NationStates Jolt Archive

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.

Check out this page (http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm). It outlines an alternative to the monetary system.

I just want to know what people think about this idea, and any problems you may find with it.

BTW I can't post again until tomorrow, so don't get pissed off at me for not replying straight off.

I've got an idea. Send me all your money, and I'll burn it in a giant bonfire to show my rebellion against the evil capitalist society.

So, the Barter System.

You have got to be kidding me. We've been killing each other and stealing each other's shit since we were living in caves. The inherent flaw with a Resource based economy is that it assumes that somehow the elimination of money results in the elimination of threats or physical violence.

Mankind will simply transfer his value for money into a value for resources, and it won't stop him from coercing and subduing his fellow man for said resources.

Money like time is just an idea. It's just a super codified way of defining value. And even without it we'd find a way to determine worth, value and cost. Well technically it's a good idea (the link) but who would determine who gets what and how much? How do we know they REALLY have EVERYONE's best interests at heart. Like other panaceas (Communism for one) it only works in a perfect world. The way the world works now is utter decentralization w/c while bloody and violent at times is better than having a single entity with ALL the power (think Palpatine) - the old chestnut: Absolute Vodka corrupts Absolutely.

Cathenia

I think it's a great idea. I have already begun hoarding resources.

Beyond the already mentioned issues, there's also the fact that the barter system then relies on credit, if you can't give your service at that very time. This is solved by a monetary system, because you can give your service and then later use what you got in return. It also means that just becuse you don't have exactly what goods someone wants doesn't mean you won't get their service - now you can use money.

monney is not the problem,GREED is.....or we may all are THE problem

ps: i'm not greedy

monney is not the problem,GREED is.....or we may all are THE problem

ps: i'm not greedy

That's the essential problem. Greed ain't good for a utopian ideal like communism or libertie, egalite, fraternite. The evil side of humanity gets in the way and then you have incidents like Collectivization, The Great Purges, The Terror, et al. The only thing it shows is that a Revolution devours its children.

Napoleon had it right - Need to keep 'em in line? Give em a whiff of the grapeshot.

Cathenia

The idea that greed--or at least rational greed is evil is bogus and absurd: it sickens me to such an extent that I feel like emptying the contents of my stomach all over my monitor. You'd think it would go to the keyboard, but I projectile vomit when I'm particularly angry.

The idea that greed--or at least irrational greed is evil is bogus and absurd: it sickens me to such an extent that I feel like emptying the contents of my stomach all over my monitor. You'd think it would go to the keyboard, but I projectile vomit when I'm particularly angry.


:puke(;
try to explain :confused:

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.

Check out this page (http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm). It outlines an alternative to the monetary system.

I just want to know what people think about this idea, and any problems you may find with it.

BTW I can't post again until tomorrow, so don't get pissed off at me for not replying straight off.

You're on the right track. You've come to the realization that countless others before you have. In a few years you'll realize it isnt money per se, its the capitalist system as a whole that is behind this. I didnt read the whole site you linked to, but everything I read sounded like a rehashing of communism, which is the ultimate economic system. It is the path to a utopia where there are no longer any poor and the riches are shared by all.

You're on the right track. You've come to the realization that countless others before you have. In a few years you'll realize it isnt money per se, its the capitalist system as a whole that is behind this. I didnt read the whole site you linked to, but everything I read sounded like a rehashing of communism, which is the ultimate economic system. It is the path to a utopia where there are no longer any poor and the riches are shared by all.

To imply that the system is the one root of evil is bullshit, if you think about it. It's all about the people operating the system. If the right people were in charge, capitalism would work. I submit to you that just as 'real communism' was never tried, proper capitalism has never been tried either.

:puke(;
try to explain :confused:

The best explanation I can give is already contained at the bottom of my signature. I don't like the idea of invoking someone elses' work as being a representation of my beliefs, but this comes so close that it's more convenient to just point to it as opposed to writing a frikking book telling you why.

No, no, don't be silly.

You'll note from my signature that it's hard to go further left than I have, but I have to say that, well, no! Capitalism exists for a reason (at some point people -if the planet lasts long enough- might be able to say, "capitalism existed for a reason"), and should not be totally blown-away. Why in the world would such complex systems emerge if there was no reasonable use for them?

