It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HOARDING = Bad, correct?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Here's something to ponder about.

Common culture seems to reflect easily that HOARDING is bad. Just like the TV show 'Hoarders', you see all of the JUNK that these people collect over time, and see how it stifles there very existence! Some can't walk around in their own home, or even cook a decent meal. And along with the JUNK that they hoard, comes infestations, and bad health crises, and sometimes dead animals, for lack of caring, or just simply forgetting about certain pets they had. Common culture seems to agree, that that is NOT the way to live.

However, why is someone that HOARDS money, considered successful? What about those that have thousands, millions, or billions in the bank. Dollars after Dollars just sitting there collecting 'figurative' dust. Why does common culture not think that is BAD? or even BAD for your health? Is it because you don't "see" it all over the place? But it is there, and not being used by other who desperately need it.

Just like with the TV Show, helpful people come and either throw away things, or give stuff away. Why don't people that hoard money, give it away? Especially to the rest of the world who may need it. Why the need to hold on to so much wealth? Why does common culture (in the capitalistic era), think it is ok to hold onto lots of money, but in the same breath say its bad to hold onto 1,000's of magazines, or hundreds doritos bags, etc.

I understand, having enough to provide for your family, and saving up for rainy day. But there comes a point, where you just have EXTRA, and there comes a point where that is simply HOARDING. Especially when there are people starving in the world, or homeless, etc.

Many different faiths and religions from around the globe, and from many countries, all state to live humbly and to basically not 'HOARD' wealth. (From Buddhism, to Christianity, to Islam, etc)

Don't you think that wealth should not be HOARDED? Don't you think the person would actually feel better, that they helped other people out? Should common culture start reflecting that HOARDING anything, including wealth is not such a good idea?

What's next, people hoarding Air, restricting others to breath? Hoarding water, preventing others from drinking? It doesn't seem that would be ideal, in a new ideal world.

Your thoughts?




posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Its probably just the "untidyness" factor (and your suggestion of infestation that can arise).

Nobody would get upset if you had thousands of dorito bags, stored neatly away in shelving, categorised and indexed, in a warehouse across the other side of town. They might think you a bit strange in your choice, but nowhere near the revulsion that people would have if they were stored in your own home, in whatever spare corner you could stuff them.

Similarly with money.
If you had fifty million in the bank, fine.
If you had fifty million at home, stuffed into cardboard boxes, plastic bags, under the mattress, filling the bath, and loose in piles all over the place to the point where you could hardly walk from the bedroom to the kitchen... thats different.


edit on 11-6-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   


Don't you think that wealth should not be HOARDED? Don't you think the person would actually feel better, that they helped other people out? Should common culture start reflecting that HOARDING anything, including wealth is not such a good idea?


Thats up to the person , we as a society expect that person to help others because he has so much , He is under no obligation but is seen as greedy if he doesn't help. Even though its their money and they can do as they please. They probably worked hard to achieve it , and i bet they didn't get so rich by giving it away lol.

Imagine how many millionaires would not be today , if they just gave away money getting up to where they are now . there would hardly be any .

hoarding junk vs collecting money

"is a pattern of behavior that is characterized by the excessive acquisition of and inability or unwillingness to discard large quantities of objects that would seemingly qualify as useless or without value"

the money is very useful , and full of value so it can't be hoarding. It would be saving for my future generations lifestyle.

Problem with hand outs , is people get used to it eventually and comes to a point where they look down on you , when you chose not to hand out anymore like its a obligation lol.

Who doesn't love a free lunch ? but somebody has to pay for it in the end.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
If your family and you cannot clean your own house because its to big FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY TO CLEAN WHATDOES THAT MEAN??? When you know you share a planet with some w/o even a roof over their head?

tl lnk



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by seedofchucky



Don't you think that wealth should not be HOARDED? Don't you think the person would actually feel better, that they helped other people out? Should common culture start reflecting that HOARDING anything, including wealth is not such a good idea?


