Total Posts:228|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Resource Based Economy

Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 7:42:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The term and meaning of a Resource-Based Economy was originated by Jacque Fresco. It is a system in which all goods and services are available without the use of money, credits, barter or any other system of debt or servitude. All resources become the common heritage of all of the inhabitants, not just a select few. The premise upon which this system is based is that the Earth is abundant with plentiful resource; our practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant and counter productive to our survival.

Modern society has access to highly advanced technology and can make available food, clothing, housing and medical care; update our educational system; and develop a limitless supply of renewable, non-contaminating energy. 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.

Consider the following examples: At the beginning of World War II the US had a mere 600 or so first-class fighting aircraft. We rapidly overcame this short supply by turning out more than 90,000 planes a year. The question at the start of World War II was: Do we have enough funds to produce the required implements of war? The answer was no, we did not have enough money, nor did we have enough gold; but we did have more than enough resources. It was the available resources that enabled the US to achieve the high production and efficiency required to win the war. Unfortunately this is only considered in times of war.

In a resource-based economy all of the world's resources are held as the common heritage of all of Earth's people, thus eventually outgrowing the need for the artificial boundaries that separate people. This is the unifying imperative.

We must emphasize that this approach to global governance has nothing whatever in common with the present aims of an elite to form a world government with themselves and large corporations at the helm, and the vast majority of the world's population subservient to them. Our vision of globalization empowers each and every person on the planet to be the best they can be, not to live in abject subjugation to a corporate governing body.

Our proposals would not only add to the well being of people, but they would also provide the necessary information that would enable them to participate in any area of their competence. The measure of success would be based on the fulfilment of one's individual pursuits rather than the acquisition of wealth, property and power.

At present, we have enough material resources to provide a very high standard of living for all of Earth's inhabitants. 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.

A resource-based economy would make it possible to use technology to overcome scarce resources by applying renewable sources of energy, computerizing and automating manufacturing and inventory, designing safe energy-efficient cities and advanced transportation systems, providing universal health care and more relevant education, and most of all by generating a new incentive system based on human and environmental concern.

Many people believe that there is too much technology in the world today, and that technology is the major cause of our environmental pollution. This is not the case. It is the abuse and misuse of technology that should be our major concern. In a more humane civilization, instead of machines displacing people they would shorten the workday, increase the availability of goods and services, and lengthen vacation time. If we utilize new technology to raise the standard of living for all people, then the infusion of machine technology would no longer be a threat.

A resource-based world economy would also involve all-out efforts to develop new, clean, and renewable sources of energy: geothermal; controlled fusion; solar; photovoltaic; wind, wave, and tidal power; and even fuel from the oceans. We would eventually be able to have energy in unlimited quantity that could propel civilization for thousands of years. A resource-based economy must also be committed to the redesign of our cities, transportation systems, and industrial plants, allowing them to be energy efficient, clean, and conveniently serve the needs of all people.

What else would a resource-based economy mean? Technology intelligently and efficiently applied, conserves energy, reduces waste, and provides more leisure time. With automated inventory on a global scale, we can maintain a balance between production and distribution. Only nutritious and healthy food would be available and planned obsolescence would be unnecessary and non-existent in a resource-based economy.

As we outgrow the need for professions based on the monetary system, for instance lawyers, bankers, insurance agents, marketing and advertising personnel, salespersons, and stockbrokers, a considerable amount of waste will be eliminated. 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. Our only shortage is the lack of creative thought and intelligence in ourselves and our elected leaders to solve these problems. The most valuable, untapped resource today is human ingenuity.

With the elimination of debt, the fear of losing one's job will no longer be a threat. This assurance, combined with education on how to relate to one another in a much more meaningful way, could considerably reduce both mental and physical stress and leave us free to explore and develop our abilities.

If the thought of eliminating money still troubles you, consider this: If a group of people with gold, diamonds and money were stranded on an island that had no resources such as food, clean air and water, their wealth would be irrelevant to their survival. 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.

Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed and the people accept money as an exchange medium for the scarce resources. Money is a social convention, an agreement if you will. It is neither a natural resource nor does it represent one. It is not necessary for survival unless we have been conditioned to accept it as such.

http://www.thevenusproject.com...
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2011 6:05:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Video on the topic:
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Austin96
Posts: 56
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 5:32:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM, Austin96 wrote:
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.

