At 3/18/2012 2:07:32 PM, AdamDeben wrote:
Capitalism can't be hurt; it's an abstraction. The abundance of air doesn't hurt capitalism; it just means that economic laws don't apply to air.Correct; the concept of money is an illusion. I mean you can't make profit off of wind, tides, and the sun; like you can with oil. It hurts the system. I'm surprised that someone as intelligent as you think you are would even think that argument is relevant.
Money is not an illusion; it's just only useful for scarce goods and services. When energy is no longer scarce, people will no longer spend money or undue time on energy. I can stand in the sun all I want, but I won't get energy from it unless I construct and maintian solar panels, and people can make profits off of solar panels. Solar cookers directly use solar energy to do work, so we can say that energy for solar cookers is not scarce; thus, people don't spend money to power their solar cookers. Solar panels currently aren't powerful enough to power cars on solar energy alone, and until they are, people will spend money to power their cars.
If I build a machine that generates energy from the tides, and not everyone has such a machine, then I will indeed make a profit off of the tides.
It costs resources, and the resources needed to harness the energy would be calculated into the system. Monetary economics has no regard for this; just regard for profit. It's not necessary to sell the energy because it's already there. It would be deceiving to try to make profit off of the sun.
You can't put lava in a car or even distribute it among cities. You distribute the energy, and you can do so without a concern for profit.
Does that mean that it costs nothing to set up a system to extract energy from a volcano? If so, then why is nobody extracting the energy now? If not, then the energy could still be sold at a price, and thus at a profit.
If people currently aren't extracting the energy because it takes too many resources, then how would the energy suddenly be worth the resources in an RBE?
And please don't say that it's because they wouldn't make a profit, because if it takes resources to get the energy, then the energy isn't scarce, and can thus be sold.
but it can't make profit, because others can easily access it for cheaper or for free. Eliminating monopoly, which corporations do not want.
It's also easier to tap than oil.
Then it would already be tapped.
If others could access it cheaper, then they would access it cheaper, too. If they could access it for free, then they'd already access it for free, then sell it to those who can't. If you say that you already can access it for free, then why aren't you?
There are more alternative energies. Oil is not sustainable. It takes millions of years to form from dead plants and we're consuming it a lot faster than that. Separate companies make the generators for the oil. Another company makes the oil. Another sells the oil. The last guy is unemployed.
We need solar or some other form of energy for cars. Like I said; and no one took seriously; you can't sell the sun. No one can hold a monopoly on the sun or the wind or tides. But you can with oil.
Harnessing solar energy, or other renewable sources, requires the construction of machinery. Companies are currently profiting off of solar cells, and some buildings are run entirely on their own solar energy, even in capitalism. Those of us who don't live in such sun-friendly areas buy our energy.
Then wouldn't the unemployed guy go get the volcano energy for free?
Remember, capitalism doesn't require a monopoly, just a supply and demand, and that's what's occuring already.The world never requires monopoly, but it happens anyway. Small businesses die from this, for lack of a better word.
Does the free market currently have any monopolies?
The system would track supply and demand Why don't you understand that, as I've told you a number of times how things would be tracked.
A computer can graph supply and demand, but it can't react to it. Prices contain both knowledge and incentive, but computers can only understand knowledge. There's also the fact that supply and demand inherently require a measure of want, which is impossible without some sort of price system.