Thats up to the person , we as a society expect that person to help others because he has so much , He is under no obligation but is seen as greedy if he doesn't help. Even though its their money and they can do as they please. They probably worked hard to achieve it , and i bet they didn't get so rich by giving it away lol.

Imagine how many millionaires would not be today , if they just gave away money getting up to where they are now . there would hardly be any .

hoarding junk vs collecting money

"is a pattern of behavior that is characterized by the excessive acquisition of and inability or unwillingness to discard large quantities of objects that would seemingly qualify as useless or without value"

the money is very useful , and full of value so it can't be hoarding. It would be saving for my future generations lifestyle.

Problem with hand outs , is people get used to it eventually and comes to a point where they look down on you , when you chose not to hand out anymore like its a obligation lol.

Who doesn't love a free lunch ? but somebody has to pay for it in the end.




But I guess why is a "millionaire" considered successful because he has plenty in the bank? Why not being successful for completely stopping world poverty? or for a new invention? Would Mark Zuckerburg not be successful, if he didn't have billions? What determines success? Why does wealth have to determine success?

That's like saying, "OH BOY, that person collected 1,000 Doritos BAGS" he must be someone to envy, and I want to collect more bags then he did, and hoard them to myself too. (instead of recycling the plastic in other forms of useful objects, etc). Same with money. Common Culture seems to respect those with LOTS of money, over those with NO money.

But what if some of those with no money are actually VERY VERY SUCCESSFUL, but just gave all of the $$ away to help others, instead of just sitting in the bank? What is someone makes $1 million a year, but also gives $1 million away (loosely speaking, not accounting for taxes, and the money needed to live and eat). Technically, they would be POOR, by some standards, because there is $0 in the bank. But in effect he is earning plenty of money, but also distributing and helping others. Would that not be better than hoarding money in the bank?

What are we living as KINGS/QUEENS in this current society, where we have to make money and LOTS of money, so that our grandchildren and great grandchilren can all have YACHTS and beachclubs?? Seems ironic for those that cry out for Democracy, yet want to hoard WEALTH for their OWN Family.

Some interesting ideas get put forth in the FREE WORLD CHARTER. Browse through it for more details::
www.freeworldcharter.org...


Into Video here:



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by uSNUUZuLUUz
Common culture seems to reflect easily that HOARDING is bad.


Which is why I don't base judgments on common culture.

As long as you're not picking my pocket nor breaking my leg, hoard away.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 


First of all, in terms of money, HOARDING = SAVING... there is nothing wrong with that.


Dollars after Dollars just sitting there collecting 'figurative' dust. Why does common culture not think that is BAD?

It IS seen as bad because they say it causes economic stagnation when everyone saves instead of spends. The common belief is that people should spend, spend, spend, so they they can keep the economy flowing smoothly. In fact, Executive Order 6102 was rationalized in this way:


Executive Order 6102 is an Executive Order signed on April 5, 1933, by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt "forbidding the Hoarding of Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, and Gold Certificates within the continental United States". The order criminalized the possession of monetary gold by any individual, partnership, association or corporation.

The order was rationalized on the grounds that hard times had caused "hoarding" of gold, stalling economic growth and making the depression worse.[1]

This is also why they make you use depreciating Federal Reserve Notes. They know no one will want to save their money if the money supply is constantly being inflated and each dollar is slowly losing value. No one can create more gold out of thin air and that's why it holds value very well... and that's why people 'hoard' it.

But in my opinion people should be allowed to save all they want. It's not up the government to dictate when and how people should use their money, and I find it absolutely absurd that they have the authority to enforce a crappy deflationary currency which discourages people from saving their hard earned money.

People actually save their money for a reason, and that reason is so that they may spend it at a later time. It's not as if they are going to hide it away for ever. However, the extremely rich people will tend to save up large sums of money for long periods of time, often until they die, because they simply have more money then they can ever spend.