Reply: It is becoming more accepted as our current system is showing it's many faults.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 5:40:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
So if I want a car, how do I get one? I'm not allowed to barter for one. Does the government just provide me with one? Or do I just walk over to a car dealership and just grab one?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 6:16:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 5:32:35 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM, Austin96 wrote:
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.

Reply: It is becoming more accepted as our current system is showing it's many faults.

Reply: You would just order whatever car you want and when you don't want it anymore, you give it back. Would you have a problem with that?
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 6:23:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 6:16:59 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 5:32:35 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM, Austin96 wrote:
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.

Reply: It is becoming more accepted as our current system is showing it's many faults.

Reply: You would just order whatever car you want and when you don't want it anymore, you give it back. Would you have a problem with that?

I'm merely asking questions right now.

Order from who? The government or from a private company? And how would this work for rationing? Obviously, everyone is going to order some extremely nice car, some might even want multiple cars (after all, those with the higher-end lifestyles often have many cars, and do nothing with them but look at them).

So that would require a lot of manufacturing of the really nice cars (which use more resources than the lower end cars).

Also, what would the car manufacturer's (be it a private company, or a company owned by the government, and so the people) incentive be to make better cars year after year?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 6:35:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Money is only important in a society when certain resources for survival must be rationed
That's all societies, and all resources for survival or otherwise need to be apportioned. Scarcity is laughing at you so hard it's going to pee its pants. Common property is a contradiction, we can't both drive a car in different directions at the same time. And material values are not "heritage," they need to be PRODUCED by individual action.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 6:59:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 6:23:06 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 6:16:59 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 5:32:35 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM, Austin96 wrote:
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.

Reply: It is becoming more accepted as our current system is showing it's many faults.

Reply: You would just order whatever car you want and when you don't want it anymore, you give it back. Would you have a problem with that?

I'm merely asking questions right now.

Order from who? The government or from a private company? And how would this work for rationing? Obviously, everyone is going to order some extremely nice car, some might even want multiple cars (after all, those with the higher-end lifestyles often have many cars, and do nothing with them but look at them).

So that would require a lot of manufacturing of the really nice cars (which use more resources than the lower end cars).

Also, what would the car manufacturer's (be it a private company, or a company owned by the government, and so the people) incentive be to make better cars year after year?

Reply:There are no private entities. There is no profit market. It's a worldwide global network. A global alliance organized in a fashion that you would want to call a government, but that would not act as what you would commonly associate with most governments. The central organization would mostly have it's decisions made by technological data, not human opinions. Your current ideas of society and economy would have to be changed.

This system is not a utopia and it's not a make a wish foundation. Everyone would have the same opportunities based on how much resources are available on earth to create such products. These calculations would all be done via computer technology. If the world wide resource base only has enough resources for everyone to obtain "X amount" of any specific product, then that's what is fair and sustainable for the overall stability of the system as a whole. Also, lower end products and nicer end products are a creation of the wealthy. In this system, everyone would get the best products available based on the total available resources. The earth has plenty of resources. Without money and the wealthy minority controlling the system, these resources can finally be used to benefit the entire human race as a whole.

I'm not an expert on the system yet, but I am learning. I hope this answered some of your questions.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).

However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

You also run the issue of creating all this stuff. In order to maximize production, you'd have to tell everyone what to do, taking away their free will to do what they want.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:26:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).


However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

Reply: The system doesn't say that everyone would get a plane. But whatever can be sustainable and available for everyone as it pertains to air travel, it would be.

The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

Reply: The earth has a lot more resources than you seem to think it does OreEle. There is a lot of waste. Waste that could be recycled and used for future products. Like I said, it's not a make a wish foundation. It's not a genie bottle and it's not a magic wand. It's an efficient system whose organization and decisions are guided by technological data, not people's opinions and desires. Just because you want a plane or a 1000" television, doesn't mean you get one. You have to rethink how you see life. Selfish desires cannot run human systems anymore. It will only continue to cause problems for the human race as a whole.