Currency has its place, it is just that our society today is too savagely primitive to use it in a civilised fashion. Money has a place.

wow!!!!!!!! what a sig :sniper: Melkor, you should play Tropico :D

wow!!!!!!!! what a sig :sniper: Melkor, you should play Tropico :D

What? Is this a good thing?

What? Is this a good thing?
the game is good but your sig is not :fluffle:

the game is good but your sig is not :fluffle:

Suit yourself.

What is a sig and how come Im not seeing any?
Go to the "profile" button onderneath the NS banner at the top of your screen. Find "Edit Options" on the left and scroll down about halfway down the page untill you see a checkbox that says "Display signatures." Check it.

Suit yourself.
this is YOUR sig not mine ;)

So I'm taking it you read my link and hated it, hmm?

So I'm taking it you read my link and hated it, hmm?
hate.no!,i just don't agree

That's alright. You don't ahve to agree with it, it's still right ;)

That's alright. You don't ahve to agree with it, it's still right ;)

:fluffle: :D

Read the link, pretty interesting read, but like anarchy and communism, would inevitably fail due to human nature...or perhaps 'modern human desires' would be a more appropriate term. Either way, sounds good on paper. :P

The article provides some interesting arguments, however it seems to centre around overcoming the problem of scarcity of resources. However, it seems to be rather vague on how to overcome the problem of scarcity. Economics is a theory based upon scarce resources trying to satisfy unlimited wants and needs. Scarcity has and always will be a problem because there is only so much of certain materials in the world. Whilst I appreciate that the article does address the idea of renewable energy sources, it then goes on to speak about using resources more efficiently (i.e. not producing duplicate products), but that merely delays scarcity rather than overcomes it.

The article seems to call for a global Command Economy whereby a central body would organise production and distribution. Empirically, where Command Economies have existed, they have been economically inefficient and thus merely confounded the problem of scarcity. Command Economies cannot easily adjust to sudden changes in a market situation due to their rigid nature of planning production according to "Ceterus Paribus" - All Things Remaining Equal. An example would be where the allocation of food was planned but a sudden change in the conditions (for example, a drought) that reduces supply and creates a shortage of availiable food. What a free market economy has as an advantage over this is that the monetary system would then correct itself to a higher price and reduce demand to the new equilibrium. The logistical problems of such a global Command Economy also raise an interesting point.

Monetary systems are a method of valuation and a medium of exchange. It is not neccesarily the monetary system itself that creates inequality, but the distribution of monetary wealth within the system. Competition in a market place for demand, according to economic theory, results in the most efficient allocation of resources and better product innovation in order to outdo competitors. I appreciate this does not happen all the time in real life, but I would be more in favour of improving the existing system rather than scrapping it and building something on this scale.

Money is a means to an end. A problem is that many regard possession of money to be valuable in itself.

Meh, the sooner we realise that no purist system is going to work flawlessly, the better.

Money is not the problem! The fact that not enough people have it is the problem! Capitalism can solve this. I'm a great believer in capitalism. I believe in capitalism so strongly I think the stock market should be divided up and equally distributed to all workers.

That's the essential problem. Greed ain't good for a utopian ideal like communism or libertie, egalite, fraternite. The evil side of humanity gets in the way and then you have incidents like Collectivization, The Great Purges, The Terror, et al. The only thing it shows is that a Revolution devours its children.

Napoleon had it right - Need to keep 'em in line? Give em a whiff of the grapeshot.

Cathenia

Greed isn't 'evil'. Greed helped keep the human race alive in its infancy, and when we've destroyed our civilisation because of greed, greed'll help keep us alive once again.

Money is not the problem! The fact that not enough people have it is the problem! Capitalism can solve this. I'm a great believer in capitalism. I believe in capitalism so strongly I think the stock market should be divided up and equally distributed to all workers.
Genius!

Read the link, pretty interesting read, but like anarchy and communism, would inevitably fail due to human nature...or perhaps 'modern human desires' would be a more appropriate term. Either way, sounds good on paper. :P

Actually, as a point of fact, Objectivists don't tend to advocate that everyone should think like this, act like this, or apply it to every situation. It's not a philosophy for everyone, it's a philosophy for those with the ability and will to reason it.

Also, saying Objectivism would fail due to human nature is... sort of odd. Especially since it embodies every aspect of human nature anyway.