In such cases the logic is reversed. You never see any economists giving rich people a hard time for hoarding their money... it's their 'right' to have ridiculously huge sums of money and who are we to ridicule them just because we aren't so successful. It's only the little guy who ever gets heat for hoarding, never the rich guy.
edit on 11-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 


Free everything ? suddenly 2 billion kids want an iphone. suddenly 1 million want yacts. Do you think the greed factor will go away ? or multiply x10 ? You give people a CM they want a MILE ,

What happens when demand can't be fufilled fast enough ? Angry mobs ?

Secondly if you build machines to build everything , and make EVERYTHING FREE do you understand what kind of resource rape that will do to the earth ? Do you understand the energy and materials required ?

Right now things are capped because people can't afford something , supply and demand is limited to what people can afford and its not as quick as a resource rape as free everything would be .

I love the idea of equality , no money , free everything . But in reality it wouldn't work . First off you need everyone to agree to this system and be patient.

We are humans , greedy , impatient , want want want. 7 billion + to cater too . Many jobs that robots can't do , why would anyone wanna do those jobs , if everything is free? lol


millionaires giving handouts is not the answer
All that does is create "lazy hoarders" of others peoples wealth



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


I agree, it's your right to "Save", but at what COST?

If your neighbor becomes homeless, or can't provide food for his family, and you just saved $10,000 last week. How does that make you feel? Yes, it is your right, to save, and not help, but at what point does MORALITY kick in? Would Hoarding wealth be considered bad at that point?

What if we as society have been suckered in to thinking that harding wealth is GOOD. Taking that idea all the way back to the KINGS/QUEENS and royal families of the Past. Do you agree that Democracy is better than Aristocracy? Yet why does common culture instruct us to hold onto as much wealth as possible and pass onto our kids? isn't that like an Aristocracy, where you would have king after king from the same bloodline, and all the riches pass from one generation to the next?

Yes provide for your family and save. But not at the cost of preventing others from their basic needs.

For some out of the box thinking. Please Check out the FREE WORLD CHARTER video posted above.

Also if you have time check out "PARADISE OR OBLIVION" a 48 min video from the VENUS PROJECT (link below:


The Venus Project:: www.thevenusproject.com...




This video presentation advocates a new socio-economic system, which is updated to present-day knowledge, featuring the life-long work of Social Engineer, Futurist, Inventor and Industrial Designer Jacque Fresco, which he calls a Resource-Based Economy. This documentary details the root causes of the systemic value disorders and detrimental symptoms caused by our current established system. The film details the need to outgrow the dated and inefficient methods of politics, law, business, or any other "establishment" notions of human affairs, and use the methods of science, combined with high technology, to provide for the needs of all the world's people. It is not based on the opinions of the political and financial elite or on illusionary so-called democracies, but on maintaining a dynamic equilibrium with the planet that could ultimately provide abundance for all people. Paradise or Oblivion, by The Venus Project, introduces the viewer to a more appropriate value system that would be required to enable this caring and holistic approach to benefit human civilization. This alternative surpasses the need for a monetary-based, controlled, and scarcity-oriented environment, which we find ourselves in today.





posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 



If your neighbor becomes homeless, or can't provide food for his family, and you just saved $10,000 last week. How does that make you feel? Yes, it is your right, to save, and not help, but at what point does MORALITY kick in? Would Hoarding wealth be considered bad at that point?

It seems you have completely missed my point. $10,000 is nothing, the "little guy" should not be ridiculed for saving that much money. It is perfectly acceptable for anyone to save 10K if they want to. Most people can only save a few thousand dollars anyway, and that's perfectly fine. However when someone has a few hundred million or even several billion dollars, then I would start to lean towards your way of thinking... it would be fairer of them to spread around some of that wealth to people who are suffering intensely because they have no money.

It has nothing to do with handing out freebies as seedofchucky puts it, it's about using excessive unneeded wealth to support those people who are in desperate need of a helping hand. I believe in empathy and compassion, but I certainly don't believe in getting everything for free either. If people want to hoard they will hoard, and we should have no ability to dictate how they use their wealth, but I do agree those with excessive wealth should have the morality to help out those with excessively limited wealth... but we can't force them.

