Lied to, already.

**SourceSkills** · 09-04-12, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

I read it, and find it naive, but even if it did work, that wouldn't make science free. We still need scientists to work. We still need engineers, factory workers and truck drivers to get them their instruments, chemicals, pencils, computers, etc. These people need to eat, they need gas for their cars, electricity, etc. The food needs to come from somewhere - that will take work by farmers, more truck drivers, whole industries. This stuff isn't just going away because we get rid of currency. All of that work will still need to be done, so the cost will remain.

i am sorry but i dont think you can absorb all that knowledge in those links in a day let alone a couple of hours. i would say you should really give it more of a chance. to truly see why you dont need a currency you have to understand the finer details to understand how it would work (well i say finer but there really isnt any because it is all important in its own way hence my statement). if you really want to understand what i am saying and why i am saying it that will just take time. I am not saying your stupid or anything its just with all things as complicated as this it takes time. now if you just want to stick with your opinion thats fine because once again i am not on a holy crusade. its your choice i only hope i provided enough ideas and info that you might open your mind to them.

**WickedTribe** · 09-04-12, 06:46 PM

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Sure but let me ask you a question first here. With the US having more people per capita than any other nation in prison do you think that that's a free society.

We have more people per person?

**Fovezer** · 09-04-12, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Thrive is a bit wack in some areas I will agree but it has good info on the economic, Medical, technological, and government issues.

As for zeitgeist what sacres people away from it is the idea that your religion, your government, and basically your entire livelihood is contrary to the reality of the sciencetific fact. It's not an overnight process and in world in which an RBE is truly realized is no place for me or you but it is something that we should strive to be not for us but for our children and children's children and of course for our mother Earth. It is all possible today to implement many of those things that an RBE proposes as well. Just read and find out for yourself don't let me decide for you.

No, sorry, Thrive is completely insane. It talks about perpetual motion machines, which are impossible, aliens, NWO/one-world government conspiracy theories, etc. It's total bullshit.

And no, it's not possible to implement the Zeitgeist ideas. Not to mention the ideas presented are not new ones, it's basically communism. Theoretical pure communism, that is. Like what Marx put forward in the Communist Manifesto, but with robots controlling all the production. Now don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of Marx, but I'm not a communist and I only believe communism can work on small-scale collectives and not for a whole society.

**WickedTribe** · 09-04-12, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

i am sorry but i dont think you can absorb all that knowledge in those links in a day let alone a couple of hours. i would say you should really give it more of a chance. to truly see why you dont need a currency you have to understand the finer details to understand how it would work (well i say finer but there really isnt any because it is all important in its own way hence my statement). if you really want to understand what i am saying and why i am saying it that will just take time. I am not saying your stupid or anything its just with all things as complicated as this it takes time. now if you just want to stick with your opinion thats fine because once again i am not on a holy crusade. its your choice i only hope i provided enough ideas and info that you might open your mind to them.

My mind is open, I just didn't read any arguments that I found compelling. If you have a specific argument for why science will require no resources under this system, then make it.

**Ranger10** · 09-04-12, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Sure but let me ask you a question first here. With the US having more people per capita than any other nation in prison do you think that that's a free society. Do you think that that's part of our humanity? Humans like every other animal hate being caged up and only want to be understood and nurtured. So take this into account as well out of the entire prison population how many of those were violent crime offenders? Then also find out how many of those violent crime offenders were put there because they acted on the acquisition of wealth in some form? Just a question to ponder while I continue.

Well, money is the root of all evil in some for or another. But isn't your whole idea here based on abolishing the monetary system, along with others? Is that not just another form of money having an influence in your thinking? Are you not succumbing to the same ideologies that eventually produce a culture where the lack of money creates a whole new evil? Simply doing away with money doesn't solve any issues. Yes, money makes things complicated. Even when you don't have it, the NOT having it makes it more complicated.

And as far as people in prison, give me another country which sees as much immigration as the US. Imagine trying to incorporate so many people, from so many other nations whose laws and ideas on the social contract as so different. They try to get them all to play together. We have so many people in prison because of the sectarian violence in our cities, the abuse of harmful substances, and the fact we don't like to actually follow through with our punishments or we make them too light to begin with.

I'm all for talking about reforming the prison system, but I will be very liberal in some areas, and absolutely draconian in others.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

First and foremost people must understand that our government, our economy, our religious institutions, and our banking and business institutions are all obsolete and harmful to our humanity. Our humanity is actually stifled by them. Our creativity and intelligence are suppressed and that's how some people actually want it to be but that's a different story for a different time. Now this is the hard part because people especially those are and were heavily conditioned especially in the religious and corporate sectors will be extremely resistant to the idea that they are wrong. This may go as far as force being used to suppress those ideas which you already kind of see today.

Your first part of this comment seems so ludicrous that it's impossible to quantify. I understand the purpose. You want that Star Trek society where everyone magically wants to be friends, we don't need money and the social contract is so strong that a verbal reprimand would shape behavior. Problem is, you are talking about a utopia which isn't realistic.

