Total Posts:69|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Abolition of Money

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 1:53:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'm not quite there yet but I'm seriously taking this into consideration.

Besides the realization that money itself is essentially debt and that the system we have now will inevitably result in inflation, it has come to my attention that once all jobs become automated in a monetary society anyone who doesn't own the robots is screwed.

What if this monetary society wasn't replaced with the old system of inefficient money-less trade but rather replaced with something else; a whole knew scope of economics based on increasing everyone's living standards which the whole point of technology which would threaten to undermine us in the way of economics we have now if they continue.

Discuss.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 1:57:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
There has been no question in my mind that the monetary system ought to be abolished. In fact, I remember when I was a child, I asked my mom "Why do we even need money?" It's something that has hindered the human race for far too long.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:11:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 1:57:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
There has been no question in my mind that the monetary system ought to be abolished. In fact, I remember when I was a child, I asked my mom "Why do we even need money?" It's something that has hindered the human race for far too long.

Can you describe exactly how things would work without it?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:14:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Can you further explain your statement that money is essentially debt?

Money has changed tremendously in what it was. Now it's just numbers as a balance of worth. I hardly carry any greenbacks these days.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:21:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:14:58 AM, innomen wrote:
Can you further explain your statement that money is essentially debt?

Money has changed tremendously in what it was. Now it's just numbers as a balance of worth. I hardly carry any greenbacks these days.

It's debt to the bank. Not trying to dodge but Geo knows more about all this than I do, you should ask him about it. I haven't really figured it out yet.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:23:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 1:53:08 AM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not quite there yet but I'm seriously taking this into consideration.

Send me a debate on it if you think it's a good idea. ;)
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:25:56 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:23:43 AM, Puck wrote:
At 5/13/2010 1:53:08 AM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm not quite there yet but I'm seriously taking this into consideration.

Send me a debate on it if you think it's a good idea. ;)

I haven't thought about it long enough. But I would really like to see someone else debate it.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:29:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:28:06 AM, Puck wrote:
Now why am I not surprised? :P

I just had said I didn't know enough about it before you asked. Why would I want to debate? Jesus Christ, smartass.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:32:44 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:29:57 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:28:06 AM, Puck wrote:
Now why am I not surprised? :P

I just had said I didn't know enough about it before you asked. Why would I want to debate? Jesus Christ, smartass.

And how many occasions have you knocked back debates upon subjects you do strongly advocate and push? I can think of quite a few. :) That is what the comment was directed at.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:36:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:14:58 AM, innomen wrote:
Can you further explain your statement that money is essentially debt?

All the money the Federal Reserve prints for the government, is loaned money that the government has to pay back to the Federal Reserve bankers. Every dollar printed is a piece of debt.

Money = debt.

On the front of a dollar bill you will see the words "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private."

Money has changed tremendously in what it was. Now it's just numbers as a balance of worth. I hardly carry any greenbacks these days.

3% of the money supply is paper. 97% of money is digital. All it takes to put more money into circulation these days is to punch in a few numbers on a computer screen. Money has no value. It's essentially Monopoly money.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:43:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:11:54 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Can you describe exactly how things would work without it?

Resource-based economy:

"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."

-- http://www.thevenusproject.com...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:53:54 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:45:38 AM, FREEDO wrote:
But what's the incentive for people to work?

Rather than the primitive incentive of mere survival, the incentive would be far greater. Flying shoes, space hotels, Mars colonies, and research and development of technology and sciences. People have such weak and mundane ideas of an incentive. Aim higher!

On a realistic level however, people will feel obliged to work to maintain the resource rationing infrastructure that enables a higher standard of living. Instead of working for worthless money, you'd be a part of a collaborative effort to maintain yours and everyone else's living quality.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:53:54 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:45:38 AM, FREEDO wrote:
But what's the incentive for people to work?

Rather than the primitive incentive of mere survival, the incentive would be far greater. Flying shoes, space hotels, Mars colonies, and research and development of technology and sciences. People have such weak and mundane ideas of an incentive. Aim higher!

On a realistic level however, people will feel obliged to work to maintain the resource rationing infrastructure that enables a higher standard of living. Instead of working for worthless money, you'd be a part of a collaborative effort to maintain yours and everyone else's living quality.

Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:09:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.

Higher standard of living is a good direct incentive. I suppose if such a system were applied, there may have to be some sort of query on each household to confirm that they are contributing and deserve the rationing of the resources. That way if no work, no productivity, then you can go and be homeless and don't expect any resources.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:10:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:09:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.

Higher standard of living is a good direct incentive. I suppose if such a system were applied, there may have to be some sort of query on each household to confirm that they are contributing and deserve the rationing of the resources. That way if no work, no productivity, then you can go and be homeless and don't expect any resources.

In other words, force them to work.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:13:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 2:53:54 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:45:38 AM, FREEDO wrote:
But what's the incentive for people to work?