EDIT: and yes I have seen that documentary but there are a thousand reasons why it wouldn't work as proposed.
edit on 11-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
While I am the 1st guy to say " let's get rid of Money " the issue is that we still cannot regulate the flow of these goods and materials without some form of moderation control being enforced.

Money is the means of which regulates the flow of materials, it's that factor that defines why the wheat from the farm is gone, oh because I have this pile of cash. So if money isn't there, that farmer who still has to till, plant, harvest that wheat doesn't have all his wheat ganked up without being able to get something back for all that work and materials consumed to get the wheat.

If it's free, wouldn't all our resources be snagged up and horded anyways? How would you deprogram the mind and society of money? Short of a global disaster.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
At a certain point, you life style doesn't really increase with more money. You don't live that differently if you have 2 billion as opposed to 3 billion. As a matter of fact, there was a study that showed anything over $70,000 per year doesn't increase happiness. (I'll try to find the study).

What it does do is give you power and control over people. To some people that's worth a lot. The super rich don't spend their money they save it. They take it out of the flow. Give a poor person $100.00 and it will be spent and put back to business within 10 minutes. If a rich person money and it probably will just sit there.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


You make great points, however you state that $10,000 is nothing, and they can save that if they want to. That in actuality is ALOT of cash, and could feed you and your neighbor's family for a year easily (2 families). Sometimes it's that mindset that the millionaires and the billionaires think too. They think "oh a million, that's nothing. I'll just keep it handy in the bank here" However $1 million can easily feed 200 families (per the above example) for a year.

Imagine if everyone in the world gave up part of their extra cash in the bank, and gave to those who don't have food or shelter. Imagine what the world would be like. NO poverty? No Wars? All for just giving up -- GREED. simple enough, right? Or is that GREEN gene just too entralled in our society, to gain and gain, and keep and keep. Rather to share, and help one another.

Remember "WE ARE ONLY AS STRONG AS OUR WEAKEST LINK". If you have homeless neighbors, and you are rich with 3 houses, know that there might me conflict in your community. But if everyone had a home and food, there would be less conflict. also think about that statement globally. Earth and Humans as a species can't move on to the next level, while some people have 5 houses, and majority have 0 houses. Or when some people never have to think about the cost of a meal, and some people barely have bread and water for most of their meals.

No one is forcing your hand, or other wealth hoarders.. but perhaps the main force needs to come from within. The desire to expand oneself from oneself. Rather than saying "look at all the money i have in the bank", it's look at all the money "WE HAVE TOGETHER". as a world.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 



You make great points, however you state that $10,000 is nothing, and they can save that if they want to. That in actuality is ALOT of cash, and could feed you and your neighbor's family for a year easily (2 families). Sometimes it's that mindset that the millionaires and the billionaires think too. They think "oh a million, that's nothing. I'll just keep it handy in the bank here" However $1 million can easily feed 200 families (per the above example) for a year.

Actually 10K is nothing... maybe enough for a half-decent car. The problem with your mentality is that you settle for so little and think people who have even just a few thousand should share their money. Perhaps we should all be striving to have more than just a few thousand, and perhaps that would be possible if huge sums of money weren't concentrated in the hands of a few. Once again you are trying to target the little guy who only has a few thousand... that is absolutely crap all, leave them alone. Try targeting those people who actually have a ridiculous and excessive amount of money, those who actually have A LOT of money to spare. In reality we should all be able to save at least 10K and no one should be poor, but that doesn't happen because such huge amounts of money are concentrated in a few hands.

