I totally agree! I hear life was pretty sweet under Communism. Sure it kinda sucked if the central authorities made a boo-boo and accidentally allocated only 5 labour resources where they needed 20, but because of the "full employment" thing you could just as easily end up in a job with a team of 20 where they only really needed 5. OK, so Communism had a few minor foibles, but that's nothing a tidy piece of C code can't fix. In fact, I could probably help write that code. I want to make sure the resources go to the right place this time

YES! Bravo! You have just discovered the major cause for the current monetary system! And I agree with you 100%. Namely: Some people took it upon themselves to rule over everyone else within which they also set up rules about money and used violence to enforce them. This is how the current fraudulent monetary system came to be and this is the real cause and therefor the real problem! I congratulate you for discovering this!

I don't even need to point out how obvious it is some people recognized this system for the fraud that it is since these are the same people you correctly pointed out were "either slaughtered or marginalized".

Also a quick side note: No one forces people to accept bitcoins much like in the beginning no one forced people to accept some weight of precious metals in exchange for some value. And this is how a market regulated by market consumers operates.. as oppose to what you discovered caused today's problems - a market regulated by a violent central authority.


Ahh I knew we were doing too good for your cognitive dissonance not to kick in sooner rather than later. Of course when you, Mr. LightRider, tell little ole me how the world works, I should trust and believe you instead of question and request evidence to support your assertions. I'm afraid the human nature of our brain has again got the best of you and I cannot continue if you aren't willing to produce something other than your opinion as support to your main premise: "Any currency favors one arbitrary group of people over another"

But you realize you're not actually saying anything meaningful? Unless you can take a more reductionist approach to your explanations you're not going to convince anyone, except people who also think the way you do. You're just speaking in this meaningless holistic way that makes no sense to someone who knows to use methodological individualism as a basis for the explanation of social phenomenon.

Evoorhees has explained with methodological individualism the Mengerian account of why money is a naturally emergent phenomenon that serves an actual purpose, and how it would come about naturally even to a society of people who have no prior concept of money. He's not even really being prescriptive about it; he's being descriptive. It is explained by reducing the account to simple non-controversial statements, i.e. so that the explanation doesn't even assume some hyper-rational cooperation of people to come up with it. It just comes about on its own by individual humans being merely rational actors, and that is to say human action isn't just arbitrary action but goal-driven. Now, this isn't a rejection of the existence of collective groups -- of numbers of people lower than Dunbar's limit at least -- but it's just saying that any form of collectivism isn't even necessary explain money in a sufficient way.

And the Wikipedia link on economic calculation explains -- again using methodological individualism -- why money prices are needed for profit/loss accounting, and why profit/loss accounting is needed for a society to rationally economize and allocate resources, and for entrepreneurs to coordinate, on a macro scale. Prices actually mean something; they're not just arbitrarily set things (at least in a free market). They're a bottom-up reflection of the intersubjective valuations of things to the people in an economy, and of the availability of such things. Without prices you lack the necessary information to be able to calculate what is economically profitable to produce and what isn't. You won't get that information any other way than through the emergent processes of the price system. Certainly no central computer could have it because it doesn't have access to the dynamic minds of everybody in the society. So when you say 'Economic calculation is an abstraction and distorts our perceptions and values', I don't even know what that means. I'd say it's the complete opposite, but I'm not merely asserting it like you're doing. You can't just holistically dismiss any inconvenient economic explanation outright that comes your way as being some mere historical baggage. You actually have to criticize it, and use the same reductionistic approach to explain why what we're saying isn't actually true and why the Venus project ideas are right

Lecture: Calculation and Socialism | Joseph T. Salerno

Yes! You're doing great! You are very close to understanding the problem now. Just answer one more question: How did this monetary system come to be and how come it still exists? Remember you need to understand cause and effect to really understand our reality.


No, no.. I asked for evidence, not more mere statements. For instance when you make a statement "Gold favors those with easier access to it as opposed to those who have none." you have to show evidence how easy access translates into favoritism. For all I know I could have easy access to a gold mine but if I have to dig 5km below earth and nearly die digging it up I don't see how that favors me over someone else who can simply work on a field in no real danger, and sell me their crops for my gold..

The same goes for all the other forms of money you listed. You need to show me evidence how easy access translates into favoritism. Merely saying it is not evidence.

What exactly is this "system" you're talking about?


Can you prove this mere statement with evidence?

A system that promotes acquisitiveness, dominance and inequality will not lead to a better society. Any currency favors one arbitrary group of people over another, and will perpetuate the problems we have today.

Why? Because I'm not willing to be constrained by your ignorance?

Look, I know it causes too much cognitive dissonance to you when I show you what the reality really is and when this reality is conflicting with your beliefs neuroscience teaches us it's simply too much pain for you to be rational and change your belief and you're going to irrationally defend it instead. So I'm not going to engage with you beyond this post because it's pointless and I know you'll stick with your beliefs no matter what I say or what evidence I show to you.

But when you present as our only options a "resource based economy" regulated by scientific calculations vs a market economy regulated by a central authority I'm not willing to ignore the fact that there's more options, one of them being a market economy regulated exclusively by consumers in this economy (usually called a free market). But of course that's a pipe dream whereas your resource based economy is not, right?  

Anyway I know you are unable to listen and swallow this right now so I'll give you some more cognitive dissonance just for shits and giggles and I'll ask you again: If you can come up with a valid example of how the world could get into such huge debt using only bitcoins as money, an example that will make sense to at least 10people on this forum, I'll send you all my BTC.

I'm glad you recognize how silly you sound.

Again: No.

Against my better judgment.. 


How about neither?

If nobody works or needs to work because machines are doing everything then you're already living in utopia. What's the problem? Isn't that the whole goal of the Venus project you're so fond of? A fine goal, but the thing is without money you have no way to do economic calculation and so no rational way to allocate resources to where you're going to get the biggest bang for your buck. You get more scarcity, not a magical post-scarcity utopia.

Dude, this forum is a string of 1s and 0s. So is wikipedia and redtube. And gold is just a bunch of stupid electrons and protons and so are you.

Wow that is just so false that I don't know how to address it.

Does gold have any relationship to reality? Do Bitcoins? Do cigarettes and seashells and cattle have any relationship to reality? I think they clearly do. They are real. And, they are money. Sooooo... WTF are you talking about?

I never said that. I said that possibilities are not freedom.

Being free to do whatever you want does not mean you can do whatever you want for nothing (for "free"). And that has nothing to do with money. That's just how the world is. "There is no such thing as a free lunch". Sorry dude.

That's not money, that's reality.

Oh man, house doesn't grow like a plant, cars doesn't fall from the sky ready for you to drive,... All those things comes from men's work. Tha's not slavery that's reality.

Just witness two toddlers (who have no understanding of money or economics) fighting over a toy.