Rather than the primitive incentive of mere survival, the incentive would be far greater. Flying shoes, space hotels, Mars colonies, and research and development of technology and sciences. People have such weak and mundane ideas of an incentive. Aim higher!

On a realistic level however, people will feel obliged to work to maintain the resource rationing infrastructure that enables a higher standard of living. Instead of working for worthless money, you'd be a part of a collaborative effort to maintain yours and everyone else's living quality.

That sounds lovely but I don't think it works.

People work, to acquire or maintain a certain standard of living. I hate my job, I only do it for the money. If resources are simply assigned to me regardless why would I work? In truth society requires a certain form of economic servitude. You could replace money as the source of incentive with loyalty to the state and the colloborative infrastructure, which is fascism.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:14:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:09:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.

Higher standard of living is a good direct incentive. I suppose if such a system were applied, there may have to be some sort of query on each household to confirm that they are contributing and deserve the rationing of the resources. That way if no work, no productivity, then you can go and be homeless and don't expect any resources.

So it's identical to a money based incentive system, just with direct state involvement in every household.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:15:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
You see, I'm in between. I think the basic necessities needed for life should be made universal. But luxury should be earned.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:16:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:10:37 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:09:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.

Higher standard of living is a good direct incentive. I suppose if such a system were applied, there may have to be some sort of query on each household to confirm that they are contributing and deserve the rationing of the resources. That way if no work, no productivity, then you can go and be homeless and don't expect any resources.

In other words, force them to work.

I think people should earn or deserve what they get. However, I think a minimal quality of basic survival should be guaranteed to all, whether they contribute or not.

So no. People aren't forced to work because they will automatically be provided with the survival basics. NO ONE will have to struggle to survive. Only struggle to thrive.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:17:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Geo, has it occurred to you that your resource-based economy is just a fancy word for Communism?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:17:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:15:59 AM, FREEDO wrote:
You see, I'm in between. I think the basic necessities needed for life should be made universal. But luxury should be earned.

Ahh, you beat me to it. I posted the same thing at the same moment. XD
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:17:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:16:17 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:10:37 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:09:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 2:55:58 AM, FREEDO wrote:
Geo, that's really just not good enough. It needs direct practical incentive.

Higher standard of living is a good direct incentive. I suppose if such a system were applied, there may have to be some sort of query on each household to confirm that they are contributing and deserve the rationing of the resources. That way if no work, no productivity, then you can go and be homeless and don't expect any resources.

In other words, force them to work.

I think people should earn or deserve what they get. However, I think a minimal quality of basic survival should be guaranteed to all, whether they contribute or not.

So no. People aren't forced to work because they will automatically be provided with the survival basics. NO ONE will have to struggle to survive. Only struggle to thrive.

How minimal are we talking about, and why should society be required to support these... for want of a better term, 'useless eaters'.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:18:56 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:17:39 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:15:59 AM, FREEDO wrote:
You see, I'm in between. I think the basic necessities needed for life should be made universal. But luxury should be earned.

Ahh, you beat me to it. I posted the same thing at the same moment. XD

But that isn't really what you described now is it.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:22:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:15:59 AM, FREEDO wrote:
I think the basic necessities needed for life should be made universal.

Why? By whom? Why should I care about you?
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:22:18 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:17:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:16:17 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I think people should earn or deserve what they get. However, I think a minimal quality of basic survival should be guaranteed to all, whether they contribute or not.

So no. People aren't forced to work because they will automatically be provided with the survival basics. NO ONE will have to struggle to survive. Only struggle to thrive.

How minimal are we talking about,

Shelter, food, clothing, hygiene.

and why should society be required to support these... for want of a better term, 'useless eaters'.

Why should a "useless eater" get to reside on earth? People were born out of this earth and shouldn't have to pay to live on it. Plus, "society" isn't supporting them directly. Society is contributing to a central repository of resources.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:24:52 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:18:56 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:17:39 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
But that isn't really what you described now is it.

Your right. My initial response wasn't well thought out. It wasn't til you brought up your point that allowed me to properly elaborate on that.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2010 3:25:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/13/2010 3:22:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:17:57 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 5/13/2010 3:16:17 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
I think people should earn or deserve what they get. However, I think a minimal quality of basic survival should be guaranteed to all, whether they contribute or not.

So no. People aren't forced to work because they will automatically be provided with the survival basics. NO ONE will have to struggle to survive. Only struggle to thrive.

How minimal are we talking about,

Shelter, food, clothing, hygiene.

and why should society be required to support these... for want of a better term, 'useless eaters'.

Why should a "useless eater" get to reside on earth? People were born out of this earth and shouldn't have to pay to live on it. Plus, "society" isn't supporting them directly. Society is contributing to a central repository of resources.

Which means that society is supporting them directly.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.