In reality we have no one to blame but our selves, it's ignorant to blame the rich people for our problems when we let them steal all our wealth by working in a capitalistic system which pays the workers basically nothing and all the money their work generates goes to shareholders. I blame society for being so god damn ignorant of the truth about how the system works and how they screw themselves over by participating and in unfair system. It's our own fault for supporting a system which screws us over. If you want to stop such huge amounts of wealth getting into the hands of only a few people then you need to fix the system which ALLOWS them to sweep in those huge amounts of money in the first place. There's no bloody point in trying to make them hand it back to us, because the system will ensure the money simply flows back into their hands and we are right back where we started. Fix the cause not the symptom.
edit on 11-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 



You make great points, however you state that $10,000 is nothing, and they can save that if they want to. That in actuality is ALOT of cash, and could feed you and your neighbor's family for a year easily (2 families). Sometimes it's that mindset that the millionaires and the billionaires think too. They think "oh a million, that's nothing. I'll just keep it handy in the bank here" However $1 million can easily feed 200 families (per the above example) for a year.

Actually 10K is nothing... maybe enough for a half-decent car. The problem with your mentality is that you settle for so little and think people who have even just a few thousand should share their money. Perhaps we should all be striving to have more than just a few thousand, and perhaps that would be possible if huge sums of money weren't concentrated in the hands of a few. Once again you are trying to target the little guy who only has a few thousand... that is absolutely crap all, leave them alone. Try targeting those people who actually have a ridiculous and excessive amount of money, those who actually have A LOT of money to spare. In reality we should all be able to save at least 10K and no one should be poor, but that doesn't happen because such huge amounts of money are concentrated in a few hands.

In reality we have no one to blame but our selves, it's ignorant to blame the rich people for our problems when we let them steal all our wealth by working in a capitalistic system which pays the workers basically nothing and all the money their work generates goes to shareholders. I blame society for being so god damn ignorant of the truth about how the system works and how they screw themselves over by participating and in unfair system. It's our own fault for supporting a system which screws us over. If you want to stop such huge amounts of wealth getting into the hands of only a few people then you need to fix the system which ALLOWS them to sweep in those huge amounts of money in the first place. There's no bloody point in trying to make them hand it back to us, because the system will ensure the money simply flows back into their hands and we are right back where we started. Fix the cause not the symptom.
edit on 11-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


You are absolutely right that the system needs to be fixed..
which is kind of the reason for the whole discussion.

However, I want to make clear, that I am not expecting those that have $10k in the bank to do all the heavy lifting. I'm saying the following. If I have $500 in the bank, $1 to me is nothing. And so I just gave $1 to someone, it wouldn't mind to me that much. But someone in a third world country receiving $1 could do SO MUCH. It could buy grain, or water, or supplies, or medical care etc.

If you expand on this, If you have $1 Million in the bank, $10,000 may not seem that much. And so you could donate $10,000 and it would be no skin of of your back. Howver $10,000 could do alot for many people.

If you extrapolate further. If you have $1 Billion in the bank. $1 million is nothing to you. Yet it could do WONDERS to many others.

I'm not saying ONE person, or ONE group has to carry the load of the world. I'm saying we all have a small percentage that we don't "need" or even "care about". I'm just just saying what if we gave away that little "extra" instead of hoarding it, on what it would do for the benefit of your neighbors, your country, the whole world?



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I wonder how many of the hoarders also hoard money? And how many of the hoarders are also fat? Or have been abused by something? Hoarders in my opinion come at all levels or in shades of gray.

My mother hoardes boxes in her basement. She must have a hundred. She orginally thought she use them to ship her books in. My sister in law suggested she should save 6 boxes: two small two medium, two large. I said it is a huge fire hazzard. Boxes are extremely flamable. My mother also saves magazines and catalogues for decades. I told her the catalogues are only good for 3-6 months. The magazines she should save only this year's worth unless it is some special subscription like National Geographic, or Food Cooking Magazines... When she dies I will have to rent a dumpster and fill it. I will try to recycle the magazines. She has tons of old clothes that need donated to Good will, plastic food savers by the hundreds, really old towels that are gross, three rooms as offices filled with paper clutter. The coffee table is piled high with a hundred magazines, no one can lay down and see the TV. When I go there to visit I sit and think of all the work it would be to get rid of the worthless crap she saves. Yet she is no where near TV hoarder staus either, just cluttered. I can't stand to watch those hoarder shows. I have trouble cleaning my desk off myself. Always thinking if I throw it away I might need it. It is work and decision making to throw stuff out, or to donate to charities. I keep a box in the garage and when it's filled I donate to Goodwill my favorite charity. Sharing extras is a good planetary thing.