In my opinion, government provides the backdrop for social and economic stability. It is not in an of itself the same institution as business, but rather, it provides the backbone for which business is shaped. Religious institutions provide the foundation of what we consider moral. Banking provides peace of mind. These things don't stifle humanity any more than the valley walls of a ravine hold back the rushing water. They give it structure. These religious and government institutions, as stifling as they may be, keep people who don't like your idea, or the very fact that you expressed that idea here, from coming to your house and putting a hole in your head. Our society would collapse under its own weight.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Now say that it's years from now and enough people are convinced an RBE the right way to go and we can move forward and leave those things behind and fix those problems that those institutions created. But how do we fix them you ask? Well that's the easy part. With the abundance of resources now at all of our disposal we can start to build more efficient machines and computers that will take tedious and hard labor out of our hands and build a better society, better homes, better cities, and finally have the ability to give all of humanity what it by right needs and deserves. That's a house, food, clean drinking water, electricity, and above all a purpose by the way. All of which is possible today I might add even if you insist on holding over money.

Who gets those resources? Economics is defined as the acquisition, distribution and consumption of limited goods or services to satisfy the unlimited human appetite. It's that last part you have to read into. Humans, by our very nature are hungry... for everything; wealth, knowledge, power, longer life, stuff... on and on the list goes.

It would be great to live in the kind of world where all these unlimited resources are used to better humanity. But at it's core, it still requires economics on some level to make sure those resources are used correctly for the betterment of all man kind. In thousands and thousands of recorded human history, we've still not managed to prevent wars, or any semblance of this utopia except on the smallest levels. And even then, it required tremendous amounts of effort from the world around them to be supported. How could we ever make this transition realistically? I don't think its possible.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

But where is this abundance coming from? Well the key to it all is electricity. Because without it none of this works. Fortunately we have abundance of that as well and it is all clean energy. Between solar, wind, and geothermal we have enough energy reserves to last thousands if not millions of years just on those three alone and who knows what energy tech we will come up with once we take the money gloves off. With that much power we can grow as much food as we need, clean all the water we need for drinking, build as much as we need and ensure a quality living experience for all of us.

I totally agree. We have the energy. In a single second, our sun produces enough energy to power our world from it's beginning and for another ten thousand years. No one is disputing that. But the application is beyond the reach of all of us combined.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

So back to my first point the one I told you to ponder on a bit. If you thought about it carefully you will notice that nearly everyone's reason for being in prison is related to money somehow (mentally handicapped people excluded). Whether it be from just pure greed or out of simple nessecity. So if you agree which you don't have to its just a popular conclusion you will see that in a RBE society those people would have had no need to commit those crimes. Just an example as to how our humanity will be further restored. This also effectively gets rid of 99 percent of all crime worldwide. So if you're wondering why I mention that before there you go reason clarified.

Greed is not the only impetus for committing crime. I'll certainly agree its a big part. But people commit crime because their bored. Or on drugs. Or simply because they didn't like someone. The one thing that's consistent is that in all cases, whether motivated by money, hate, jealousy or greed, it's the inherent, fallible nature of man to want more and more. You can't take away the nature of man by removing the need of things he/she wants.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Now I'm not a freakin genius. Anyone who knows me will tell you that but if I was able to absorb all that basic understanding others can to. I also do not claim to be an expert on any of the subjects discussed thus the reason why I don't give long winded explanations as to how those things work or are implemented I just know that it can he done but that's not without careful study and reasoning I did on my own.

I see your reasoning. It makes sense... on paper. It catches all the trappings of humanity, but it's a lot like a good invention. Simply doing the science behind it, doesn't guarantee the engineering will work out. In fact, most good ideas never die in the science, instead they die when you put the nuts and bolts on. Then it starts to fall apart.

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

Point is when the reformation of the mind begins is when our society begins to change for the better and that is literally where all this starts.

While I think this is a fun discussion to have. I think ultimately the time it takes to make this work will outlive those who believe in it. These kinds of ideas are constantly being thought up and sold, like one would sell a vacuum cleaner. Analogous metaphors of "sucking" not withstanding, the only way I see this working would be in a science fiction movie, where you only have to make it plausible for 90 minutes.

**SourceSkills** · 09-04-12, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

My mind is open, I just didn't read any arguments that I found compelling. If you have a specific argument for why science will require no resources under this system, then make it.

resources and cost are two very different things. the use of resources is not a cost its a management of raw materials to fit your needs. a cost is more figurative and its more like you lost or gave something something of significance to you say money for instance to gain something of equal, greater, or less value. now you can say that manufacturing something will cost resources and that's technically true but its more a turn of phrase because what your actually doing is using the raw materials that make up the manufactured item or items to their fullest potential that you can than actually meaning it will cost you. using resources doesn't cost you anything. so let me be clear money is not a raw material resource nor has it ever been (well unless you count what they make the coins out of :P).