You also run the issue of creating all this stuff. In order to maximize production, you'd have to tell everyone what to do, taking away their free will to do what they want.

Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way. Everything else could be filled by people who want to help. Volunteers are in no short demand, people like to help and their would be ample opportunity for them to, until 100% of production could be ran by technology. In such a system where people aren't suppressed and they don't feel like slaves, they will find ways to use their time productively. People don't need to be controlled in the ways that the current systems control people. That needs to stop.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:36:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:26:20 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).


However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

Reply: The system doesn't say that everyone would get a plane. But whatever can be sustainable and available for everyone as it pertains to air travel, it would be.

But very little is actually in large enough quantity for everyone. Even when it comes to something as simple as cars, people out number them over 10 to 1. And thats including all the junker cars that still roll around.


The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

Reply: The earth has a lot more resources than you seem to think it does OreEle.

I think there is a lot fewer than you seem to think. With two of the key resources being labor and time.

There is a lot of waste. Waste that could be recycled and used for future products. Like I said, it's not a make a wish foundation. It's not a genie bottle and it's not a magic wand. It's an efficient system whose organization and decisions are guided by technological data, not people's opinions and desires. Just because you want a plane or a 1000" television, doesn't mean you get one. You have to rethink how you see life. Selfish desires cannot run human systems anymore. It will only continue to cause problems for the human race as a whole.

Selfish desires are part of the current human nature. People want things, you can't get past that. The only way for them to not "want" something is for them to not know about it. And if you're talking about controlling what they do and do not know as a way to dictate their lives, that is the most absolute form of slavery and control there is.


You also run the issue of creating all this stuff. In order to maximize production, you'd have to tell everyone what to do, taking away their free will to do what they want.

Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way. Everything else could be filled by people who want to help. Volunteers are in no short demand, people like to help and their would be ample opportunity for them to, until 100% of production could be ran by technology. In such a system where people aren't suppressed and they don't feel like slaves, they will find ways to use their time productively. People don't need to be controlled in the ways that the current systems control people. That needs to stop.

All those machines have to be made and programmed.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:47:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:36:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:26:20 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).


However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

Reply: The system doesn't say that everyone would get a plane. But whatever can be sustainable and available for everyone as it pertains to air travel, it would be.

But very little is actually in large enough quantity for everyone. Even when it comes to something as simple as cars, people out number them over 10 to 1. And thats including all the junker cars that still roll around.


The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

Reply: The earth has a lot more resources than you seem to think it does OreEle.

I think there is a lot fewer than you seem to think. With two of the key resources being labor and time.

There is a lot of waste. Waste that could be recycled and used for future products. Like I said, it's not a make a wish foundation. It's not a genie bottle and it's not a magic wand. It's an efficient system whose organization and decisions are guided by technological data, not people's opinions and desires. Just because you want a plane or a 1000" television, doesn't mean you get one. You have to rethink how you see life. Selfish desires cannot run human systems anymore. It will only continue to cause problems for the human race as a whole.

Selfish desires are part of the current human nature. People want things, you can't get past that. The only way for them to not "want" something is for them to not know about it. And if you're talking about controlling what they do and do not know as a way to dictate their lives, that is the most absolute form of slavery and control there is.


You also run the issue of creating all this stuff. In order to maximize production, you'd have to tell everyone what to do, taking away their free will to do what they want.

Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way. Everything else could be filled by people who want to help. Volunteers are in no short demand, people like to help and their would be ample opportunity for them to, until 100% of production could be ran by technology. In such a system where people aren't suppressed and they don't feel like slaves, they will find ways to use their time productively. People don't need to be controlled in the ways that the current systems control people. That needs to stop.

All those machines have to be made and programmed.

Reply: I could sit hear and try to explain it all to you in great detail, but it wouldn't matter. You seem to think that you know everything.

Question: What are you basing your assumptions on?
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:54:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:47:45 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:36:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:26:20 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).


However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

Reply: The system doesn't say that everyone would get a plane. But whatever can be sustainable and available for everyone as it pertains to air travel, it would be.

But very little is actually in large enough quantity for everyone. Even when it comes to something as simple as cars, people out number them over 10 to 1. And thats including all the junker cars that still roll around.

