enough. And even in the Koran there are lines which speak of peace being the primary goal.
So... If an Individual agrees to follow those three Laws with Me and Others, as I agree to follow them as well, whatever other trappings anOther
wishes to place in Their view of things, I'm all good. Most Humans follow these Laws - except where propaganda has led Them into war. Sure, there's
the occasional psycho. They're there regardless of what We do - We won't be LESS safe from that. So when considering whether it would be better, I
don't consider "psycho" situations as representing the overall effect.
Rather I look at it as having some element of rationality and communication. I do suspect They will take down the web soon. I bloody hope I'm wrong.
So several scenarios might be played out here. We shall see, shall We not? [smile]
Perhaps war today is motivated by wealth and scarcity.
And wage slavery, sapping the time/energy from the work of that flesh... Ethical issues.
But lets go back in time to the first wars
Well, I'd rather not. You have admitted the possibility that today, We are involved in war solely because of the possible money/power/energy scarcity
paradigm. That is the paradigm I am trying to change. That We, as Humans have in Our hands Now. IF We offer it up for thought widely.
I keep hoping more will bring more to consider what I offer. All I can ever say is, "*I*'m surely trying to help."
between, say, the Greek city states. Or perhaps even later on with Latinum. Rome never had anything to gain from taking over Italy. It just
Um... money/power/energy ring a bell? Yes. The energy of the People and the power to control Them, but in the end costing something so money, too,
was in there, I'm sure.
In fact a large number of wars Rome fought were for no other reason than to prove themselves as Romans and men. No needs. Just to prove they
were better than some other group. It's not that war today isn't about scarcity. It's that the idea of war can be re-birthed by your
Who's going to "rebirth the idea of war?" Sweetheart, the "wars" will be holographic, simulated, and some with warnings will be very graphic. But
believe Me, if One chooses to follow the three Laws and yet lusts for war...less common these days as most would MUCH rather do it in a video game
than real life...Those who so lust will have Their simulated joy. Off They go, then. [shrug]
I mean, go back in time far enough and you will find periods of no war. War came from somewhere. It didn't just pop out of nowhere. It may have
a relationship to scarcity, and many wars are for that. But sometimes people go to war for no other reason than power. For the simply glory of it.
That's a problem. because your society makes all people essentially happy and blissful. Some people, believe it or not, like being miserable. And want
Righty-o. Well, I'm thinking that Our view of making war to "prove your manhood" is shifted a bit. In fact, it's rather gauche overall. True Humans
do not choose to break the three Laws. Now We prove Our Beinghood in how We better the universe around Us. Do We bring betterment at all? Most of
Us try to, and when We are not, virtually always money/power/energy is involved.
I'm guessing that might be true of You, but when I place Myself in that position
Exactly. Don't base a system off your own standards. It can never work. It is impossible to change everyone.
Oh. But it's not My STANDARDS I base this on. It is a fractal seed I offer and its chaotically created structure through a society of Beings in
abundance - using wisdom from past thought. The three Laws were not written by Me. It just became clear that in such abundance those were the only
three that mattered.
Most laws are written expecting theft. In abundance theft is merely frowned upon as there's only specialty pieces - those crafted by Human hand and
ingenuity - that would even matter. As in, "I don't NEED it. Why would I steal it? No One else would take it if the word and pictures got out on
the web... No. I'll admire it, and maybe it will be gifted to Me." Or at least get the name of the Creator to get My own. Why would I risk being
known as One who breaks the second Law?
No, not that the rich can handle being rich and the poor cannot. That very few can handle either. I kind of have a thing against inheritance
for that very reason. I can handle self-inflicted poverty pretty well, and self-motivated wealth. But I have given entire semesters to try and build a
person up to something more, only to see them fall into the same errors that got them in the bucket the first time around. It's not that I don't think
humanity is epic win and beautiful and so much more capable. It's that I think most people simply won't do those things. Simply cannot handle a
corporation, or a small household.
And that's the beauty of abundance. Those who can lead will, Those who can follow follow from the heart, and Those who would rather be sailing can
That most people cannot handle leading their own lives.
Really. Where're the data on THIS claim. What defines success in this effort of leading a life?
doesn't come from something I've been taught. This was learned.
Wow. Again, how are You defining "handling" and leading life?
Mainly in college.
Well, that sounds like a rather limited social sample. You might be interested in the concept of the wanderjahr. College more or less equates to
Believe me a couple years ago I would agree with you on your views. But like I said. I spent entire semesters educating, building up, and
working to make someone a self-motivated, self-disciplined, active and smart human being, only to see them fail very shortly after I left them to
solve their own problems.
