Thread: Waking up even more.

Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix

This is what I'm talking about.

Question for Minervas: In your utopia, what happens if someone decides they want to trade? What happens if someone prints promissory notes? In your system, you have to initiate violence against such a person. I claim that this is no ideal system.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Question for Minervas: In your utopia, what happens if someone decides they want to trade? What happens if someone prints promissory notes? In your system, you have to initiate violence against such a person. I claim that this is no ideal system.

They wouldn't need to.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

They wouldn't need to.

That doesn't answer the question.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

That doesn't answer the question.

It doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

That doesn't answer the question.

It doesn't matter. Your question is irrelevant.

You don't need to punish those people as they would be a small minority and it wouldn't really matter. If a majority of people did it the whole system would fall apart. I think a resource based economy would be nice, though it wouldn't work at all right now(or for at least a few hundred years). In the current state of the world, there is no way to keep the individual freedoms we have and also have a resource based economy.

The comedian on your video was Bill Hicks! My fave comedian of all time!
George Carlin is my second fave. RIP Bill and George!

In the video the guy suggests that the only way the system will change
is by refusing to participate. I have to now bring up again...look what
happened at Waco.
The statement 'Weapons of Mass Creation' is contradictory. It should
be 'Tools of Mass Creation.

Originally Posted by Black_Eagle

It doesn't matter. Your question is irrelevant.

Suppose everyone is provided 4 potatoes and 4 loaves of bread in this society. But person A really likes potatoes and person B really likes bread. What if person A trades 2 loaves of bread to person B for 2 potatoes?

What if, furthermore, person C runs a bread factory and notices that his land is better suited to producing potatoes, and he starts producing all potatoes. But then he has no bread, so he trades his surplus potatoes for some loaves of bread?

Question for Minervas: In your utopia, what happens if someone decides they want to trade? What happens if someone prints promissory notes? In your system, you have to initiate violence against such a person. I claim that this is no ideal system.

Who said it was a utopia or simply my idea. Lots of people understand this common sense who are smart. Can we get that elephant out of the room. Your questions seem to have specific bias aim here. Seriously, what happens if someone wants to sell and trade ocean water at the beach? Nothing because people are already swimming in it. You couldn't trade ocean water if you tried.

How many times do I have to make that analogy before you give it a rest and ask a new question.

Supreme it is weapons of mass creation. Don't try and change it. lol.

Suppose everyone is provided 4 potatoes and 4 loaves of bread in this society. But person A really likes potatoes and person B really likes bread.

There would be more than 4 loaves of bread and potatoes avaliable. You can swap each others food around if you want when there is enough for everyone you can have either bread or potatoes. This does not present a problem as both are avaliable. Thank you for your question.

What if, furthermore, person C runs a bread factory

Person C does not run a bread factory alone bread is produced regardless of a person. Remember it's assuming some intelligence exists. People who are not smart enough can continue in the old way of getting ripped off, thinking it's impossible.

Now here's your weekend news.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Suppose everyone is provided 4 potatoes and 4 loaves of bread in this society. But person A really likes potatoes and person B really likes bread. What if person A trades 2 loaves of bread to person B for 2 potatoes?

What if, furthermore, person C runs a bread factory and notices that his land is better suited to producing potatoes, and he starts producing all potatoes. But then he has no bread, so he trades his surplus potatoes for some loaves of bread?

A resource based economy would have to have a surplus of food. A drastic surplus to the point that all people would be able to get enough quality food and other essentials that they wouldn't want more. I think the idea is that if stop rich people from being ridiculously greedy and power hungry, then there is far more than enough to go around. Which in the case of food, there is. World hunger could be pretty easily solved if we allocate resources correctly. Though personally I don't think just getting rid of money is gonna do this. I think it would be easier to solve these problems within the system of money, then once society is functioning on some kind of intelligent level you could get rid of money as people would be able to learn how to treat others.(though I would rather keep currency as I think it would be easier to trade high quality goods that won't be in surplus such as musical instruments and new technology, somethings will never be in abundance.)

We could take the money we currently spend on military functions and solve hunger with just that in 10-20 years easy. Maybe spend it on creating an actual education system instead of brainwashing children with patriotic bullshit like we do now. The system of one man taking advantage of another(usually called government) will not end unless we do something to fix or end the current education system. It is set right now in a way that teaches that war is something that has to happen. As long as people have this mentality we will not be free. We will not know peace. As long as one man thinks he is better or smarter or different than another because of his location in on the planet we are gonna have a class system. The only way a currency free society(or any truly civilized society) can exist is through an end to the class system.

Money is not the root of all evil. The root of all evil is one man taking advantage of another man. Even if you get rid of money this can still happen(I think this may be drews point). What we need to do is educate people.

Chase those crazy baldheads outta town.

Originally Posted by stonedape

A resource based economy would have to have a surplus of food. A drastic surplus to the point that all people would be able to get enough quality food and other essentials that they wouldn't want more. I think the idea is that if stop rich people from being ridiculously greedy and power hungry, then there is far more than enough to go around. Which in the case of food, there is. World hunger could be pretty easily solved if we allocate resources correctly. Though personally I don't think just getting rid of money is gonna do this. I think it would be easier to solve these problems within the system of money, then once society is functioning on some kind of intelligent level you could get rid of money as people would be able to learn how to treat others.(though I would rather keep currency as I think it would be easier to trade high quality goods that won't be in surplus such as musical instruments and new technology, somethings will never be in abundance.)

We could take the money we currently spend on military functions and solve hunger with just that in 10-20 years easy. Maybe spend it on creating an actual education system instead of brainwashing children with patriotic bullshit like we do now. The system of one man taking advantage of another(usually called government) will not end unless we do something to fix or end the current education system. It is set right now in a way that teaches that war is something that has to happen. As long as people have this mentality we will not be free. We will not know peace. As long as one man thinks he is better or smarter or different than another because of his location in on the planet we are gonna have a class system. The only way a currency free society(or any truly civilized society) can exist is through an end to the class system.

Money is not the root of all evil. The root of all evil is one man taking advantage of another man. Even if you get rid of money this can still happen(I think this may be drews point). What we need to do is educate people.

Chase those crazy baldheads outta town.

I think we agree in principle. My point was that scarcity will always exist at least for some things. Sure, in the future food may become post-scarcity. It's actually plausible. Right now in the Western world we already live in an economy where information, water, and to some extent even energy are post scarcity, so I can understand that notion. But I was trying to use food as a metaphor, which apparently some people didn't understand (Minervas).

You see, if and when food becomes truly post scarcity, humans will not be content to just sit around in the garden of Eden that they've created for themselves. People will want to create. But you can't immediately create an infinite amount of something. If someone invents a flying car, there won't instantaneously be 10 trillion flying cars. Scarcity will always always exist on the edge of what's possible. And hence, money will always and must always exist.

Don't confuse the messenger with the message. Fiat money is bad, but money itself is very good. This may be hard for some people to see when there are children starving in Africa right now, but some day in the future that won't be the case. At some point, food and good health will become so easy that everyone has it for free. So don't even try to use that example to bash money. If anyone wants to try to argue against money, it better damn well not mention fiat currency or poverty, because both of those have NOTHING to do with money.