**SourceSkills** · 09-04-12, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Well, money is the root of all evil in some for or another. But isn't your whole idea here based on abolishing the monetary system, along with others? Is that not just another form of money having an influence in your thinking? Are you not succumbing to the same ideologies that eventually produce a culture where the lack of money creates a whole new evil? Simply doing away with money doesn't solve any issues. Yes, money makes things complicated. Even when you don't have it, the NOT having it makes it more complicated.

And as far as people in prison, give me another country which sees as much immigration as the US. Imagine trying to incorporate so many people, from so many other nations whose laws and ideas on the social contract as so different. They try to get them all to play together. We have so many people in prison because of the sectarian violence in our cities, the abuse of harmful substances, and the fact we don't like to actually follow through with our punishments or we make them too light to begin with.

I'm all for talking about reforming the prison system, but I will be very liberal in some areas, and absolutely draconian in others.

Your first part of this comment seems so ludicrous that it's impossible to quantify. I understand the purpose. You want that Star Trek society where everyone magically wants to be friends, we don't need money and the social contract is so strong that a verbal reprimand would shape behavior. Problem is, you are talking about a utopia which isn't realistic.

In my opinion, government provides the backdrop for social and economic stability. It is not in an of itself the same institution as business, but rather, it provides the backbone for which business is shaped. Religious institutions provide the foundation of what we consider moral. Banking provides peace of mind. These things don't stifle humanity any more than the valley walls of a ravine hold back the rushing water. They give it structure. These religious and government institutions, as stifling as they may be, keep people who don't like your idea, or the very fact that you expressed that idea here, from coming to your house and putting a hole in your head. Our society would collapse under its own weight.

Who gets those resources? Economics is defined as the acquisition, distribution and consumption of limited goods or services to satisfy the unlimited human appetite. It's that last part you have to read into. Humans, by our very nature are hungry... for everything; wealth, knowledge, power, longer life, stuff... on and on the list goes.

It would be great to live in the kind of world where all these unlimited resources are used to better humanity. But at it's core, it still requires economics on some level to make sure those resources are used correctly for the betterment of all man kind. In thousands and thousands of recorded human history, we've still not managed to prevent wars, or any semblance of this utopia except on the smallest levels. And even then, it required tremendous amounts of effort from the world around them to be supported. How could we ever make this transition realistically? I don't think its possible.

I totally agree. We have the energy. In a single second, our sun produces enough energy to power our world from it's beginning and for another ten thousand years. No one is disputing that. But the application is beyond the reach of all of us combined.

Greed is not the only impetus for committing crime. I'll certainly agree its a big part. But people commit crime because their bored. Or on drugs. Or simply because they didn't like someone. The one thing that's consistent is that in all cases, whether motivated by money, hate, jealousy or greed, it's the inherent, fallible nature of man to want more and more. You can't take away the nature of man by removing the need of things he/she wants.

I see your reasoning. It makes sense... on paper. It catches all the trappings of humanity, but it's a lot like a good invention. Simply doing the science behind it, doesn't guarantee the engineering will work out. In fact, most good ideas never die in the science, instead they die when you put the nuts and bolts on. Then it starts to fall apart.

While I think this is a fun discussion to have. I think ultimately the time it takes to make this work will outlive those who believe in it. These kinds of ideas are constantly being thought up and sold, like one would sell a vacuum cleaner. Analogous metaphors of "sucking" not withstanding, the only way I see this working would be in a science fiction movie, where you only have to make it plausible for 90 minutes.

those are all very good arguments and i wouldn't dare try to go into everything further since im not an expert and only have my basic understanding's a reasoning's. thats why i suggest you just check out all my links i provided in my previous post and just absorb that info and if your still like meh this isnt my thing well thats ok you know.

**Ranger10** · 09-04-12, 08:16 PM

Fair enough. Will do.

**WickedTribe** · 09-04-12, 08:19 PM

Originally Posted by SourceSkills

resources and cost are two very different things. the use of resources is not a cost its a management of raw materials to fit your needs. a cost is more figurative and its more like you lost or gave something something of significance to you say money for instance to gain something of equal, greater, or less value. now you can say that manufacturing something will cost resources and that's technically true but its more a turn of phrase because what your actually doing is using the raw materials that make up the manufactured item or items to their fullest potential that you can than actually meaning it will cost you. using resources doesn't cost you anything. so let me be clear money is not a raw material resource nor has it ever been (well unless you count what they make the coins out of :P).

Unless you don't consider time "something of significance," then work is cost. Unless you have unlimited natural resources (you don't), then resources are "something of significance."

Let's take the example of genotyping an animal. That takes one person several hours. That's a limited resource, so that's a cost. It also requires several chemicals which need to be either acquired or synthesized from non-limitless resources. That's a cost. It requires a very complicated machine. The machine also requires raw materials. It's manufacture requires electricity, transport and man-hours as well. Those are all costs. And genotyping a mouse is one of the simplest things that we used to do in a lab.

I don't care what currency, or lack thereof, your economy is based on, those are real costs.