I am sick of the demonization of money.

Money provides an enormous utility in providing people with the ability to assign their own value to goods and to barter without finding specific goods in the marketplace. By taking money away you are either assigning a universal value to goods and resources, or you are creating a barter system that will be no different from before, only extremely inefficient.

What you also need to realise, is that money is much less gatherable than the major resources of today. Look at it this way, for the wealthiest people in the world, where do their financial resources lie? How many millionaires have a horde of cash in a large vault locked away somewhere, and how many have massive amounts of claims to oil reserves and land?

It is one thing to argue against property rights, but it is just moronic to argue against money.

Money is not the problem! The fact that not enough people have it is the problem! Capitalism can solve this. I'm a great believer in capitalism. I believe in capitalism so strongly I think the stock market should be divided up and equally distributed to all workers.

I'm going to assume you are joking, I can never be sure.

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.

Check out this page (http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm). It outlines an alternative to the monetary system.

I just want to know what people think about this idea, and any problems you may find with it.

BTW I can't post again until tomorrow, so don't get pissed off at me for not replying straight off.

The major issue with this is how to transfer good to get what we need under a system like this. How would this work for electical, phone, internet service. If I wanted to sell something of value, but the only person who wanted to buy it didn't have anything I wanted in return or know anyone else who did, how would goods get to those who need them most.

The only positive I can see about stopping the monitary system, elmimnating the cost of production and regulation of money, otherwise, its a far more efficient system. IMO

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.

Check out this page (http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm). It outlines an alternative to the monetary system.

I just want to know what people think about this idea, and any problems you may find with it.

BTW I can't post again until tomorrow, so don't get pissed off at me for not replying straight off.
tag - gtg... but first: money is another method of control

check out our thoughts on this thread: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=418610

and www.altruists.org have some decent stuff.

but first: money is another method of control


I call bullshit, PM.

We'll just divide up all the resources of the world among all the people of the world? Where will I keep 2 tons of unrefined nickel ore? And how do I know how much of it to trade for a pair of movie tickets?

It's probably best that we DON'T strip mine the entire planet and distribute the results to the entire population. Maybe we could just leave it there for now. And we could use something that symbolized the value of the resource, so people could exchange that symbolic item for needed goods and services without having to visit the backyard ore pile. We could call it.... money!

Honestly, that article is the most half-considered nonsense I've ever read.

Try this (http://www.xat.org).
It's much more reasonable.

Money is part of the problem, but not the only part. The real root of it all is authority and the artificiality of life in our social system. You can't attack money without also dealing with those problems.

I call bullshit, PM.
i could argue back, but i'm too lazy :rolleyes:
and tired

bah

This thread is all the proof I need that most of the people in this world are idiots.

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT BARTER.

We'll just divide up all the resources of the world among all the people of the world? Where will I keep 2 tons of unrefined nickel ore? And how do I know how much of it to trade for a pair of movie tickets?

It's probably best that we DON'T strip mine the entire planet and distribute the results to the entire population. Maybe we could just leave it there for now. And we could use something that symbolized the value of the resource, so people could exchange that symbolic item for needed goods and services without having to visit the backyard ore pile. We could call it.... money!

Honestly, that article is the most half-considered nonsense I've ever read.Your post is some of the least considered nonsense I've ever read.

Where exactly did anyone suggest we strip-mine the planet?

Follow the link in my first post and read the article.

i could argue back, but i'm too lazy :rolleyes:
and tired

bah

Haha, that is fine.

(I just think you are afraid of my vast knowledge and superior debating skills ;) )

This same subject has been my belief all along and, though a barter system mentioned may not be a reliable solution, I have been working on one. I call it a Unisic Government.

A Unisic Government (standing for United Society) appeals to everyone under it, encouraging a healthier lifestyle, free education, a flawless employment rate, and a tremendous lack of crime. It eliminates the need for currency by the individual, leaving it only as a way to trade outside the nation by companies and the government. People are guaranteed their needs and are to invest in their wants on an as-needed basis in exchange for timed positions at their place of purchase. The only symbolism of actuall trading is monitored by a universal identification card, yet only as a means of providing needed information for both supply and demand as well as information an individual may need pertaining to their needs (medical information, allergies, subscriptions, etc.).