My mother in law spends money like water, when the father in law was alive he hoarded the money and would give nothing to no one. He was very selfish. When he died it was interesting to see how different people reacted.
He would not even let his wife install a dishwasher, or get hearing aids. She is almost deaf, she yells while talking. He smoked, maybe the hoarding was to pay for cigarettes, or the cancer bills.

A friend of mine's parents were extreme hoarders. Every time something broke they would store it in the attic.
When her parents died she spent all summer cleaning out their house, and finally gave up renting a moving truck and bring the contents home to her house where she finished sorting through it all.

The people who hoard all the money must hate other people, be highly insecure, and love power over others.
Some people just love with holding goodwill and love to see their family and friends struggle. We as a human race have some serious dysfunctional behavioural problems. People love to control and love power, I guess they do it because ultimately no one person really has any power over anything too much at all. I also feel dsyfunctional hoarders effect everyone they know with their behaviours, and alot of them are bossy, controling, manipulative, mean people.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by frugal
I wonder how many of the hoarders also hoard money? And how many of the hoarders are also fat? Or have been abused by something? Hoarders in my opinion come at all levels or in shades of gray.

My mother hoardes boxes in her basement. She must have a hundred. She orginally thought she use them to ship her books in. My sister in law suggested she should save 6 boxes: two small two medium, two large. I said it is a huge fire hazzard. Boxes are extremely flamable. My mother also saves magazines and catalogues for decades. I told her the catalogues are only good for 3-6 months. The magazines she should save only this year's worth unless it is some special subscription like National Geographic, or Food Cooking Magazines... When she dies I will have to rent a dumpster and fill it. I will try to recycle the magazines. She has tons of old clothes that need donated to Good will, plastic food savers by the hundreds, really old towels that are gross, three rooms as offices filled with paper clutter. The coffee table is piled high with a hundred magazines, no one can lay down and see the TV. When I go there to visit I sit and think of all the work it would be to get rid of the worthless crap she saves. Yet she is no where near TV hoarder staus either, just cluttered. I can't stand to watch those hoarder shows. I have trouble cleaning my desk off myself. Always thinking if I throw it away I might need it. It is work and decision making to throw stuff out, or to donate to charities. I keep a box in the garage and when it's filled I donate to Goodwill my favorite charity. Sharing extras is a good planetary thing.

My mother in law spends money like water, when the father in law was alive he hoarded the money and would give nothing to no one. He was very selfish. When he died it was interesting to see how different people reacted.
He would not even let his wife install a dishwasher, or get hearing aids. She is almost deaf, she yells while talking. He smoked, maybe the hoarding was to pay for cigarettes, or the cancer bills.

A friend of mine's parents were extreme hoarders. Every time something broke they would store it in the attic.
When her parents died she spent all summer cleaning out their house, and finally gave up renting a moving truck and bring the contents home to her house where she finished sorting through it all.

The people who hoard all the money must hate other people, be highly insecure, and love power over others.
Some people just love with holding goodwill and love to see their family and friends struggle. We as a human race have some serious dysfunctional behavioural problems. People love to control and love power, I guess they do it because ultimately no one person really has any power over anything too much at all. I also feel dsyfunctional hoarders effect everyone they know with their behaviours, and alot of them are bossy, controling, manipulative, mean people.


wow well stated. This is exactly what I'm talking about, hoarding anything is an Emotional problem. There are some that hoard lots of money, while even some of their immediate family members are poor! It's a power game, that wealth hoarders have, to say "Well i have this, and you can't have any"

So rather than lifting UP everyone around them, they want to build an Island, and keep people away. Fear of something? Fear of People?