So how would cars be distributed? When we currently have 10 people per car? Crank up production 100 fold? Kill off 90% of humans? Ration it out, saying some people can have a car, and some people can't?



The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

Reply: The earth has a lot more resources than you seem to think it does OreEle.

I think there is a lot fewer than you seem to think. With two of the key resources being labor and time.

There is a lot of waste. Waste that could be recycled and used for future products. Like I said, it's not a make a wish foundation. It's not a genie bottle and it's not a magic wand. It's an efficient system whose organization and decisions are guided by technological data, not people's opinions and desires. Just because you want a plane or a 1000" television, doesn't mean you get one. You have to rethink how you see life. Selfish desires cannot run human systems anymore. It will only continue to cause problems for the human race as a whole.

Selfish desires are part of the current human nature. People want things, you can't get past that. The only way for them to not "want" something is for them to not know about it. And if you're talking about controlling what they do and do not know as a way to dictate their lives, that is the most absolute form of slavery and control there is.

Do you disagree with this? Do you believe that humans do not naturally want things? If you accept that they do (which our current society is a strong indicator of, as well as 95% of all our past soceities), then how do you plan on changing them?



You also run the issue of creating all this stuff. In order to maximize production, you'd have to tell everyone what to do, taking away their free will to do what they want.

Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way. Everything else could be filled by people who want to help. Volunteers are in no short demand, people like to help and their would be ample opportunity for them to, until 100% of production could be ran by technology. In such a system where people aren't suppressed and they don't feel like slaves, they will find ways to use their time productively. People don't need to be controlled in the ways that the current systems control people. That needs to stop.

All those machines have to be made and programmed.

Reply: I could sit hear and try to explain it all to you in great detail, but it wouldn't matter. You seem to think that you know everything.

Question: What are you basing your assumptions on?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:07:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way.
If that were true technology and machines would already be doing it. Clearly either they are insufficient to the task or incentives are not available to utilize them properly.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:45:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 8:07:04 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way.
If that were true technology and machines would already be doing it. Clearly either they are insufficient to the task or incentives are not available to utilize them properly.

Reply: They aren't implemented properly because of the faults of the monetary system.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:52:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 8:45:44 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:07:04 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Reply: You don't have to tell anyone what to do, that's the whole point. People can do what they want. Technology and machines produce everything that can be produced in such a way.
If that were true technology and machines would already be doing it. Clearly either they are insufficient to the task or incentives are not available to utilize them properly.

Reply: They aren't implemented properly because of the faults of the monetary system.

As opposed to having no incentive system whatsoever.

Note that you've made an assertion here, not an explanation.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 9:16:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:54:28 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:47:45 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:36:01 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:26:20 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:09:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
That runs into the problem of "everyone gets X" but the quantum useful level of something makes that impossible.

There are 6+ billion people on earth. Now if the earth can produce 24 billion tons of food a year, that works out fine (eveyone gets 4 tons of food a year).


However, it is not likely that we can produce 6+ billion planes a year, and so not everyone can have one. And you can't cut the planes into little piece so that everyone can have a pieve, since that is useless.

Reply: The system doesn't say that everyone would get a plane. But whatever can be sustainable and available for everyone as it pertains to air travel, it would be.

But very little is actually in large enough quantity for everyone. Even when it comes to something as simple as cars, people out number them over 10 to 1. And thats including all the junker cars that still roll around.

So how would cars be distributed? When we currently have 10 people per car? Crank up production 100 fold? Kill off 90% of humans? Ration it out, saying some people can have a car, and some people can't?

Reply: You would order it. Not everyone would need a car, people in the cities wouldn't need cars. Considering that these new cities would house a huge portion of the human population, most of your concerns are satisfied. Also, there is plenty enough material to make cars and everything else. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but it's about a whole new system. One that is efficient and cuts on and reuses the waste of materials.




The same goes for any and every piece of luxury. Be it planes, hot rod cars, yaughts, or 84in 3-D plasma screen T.V.

Reply: The earth has a lot more resources than you seem to think it does OreEle.

I think there is a lot fewer than you seem to think. With two of the key resources being labor and time.