So Your whole evaluation of Humanity is based on one "failure?" In a society where things are stacked against One to begin with? No wonder You
cannot see. I base My assessments on many and many, around Me and across the globe. Humans are beautiful, creative Beings stifled by a system of
slavery though scarcity. Nearly everyone has a dream and most will not be lucky enough to see it become a reality for Them.
Worser still is seeing them get a "free" day card from the education system. knowing that they'll fall ever more in the future.
This sounds like an exception to the rule - especially if other pressures, such as survival and even discomfort, have been abated. If most were as
bad as You describe this One to be, there would be no society, no universities, no governance, no effort.
That said some people do respond. But an overwhelming majority of people simply are not capable of doing anything beyond basic works.
How do You know that? Have You offered Them all the education, the tools to practice with, the access to prove Themselves? No. No, most have never
had the opportunity to SHOW You what They can do. So it is a great fallacy to paint a picture of People "unable" when what holds Them back is not
talent, it's a chance to shine.
Luck of the draw, baby.
But I maintain that all people deserve the right to at least try and improve themselves. But I cannot agree to your claims that all humanity
are beautiful creatures that will do their pert.
1. No One has a "part" to play. So I don't claim that any will "do their part." I will say that as problems arise, leaders in solving them will
emerge. If it is a problem, there is discomfort or discord. Discomfort is a good motivator. And without money, problems will be real and not
manufactured to sell products and war.
Sorry, sometimes God makes an ugly evil person for his own reasons that I cannot claim to know.
Yeah, so? Rare it is, and it will be no more common. My point is that if We paint the picture with a psycho as the example, We are surely NOT
looking at overall expectations.
Most of the time he makes a poor man with nothing that I think is to work with his fellow man in a good community. I simply do not believe,
however, that most of humanity is independent and capable of leading itself. I was taught the opposite. I learned the truth in the world.
And I was amazed to see all I have seen about the nobility, the yearning for betterment, the willingness to get along (complicated by
money/power/energy). The sensational news bits are aberrations, though They use those incidents to instill fear. Most of Us are just fine. In fact,
given the twists and pinches of the money yoke, it's awesome to see so many who live and let live.
No... They are FREED of slavery into the opportunities that presently exist for only the lucky few who are rich and can pursue Their
bliss. And who would They be "slaving" for as They live life as today's elite live?
You don't have to be doing something to be a slave. Sometimes it's easier for evil men to do what they want if they can get the majority of the
population out of their hair and on some bread and circuses. They become their own slaves. The opportunity you present is good. But without the right
challenges they will not be motivated.
"Right challenges?" What are the challenges the rich are overcoming? Having a hand in shaping the world? Look for ways to better things? Follow
the three Laws? Do what Thou wilt within these Laws? All those paintings You might have wanted to paint but for the lack of paint, brush and canvas.
Or catching a gnarly wave in Hawaii. Or spending time teaching Your child. Or making feasts for Your family.
Allow me to explain. There was a time in my life when I was young when I had everything I wanted. Everything I ever dreamed. I did live the
life of the elite. I had everything. A good meal every day, 3-4 times a day. A warm bed, etc etc. Everything. Was I happy? No. And from that day
onward I lived a stoic life with the occasional feast. It's not that having everything was good, it was that having everything destroyed my humanity.
That's why I tell you now that I only want to do my skill, have some food and water, and create. Because honestly, it's a happier life.
[smile] I appreciate that, and many will find, as You have, that material wealth is irrelevant. They will take only as They might deem needed for
basic comfort. That will be the norm, in fact. Sure, at first, there will be a joyous foray into the material by many - but not such that there will
be any strain. Soon, the material will only matter if heart is in it. A crafted chair, a house design, a kitchen tool, a helping hand, a video game,
an excavation, these things will have value and be offered as gifts.
Oh, I doubt that very much. They would be too busy finding Their own bliss. Too busy partaking of all the advancements no longer
suppressed for profit. Too busy enjoying Their time on this planet as Each is also accorded. Who would hate that?
See what I just wrote before I read this? idk, have you ever been unimaginably wealthy with everything? The happiest I ever have been in life was a
life with little to no technology, a beautiful woman as my best friend, and working on my "bliss", as you call it. See that's why your system is
partially right. People won't fight each other if they are too busy on what they love doing. But they will fight each other when it gets
Only via holograms and video games... [smile] I have IMAGINED being wealthy (and I come from upper middle class upbringing), and you're right that
material wealth is less important than social interaction. That is why in abundance it is social aspects that define wealth, not the material.
When they find no joy in what they are doing because they have everything they want.
Except that once the material abundance no longer holds its sway, there are parties to throw or to attend, problems to solve, mysteries to solve,
learning to do, projects to start, games to play, the Interweb social "scene," and more. It will be in the social interaction that profit will be
I was happy not because I was working on my skills. I was happy because I didn't have constant bliss. I had to work to understand architecture
in those early days. Work on my projects. Struggle, cry, and hurt to understand it. I was happiest when I was in pain. because I still had friends and
people to share it with and talk.