This is the first I've ever released any information to the public domain directly on this "plan of plans" of mine, so this could be life threatening to me. It's a very real and scientificly researched way of life I plan to educate to others now and in the future, so please feel free to pass it on and mention who's dedicated their life to seeing it happen for us all, USA or wherever!

If you wish to comment on this idea or provide questions or insight, please do! It's only to help us all live better lives. Yes, this is very real.

- Ronixus (Christopher L. Dapo), Unisic Representative Of Grr Cheese

Rigth now your link dont work, but...

Money is only a tool for exchange. Basically, you have two people who want to exchange something (products or services), because both think they will benefit from the deal. Since it is not really practical to found someone with what you need (20 chickens) and who will want what you have to offer (1 cow) (add the transport nigthmare for every trade). A system had to be found.

Money, currency, credit, token, whatever you want to use will solve it. Has long has everybody recognize it. Now the more fluid is the money (currency accepted everywhere, electronic money/transaction), the more you will help exchange.

Scam is an other thing. Someone could have give you 20 ill/anorexic chicken for your healty cow... Sure money ease it, but banning it have way more cons than pro.

Okay, here is a very brief summary of the system of resource-management I am talking about:

Everything is produced and owned by the state, which is run by way of direct democracy.
Instead of working for material gain, people work in their desired job for a sense of accomplishment.
As everyone likes doing a different thing, and nobody can be comfortable(or popular) for long while remaining completely unproductive, most jobs should be filled right away.
Any work that is too simple, repetitive, or dangerous for people can be performed through automation.
All product and services are free. People can take what they like, within reason. One man should not be allowed to live alone in a four-bedroom house while there is a shortage in accomidation, for example.

This will eliminate almost all crime, social inequality, and all that other bullshit we get in our society (sorry for the choice of words, I just ate the biggest lunch of my life and I'm kinda tired and bloated right now), and encourage people to work together, instead of struggling to get money off each other.

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Aconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor — your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?

"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions — and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

"But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made — before it can be looted or mooched — made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.

"To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except by the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss — the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery — that you must offer them values, not wounds — that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of GOODS. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best your money can find. And when men live by trade — with reason, not force, as their final arbiter — it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability — and the degree of a man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

"But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality — the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.

"Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

"Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth — the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve that mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

"Money is your means of survival. The verdict which you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men's vices or men's stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment's or a penny's worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you'll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?

"Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?

"Or did you say it's the love of money that's the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It's the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money — and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it."

"Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

"Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another — their only substitute, demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride, or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich — will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt — and of his life, as he deserves.

"Then you will see the rise of the double standard — the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money — the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law — men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims — then money becomes its creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

"Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion — when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing — when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors — when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you — when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice — you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

"Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked: 'Account overdrawn.'

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are.

"You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it's crumbling around you, while your damning its life-blood — money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men's history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves — slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody's mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers — as industrialists.

"To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money — and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man's mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being — the self-made man — the American industrialist.

"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose — because it contains all the others — the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money.' No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity — to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality.

"Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide — as, I think, he will.

"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns — or dollars. Take your choice — there is no other — and your time is running out."

Muahahahaha. It's just a nicer name and form of communism - which, I should add, DOESN'T WORK. All economy needs planning. In capitalist economies the planning comes from the price mechanism, governed by money. Resource-based economies means that resources are channeled into certain sectors of the economy - by the technical and allocative inefficient government.

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.

Check out this page (http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm). It outlines an alternative to the monetary system.

I just want to know what people think about this idea, and any problems you may find with it.

BTW I can't post again until tomorrow, so don't get pissed off at me for not replying straight off.

Yeah get rid of money! After all since money has happened nothing good has happened right? Lets go back to a simpler time, without money, when humans were very hairy and caried big clubs.

Yeah get rid of money! After all since money has happened nothing good has happened right? Lets go back to a simpler time, without money, when humans were very hairy and caried big clubs.Much good has happened. How much of this is due to money?
Much evil has happened also. How much of this is due to money?

Money in itself is not the root of evil, or of good. It is a tool for trade, and as such it an item of great power. Those who have a lot of money tend to have a lot of power. Those who have little or no money struggle to maintain the power to live.