There is a lot of waste. Waste that could be recycled and used for future products. Like I said, it's not a make a wish foundation. It's not a genie bottle and it's not a magic wand. It's an efficient system whose organization and decisions are guided by technological data, not people's opinions and desires. Just because you want a plane or a 1000" television, doesn't mean you get one. You have to rethink how you see life. Selfish desires cannot run human systems anymore. It will only continue to cause problems for the human race as a whole.

Selfish desires are part of the current human nature. People want things, you can't get past that. The only way for them to not "want" something is for them to not know about it. And if you're talking about controlling what they do and do not know as a way to dictate their lives, that is the most absolute form of slavery and control there is.

Do you disagree with this? Do you believe that humans do not naturally want things? If you accept that they do (which our current society is a strong indicator of, as well as 95% of all our past soceities), then how do you plan on changing them?

Just because humans want everything doesn't mean that the earth can provide it. We don't live in a fairytale. humans can't get everything they want right now can they? No. They never can have everything they want unless they find a magic wand. The new system is to provide to everyone what can be provided based on the total resources the earth can provide. That is efficiency. There is no opinion involved. Desire doesn't matter. If the earth can't provide it, then it can't be provided. But you aren't going to get 3 cars, while taking away the one car that 2 other people could have. Their will be no "wealthy class". A minority doesn't get to have a higher standard of living by leeching it from the majority. Anybody that doesn't like it or objects, they are the people that would like have more than everyone else, they want to take from others to become part of a "wealthy" minority. That mentality must change, because it is not sustainable. It is the next stage in human mentality and human civilization. Evolution of intelligence will make this happen regardless of whether someone opposes it or not. It's only a matter of time. It's not if, it's when. Humans are becoming more intelligent and any common man or woman can see the flaws in the current system.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 9:54:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Also, there is plenty enough material to make cars and everything else. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but it's about a whole new system. One that is efficient and cuts on and reuses the waste of materials.
Wishful thinking, not demonstrated production techniques.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 2:59:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 9:54:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Also, there is plenty enough material to make cars and everything else. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but it's about a whole new system. One that is efficient and cuts on and reuses the waste of materials.
Wishful thinking, not demonstrated production techniques.

Reply: Your refutation has nothing to support it. It is not wishful thinking at all. Maybe you should take a little time to see how technology produces items, how much waste and materials can be recycled, how different techniques can be implemented and how they work, and how much raw material there actually is on earth. Until you do that, I will not take you seriously. You seem to constantly make unjustified arguments and comments of mockery. I will start to ignore this type of behavior from you in the future.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 3:11:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 2:59:28 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 9:54:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Also, there is plenty enough material to make cars and everything else. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but it's about a whole new system. One that is efficient and cuts on and reuses the waste of materials.
Wishful thinking, not demonstrated production techniques.

Reply: Your refutation has nothing to support it.
It has your text and what that text lacks to support it. But remember-- the burden of proof is on you. I know you're not used to logic, but it's necessary.

Maybe you should take a little time to see how technology produces items
It doesn't without human input. And you've shown none of this.

how much waste and materials can be recycled
Recycling is frequently costly in resources other than the ones recycled. Sometimes those resources are more valuable than the output (When they aren't, the market recycles, though it usually does so in places where there is cheaper labor)

how different techniques can be implemented
That's so vague it would take a thousand lifetimes to thoroughly research
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 3:35:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 3:11:24 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/19/2011 2:59:28 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 9:54:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Also, there is plenty enough material to make cars and everything else. I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers, but it's about a whole new system. One that is efficient and cuts on and reuses the waste of materials.
Wishful thinking, not demonstrated production techniques.

Reply: Your refutation has nothing to support it.
It has your text and what that text lacks to support it. But remember-- the burden of proof is on you. I know you're not used to logic, but it's necessary.