"WHEN THE POWER OF LOVE, OVERCOMES THE LOVE OF POWER, THE WORLD WILL KNOW PEACE"



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 



If you expand on this, If you have $1 Million in the bank, $10,000 may not seem that much. And so you could donate $10,000 and it would be no skin of of your back. Howver $10,000 could do alot for many people.

If you extrapolate further. If you have $1 Billion in the bank. $1 million is nothing to you. Yet it could do WONDERS to many others.

I'm not saying ONE person, or ONE group has to carry the load of the world. I'm saying we all have a small percentage that we don't "need" or even "care about". I'm just just saying what if we gave away that little "extra" instead of hoarding it, on what it would do for the benefit of your neighbors, your country, the whole world?

I am in COMPLETE agreement with you, OP.
S/F

I've been saying this to people (who are unarmed and obliged to continue talking to me...) for years. If you have enough, why have excess?

It seems to me like just plain common sense. I know people will flame me and call me "jealous" and "socialist" and bash me for saying it...but really....WHO NEEDS MORE THAN ENOUGH?..., say, $1,000,000 ? Really??

Answer: NO ONE. Soulless behavior. imo.



posted on Jun, 11 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented
While I am the 1st guy to say " let's get rid of Money " the issue is that we still cannot regulate the flow of these goods and materials without some form of moderation control being enforced.

Money is the means of which regulates the flow of materials, it's that factor that defines why the wheat from the farm is gone, oh because I have this pile of cash. So if money isn't there, that farmer who still has to till, plant, harvest that wheat doesn't have all his wheat ganked up without being able to get something back for all that work and materials consumed to get the wheat.

If it's free, wouldn't all our resources be snagged up and horded anyways? How would you deprogram the mind and society of money? Short of a global disaster.


About regulating materials, how do we do that now? Let's say Apple releases a new iPad, and it costs $400. They ship to let's say a select 100 stores. People stand in line, and buy the item. When they are all sold out, they are all sold out, and people go home. People can afford the $400 (not everyone), but many can. If the cost of the ipad was to regulate resources, then wouldn't the ipad cost $375,000? That way only a select few could buy the product.

In a "free" society, or one with no money, a company could make an ipod, that they think is a great invention. And make as many as they can. And yes, there would be a line for this product, and if there are no more left, then you go home. Same as the above example. New products wouldn't go to everyone, or be for everyone. Some people may not even want one. Instead of the law of Supply & Demand in rule, where the fewer of the supply the higher the cost risers, or larger supply lower cost. it would be based on Want vs. Need.

Also remember, (in this capitalistic era), that things are made to be MADE, BOUGHT, USED, and THROWN AWAY. to repeat the cycle, and buy the NEXT one, the NEW one. Did you ever stop to think about how many things are actually repaired anymore?

Hopefully, in a "free" society, manufactures, make products that can be re-used, or recycled more easily and efficiently. So a company that make ipods, makes it such that OS upgrades are free (which would eliminate part of the reasoning to dumping the old model, etc).

Now about the farmer example. Why is he working? Why do you work? Mostly it is to put food on the table, and shelter of your heads. In a "Free" society, what if the basic needs is covered for every single person on the planet? What if you have food, and shelter, and all that you need, would you still work at your current JOB? In the farmer's example, he could be farming food for his family and others. There would be no need to sell his product. Because he knows he get food from others just as easily as from himself. Now what if I said that machines can do his work for him. That now leave the farmer with extra time. What does he do? What do you do? Perhaps you can actually do what you want to do! Perhaps you can actually work where you want to work! Especially if all of your basic life needs are taking care of. Perhaps you want to paint, or Travel, or Develop Space technologies. Only the expanse of the stars is our limit. Right now, many people are only "WORKING" at their "job", to get food for month, or pay their mortgage for the month. If those needs are taking care of, you can WORK At what you LOVE to do. Or Do what you LOVE to do.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by uSNUUZuLUUz
 


What do John McCain and Mitt Romney and their respective spouses have in common?


Both couples are compulsive house hoarders.




top topics



 
3

log in

join