Okay, here is a very brief summary of the system of resource-management I am talking about:

Everything is produced and owned by the state, which is run by way of direct democracy.

Communism. Statism. What is new about this, other than assuming you'll ever find a majority of people who agree to let the state control and produce everything?

Instead of working for material gain, people work in their desired job for a sense of accomplishment.

People already work for a sense of accomplishment. Nothing says accomplishment like the means to one's own survival. And if they don't work for material gain, are you saying work will not produce anything for anyone? Why bother then? It WILL be for gain, but you are shifting the receivers of gain AWAY from the person actually working and onto ... everyone.

I don't want to work for 'everyone.' It's MY time. I want ME to gain most from it. Otherwise, I'll let other people do it, while I do more productive things.

Any work that is too simple, repetitive, or dangerous for people can be performed through automation.

Oh good! I can't wait for robot police forces controlled by a totalitarian state.

Will this mean in your system, hashing up Marxism and Communism on online forums will be done exclusively by automated systems?

All product and services are free.

And there you have it; the prime motivator (IMO) of most people who advocate anti-capitalist systems. You don't like paying for stuff. Correct me if I'm wrong and you do like paying for things. I don't enjoy paying for things either, but at least I'm not taking my personal laziness and trying to make it an economic system.

This will eliminate almost all crime, social inequality, and all that other bullshit we get in our society (sorry for the choice of words, I just ate the biggest lunch of my life and I'm kinda tired and bloated right now), and encourage people to work together, instead of struggling to get money off each other.

So in your opinion, no one in a capitalist economy works together? I guess... CORPORATIONS do not exist. Or you must have an extremely incorrect idea of what they are (I'm betting, you imagine them as mini-dictatorships run by all-powerful CEOs deliberately oppressing the poor by FORCING them to work for them, yes?).

As for eliminating all crime, social inequality etc... not convincing in any way. When you staple your version of utopia onto the supposed results from your economic system, it just makes it less credible.

If such a system was imposed in the US, I would become a criminal overnight. I'd shamefully cling to what I have, what I made, what I do, where I live, instead of giving it all up for the "good of the people" controlled by a state which now, legally, OWNS EVERYTHING.

How you or anyone can possibly advocate handing power over to the state... is beyond me. Checks and balances? Not when the government OWNS EVERYTHING. Governments historically, have been responsible for nearly every war, mass murder, genocide, atomic bombing, chemical weapons use, and oppression of the minorities. Governments. But apparently you think governments will be inherently more trustworthy, if only we give them... everything!

Doesn't sit right with me, and never will, and if you are truly willing to achieve this system by democracy, than I'm glad, because it will never happen.

Wow... abolish money.

Well if anyone would pay a bit more attention to their Adam Smith they might know that the need for money naturally arises from the division of labor- and in order for people to be one another's customers without directly providing one another what they need, money is introduced to improve trade, efficiency, and the standard of living as a whole.

If they truly believe in this project, why are they charging for their shit (http://www.thevenusproject.com/bookvid_order.shtml)?
http://www.thevenusproject.com/shop/images/catalog_large/prod005.gif
006 - The Venus Project Package (Book & Videos or DVDs)

Save by purchasing our latest books and videos.

Price: $110.80
Just another scammer, trying to take advantage of the gullibility of the public. Bah.

I don't want to work for 'everyone.' It's MY time. I want ME to gain most from it. Otherwise, I'll let other people do it, while I do more productive things.Like what?
So in your opinion, no one in a capitalist economy works together? I guess... CORPORATIONS do not exist. Or you must have an extremely incorrect idea of what they are (I'm betting, you imagine them as mini-dictatorships run by all-powerful CEOs deliberately oppressing the poor by FORCING them to work for them, yes?).Corporations work in competition with other coporations and tend to stamp out smaller business.
If such a system was imposed in the US, I would become a criminal overnight. I'd shamefully cling to what I have, what I made, what I do, where I live, instead of giving it all up for the "good of the people" controlled by a state which now, legally, OWNS EVERYTHING.The state will not try to take away what is yours. It produces things and distrobutes them. Once you take something, it's yours. Nobody is going to come to take your car back.