Maybe you should take a little time to see how technology produces items
It doesn't without human input. And you've shown none of this.

how much waste and materials can be recycled
Recycling is frequently costly in resources other than the ones recycled. Sometimes those resources are more valuable than the output (When they aren't, the market recycles, though it usually does so in places where there is cheaper labor)

how different techniques can be implemented
That's so vague it would take a thousand lifetimes to thoroughly research

Reply: I can see that you are a waste of my time now. All you do is use irrational logic in your claims. I don't have time to waste with such things, other people have valid things to say and logical arguments that need attention.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 3:40:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Let it be shown for the record that he was unable to name a single logical problem in my statement before declaring this. ^_^.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 4:19:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 3:40:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Let it be shown for the record that he was unable to name a single logical problem in my statement before declaring this. ^_^.

Reply: Let it be shown for the record that I will not explain common sense to everyone who does not understand it. I am on this website to discuss important issues with people who are intelligent and use good sense.

To Ragnar: Your irrational arguments waste people's time. I don't have the time to explain every little thing that you do not understand. I am sorry.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 6:57:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 4:19:51 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/19/2011 3:40:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Let it be shown for the record that he was unable to name a single logical problem in my statement before declaring this. ^_^.

Reply: Let it be shown for the record that I will not explain common sense to everyone who does not understand it. I am on this website to discuss important issues with people who are intelligent and use good sense.

To Ragnar: Your irrational arguments waste people's time. I don't have the time to explain every little thing that you do not understand. I am sorry.

I don't understand either. Would you mind explaining?

You know what they say. If one person says you're drunk, tell him to F off. If three people say you are drunk, you may not want to drive.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 8:59:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 4:19:51 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/19/2011 3:40:15 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Let it be shown for the record that he was unable to name a single logical problem in my statement before declaring this. ^_^.

Reply: Let it be shown for the record that I will not explain common sense to everyone who does not understand it. I am on this website to discuss important issues with people who are intelligent and use good sense.

To Ragnar: Your irrational arguments waste people's time. I don't have the time to explain every little thing that you do not understand. I am sorry.

Tiel, I'm curious as to how you would account for the manual labor needed for this project. How would you recycle all these resources that are now wasted?? Who would build all the machines, and program the computers that do all this work?? What incentive would these people have to spend time learning how to do these things, then spend their time doing it while others are out basking in the sun at the beach, or playing video games.
It sounds like you tout a society that has no incentive to do anything. You talk about becoming more intelligent, but how would that work?? What incentive do I have to even go to school if I'm going to recieve the same things even if I don't waste my time going?? Would you just draft certain people and make them do the work while the majority of society does nothing for themselves?? That is happening enough already, but at least we have an incentive to go to school, work and pay taxes to support the others who don't want to. We're already getting a taste of this kind of society and it sucks, I can't imagine if our entire society has that mentality.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 9:14:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Tiel, I'm curious as to how you would account for the manual labor needed for this project. How would you recycle all these resources that are now wasted?? Who would build all the machines, and program the computers that do all this work?? What incentive would these people have to spend time learning how to do these things, then spend their time doing it while others are out basking in the sun at the beach, or playing video games.
It sounds like you tout a society that has no incentive to do anything. You talk about becoming more intelligent, but how would that work?? What incentive do I have to even go to school if I'm going to recieve the same things even if I don't waste my time going?? Would you just draft certain people and make them do the work while the majority of society does nothing for themselves?? That is happening enough already, but at least we have an incentive to go to school, work and pay taxes to support the others who don't want to. We're already getting a taste of this kind of society and it sucks, I can't imagine if our entire society has that mentality.
There's no way to get around the problem of still needing people to work.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 10:18:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 6:16:59 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 5:32:35 PM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 2:12:34 PM, Austin96 wrote:
The problem with this type of economy is that our lifestyles would have to change immeasurably, and it would be accepted by very few people.

Reply: It is becoming more accepted as our current system is showing it's many faults.

Reply: You would just order whatever car you want and when you don't want it anymore, you give it back. Would you have a problem with that?

That's a great sales job, but there's a little more to it than that. According to the video, one of our problems is with owning property. We need to move from owning property to owning "access". He says we only use our cars 10% of the month, the other 90% it is simply stored. 90% of the month, our vehicle is wasted. He seems to be implying that we would need to go to a site to pick up a vehicle to get where we're going. Then we would drop it off for someone else to use, and get another one when we need to return. In other words, we would be sharing cars. We wouldn't own one but we'd have access to one. That way EVERYONE has access to a vehicle, not just the elite.