Oh, I am sure that material richness will not detract from the effort to learn and the struggle to grasp. And friends are still available to share
with. You seem to misunderstand bliss. Bliss does NOT mean, necessarily, no pain, no struggle, no tears. If One is HAPPY doing what One is doing -
painful or not - One is in One's bliss.
So Your bliss might frequently come in the form of learning, struggling through the effort and anguish that can entail. Sharing the trials and
tribulations with friends and family. I never said bliss had any form specifically. Each knows Their bliss and each's bliss will differ.
Rethink your system. I do like struggle and hardship. I enjoy the problems. It's not that I wouldn't enjoy your world. It's that it would get
Struggle is not removed in abundance - there will still be struggles with nature, struggles with learning, struggles to better things. What WILL
change is the opportunity Each has in choosing what Hume wishes to struggle with. Many would like to find cures for ills. Or better ways of doing
things. Or just personal edification. Presently, most have no opportunity to do these things. And if You became bored...You could always contact a
teacher and ask for lessons, or go traveling (the world, if not the universe...), or throw parties, or join with Others trying to solve a problem...
Boredom is more a function of a lack of opportunity - most who are bored can think of things They would LIKE to do but the opportunity is not there.
In abundance, it will be.
Sometimes I have these things. I don't know. Hot flashes? Of the need for battle and mayhem. Not against some foe, but against a topic. Against
a system. "fighting the war of architecture" some call it. The ideal adult life I want to live is literally a hilltop house with barely any
technology. I cannot deny my desire for a holograph room, but that's really it. I would spend my days reading, talking, and thinking. Hell, you might
learn a thing or two if you ever just decided to go and take an architectural course somewhere. We have said in close circles that architects could
solve all the world's problems.
I am tested as a genius in spatial perception, and would thrill to architecture - have even done a bit of study. But I radically suck at math, and so
though I can intuit forces and support needs, I cannot lay it out mathematically. So I have an idea of what it takes to design and build structures,
but could not show mathematically how one might work.
Um... It's only about 7 billion, and They don't have to "agree." Release the plenum energy extraction and They can stay as They are or
live more richly. Their choice. They will find that They can afford more. And then whatever They want. And then - "affording" things will be ancient
But it would grow. [You said it yourself. And there you have it. Not everyone would agree. Like I said. Some people would learn how to improve it,
others would not be able to run it for as long. repairmen would be needed.
Yes, it might grow a bit - but I also said that higher standards of living are connected to a lower birth rate - AND that this planet has plenty for
ten times the number - AND that many will leave the planet to explore the universe. Repairmen will be robots - and any whose bliss it is to repair
inventors and engineers.
Oh, there will be plenty whose bliss it is to learn and perform in these capacities.
People would seek profit and security.
Well, in abundance, security is assured, and profit will be in social standing, not money.
And God help us all when some people organize to make a government around it.
Well, with the Interweb We can "e-govern." There is no structure but as problems arise, leaders of the moment will emerge to handle the problems.
Read The Ethical Planetarian Party Platform to see how the governing through chaotic input would work.
I'm going to give you one basic example of this. America, circa 1890. America was the good guys back then. They fought foreign wars to
liberate, not to colonize. They used their technology to improve life, not to destroy it. Maybe a few cities were the exception, but the rich back
then actually used their wealth to help others get wealthy. What happened? A bubble formed. and broke. Then another. Money became the equivalent of
your free energy. It was everywhere. Anyone could have it. America was rich enough and powerful enough to throw it away and let anyone have it. So
what happened? about 20 years went by where everything was just great. Then another 10 years where there was hardly a poor man. But then people
mismanaged things. The bubbles grew too much, and they all broke. 1929 came. THEIR Free energy ultimately became their own undoing. And the rich took
what they had to secure their riches, while the poor got poorer. Wars broke out. Evil men came. And the world hasn't been the same since.
It may seem as if You are describing the same function - and in some ways You are, as money is but one aspect of the money/power/energy triad.
However... The love of money is what destroyed things. NOT the money itself. And with abundant free energy, Human energy is not a requirement but a
value added aspect, power is removed from Others and given to the Individual, and money is moot. There is no need to "manage" the plenum energy, as
unlike money it is limitless. There is no way to "love" it in the same sense that some now love the finite money We use.
So I want you to tell me that. How was money in the year 1925ish any different than free energy in the year 2025ish?
Money = finite, "love" object, allows control of others
Plenum energy = effectively infinite, not conducive to being "loved" therefore, allows autonomous control of Self and no others
6/9/2011 by Amaterasu because: tags