How you or anyone can possibly advocate handing power over to the state... is beyond me. Checks and balances? Not when the government OWNS EVERYTHING. Governments historically, have been responsible for nearly every war, mass murder, genocide, atomic bombing, chemical weapons use, and oppression of the minorities. Governments. But apparently you think governments will be inherently more trustworthy, if only we give them... everything!Again, the government will not try to sieze your property. Also, it is run by a direct democacy. You ARE the government.

If they truly believe in this project, why are they charging for their shit (http://www.thevenusproject.com/bookvid_order.shtml)?
Just another scammer, trying to take advantage of the gullibility of the public. Bah.How else are they supposed to try and do this? Would you prefer they begged?

Jacque Fresco is no scammer. Search him up. You'll find he's legitimate.

Like what?

Fighting against your totalitarian government, for one thing.

Corporations work in competition with other coporations and tend to stamp out smaller business.

Corporations are made up of individuals who are cooperating, however. Today is both competition and cooperation. What's wrong with that? It's balanced.

As for tendencies to stamp out smaller businesses... thats a problem of not enough genuine competition and too much political meddling, not a cue to ban the entire concept of money.

The state will not try to take away what is yours. It produces things and distrobutes them. Once you take something, it's yours. Nobody is going to come to take your car back.

Heh. Uh huh. Yes. Okay. Sure.

Sorry, do I sound skeptical? Maybe I don't trust governments with TOO much power. And I have only your word that the state won't try to do anything like that. You won't be the state. Power corrupts, you can guarantee in no way that it won't, and I'm not willing to live in a world where all power is just handed to the state as part of some experiment to test it out.

Again, the government will not try to sieze your property. Also, it is run by a direct democacy. You ARE the government.

That's what all proponents of communism and direct democracy claim. Hell it's what people claim is true about existing representative democracy. It's good political rhetoric. It doesn't convince me, any more than I can be convinced that occupying Iraq is 'liberating' it.

Okay, here is a very brief summary of the system of resource-management I am talking about:

Everything is produced and owned by the state, which is run by way of direct democracy.

Hooray for Communism!!

Seriously, if you want society to be your nanny and government to be your security blanket, you go for it. Me I would like some responsibility so that life is actually worth something.

Instead of working for material gain, people work in their desired job for a sense of accomplishment.

I golf and play playstation for a sense of accomplishment, while the sense of accomplishment with my jobs generally lasts about two weeks. Did you suppose that I got a huge sense of accomplishment shovelling grain into a grain bin or typing data into excel?

As everyone likes doing a different thing, and nobody can be comfortable(or popular) for long while remaining completely unproductive, most jobs should be filled right away.

I know a lot of people just itching to do some coal mining, so those jobs should have lines at the sign up location.

Any work that is too simple, repetitive, or dangerous for people can be performed through automation.

Most jobs that are too dangerous for people are generally impossible to fill with automation.

This will eliminate almost all crime, social inequality, and all that other bullshit we get in our society (sorry for the choice of words, I just ate the biggest lunch of my life and I'm kinda tired and bloated right now), and encourage people to work together, instead of struggling to get money off each other.

You are going to have to explain why it will do this.

As for tendencies to stamp out smaller businesses... thats a problem of not enough genuine competition and too much political meddling, not a cue to ban the entire concept of money.

Also, when a corporation stamps out smaller competition, they assume the role in the marketplace of the smaller competition. It must grow into the market, so it must hire more workers and provide more goods, usually at better rates.

The underlying assumptions of that essay are laughable.

the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

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.

Wrong. Absolutely wrong. Does anyone in their right mind actually think an actual high standard of living could be provided for everyone?

The measure of success would be based on the fulfillment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.

So if we're all sitting around only engaging in self actualization, and enjoying our high standards of living, who's producing goods?

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.

Most violent crimes are economically motivated? No.

Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.

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.

Oh well. There goes that high standard of living. Enjoy driving you [insert name of car you hate]. And I hope you all enjoy playing the same few games, reading the same few books, and eating the same few foods all the time.

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.

This is the root problem of the assumptions.
1) Money is not a control device, but an efficient valuation and exchange mechanism.
2) Resources (including time, effort and ingenuity) are scarce, and unevenly distributed.

This is the root problem of the assumptions.
1) Money is not a control device, but an efficient valuation and exchange mechanism.
2) Resources (including time, effort and ingenuity) are scarce, and unevenly distributed.Money is a tool of power. The richer people tend to have more freedom to take and do what they want. Those who are wealthy enough, have the freedom to impose some measure of control over those less wealthy.

Time, limited? Bah, we have all the time there is. Also, you may not have noticed, but effort and ingenuity are generated by people. There are a lot of people.

Money often rewards greed and selfishness, rather than helping those around you.

Muahahahaha. It's just a nicer name and form of communism - which, I should add, DOESN'T WORK. All economy needs planning. In capitalist economies the planning comes from the price mechanism, governed by money. Resource-based economies means that resources are channeled into certain sectors of the economy - by the technical and allocative inefficient government.Communism have never occured the way it was intended. Allways those at the top got to like their position a little too much.

In this system, no single man or group would have control.

It amuses me greatly that Francisco d'Aconia's speech made an appearance. :D

Communism have never occured the way it was intended. Allways those at the top got to like their position a little too much.

In this system, no single man or group would have control.

Economic systems are closely linked to political systems.

True capitalist economies REQUIRE a democratic government structure, and vice versa.

True communist economies REQUIRE a totalitarian government structure, and vice versa.

According to you, so, resource-based economies will lead to anarchy.

From the link...

As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers...

I thought lawyers existed as a profession to help interpet the law? Much like how plumbers are experts in plumbing, we need experts in law.

Anyways,

Barter-based economies only work if the other guy wants something you have.

Money is a tool of power. The richer people tend to have more freedom to take and do what they want. Those who are wealthy enough, have the freedom to impose some measure of control over those less wealthy.

money

A generally accepted medium for the exchange of goods and services, for measuring value, or for making payments. Many economists consider the amount of money and growth in the amount of money in an economy very influential in determining interest rates, inflation, and the level of economic activity. There is some disagreement among economists as to what types of things actually should be classified as money; for example, should balances in money market funds be included. See also money supply.

Source: Wall Street Words: An A to Z Guide to Investment Terms for Today's Investor by David L. Scott.
Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Main Entry: mon·ey
Pronunciation: 'm&-nE
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural moneys or mon·ies /'m&-nEz/
1 : an accepted or authorized medium of exchange; especially : coinage or negotiable paper issued as legal tender by a government
2 a : assets or compensation in the form of or readily convertible into cash b : capital dealt in as a commodity to be lent, traded, or invested <mortgage money available from a lender> <the money supply> c plural : sums of money <collect tax moneys>

Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

money

n 1: the most common medium of exchange; functions as legal tender; "we tried to collect the money he owed us" 2: wealth reckoned in terms of money; "all his money is in real estate" 3: the official currency issued by a government or national bank; "he changed his money into francs"

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=money

Pop quiz time! Which of those definitions says money is power?

Time, limited? Bah, we have all the time there is. Also, you may not have noticed, but effort and ingenuity are generated by people. There are a lot of people.

So you're immortal, everyone in the world is ingenious, and no one is every lazy?

Time is limited. The average lifespan is not that long at all. And I don't know about where you live, but everywhere I've ever lived (and that's quite a number of places) the lazy and stupid have far outnumbered the hard working and intelligent.

Money often rewards greed and selfishness, rather than helping those around you.

Look up [url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/]Andrew Carnegie[/quote] some time. He sure was condemed by society for giving away 90% of his fortune.

Barter-based economies only work if the other guy wants something you have.If you read back over the last few pages, you will find that I have allready called you an idiot. I was wrong. You are in fact a double idiot. Congratulations.

The monetary system is without a doubt the single greatest cause of crime, social inequality, and general suffering in the world. People are starving outside supermarkets packed full with more food than can be eaten, and walking barefoot past huge car yards, simply because they lack a resource that has NO practical use in itself whatsoever.

Money deprives the poor of what they desperately need, and drives the wealthy to hoard up even more possessions, and I say that's not good enough.


Ahh, how easy it is to rant and rave when you don't have to actually defend your position with facts.

So... the monetary system is the greatest cause of crime, social inequality and general suffering in the world. Compared to say,,, feudalism? When landowners ruled and serfs could never buy their way to freedom?

Right.

Meanwhile, there are countless instances of "the poor" WORKING their way out of poverty, and in fact, to great wealth in our MERIT-BASED society.

You want my money, come and get it. Good luck. :sniper:

-Tom Steele