Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 10:43:08 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 [95] 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 »
  Print  
Author Topic: A Resource Based Economy  (Read 261228 times)
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
July 28, 2014, 07:10:49 AM
 #1881

http://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/blockchain-bootstrapping-resource-based-economy

While this blog post is not entirely accurate, it is trying to grasp the importance of transitioning away from an infinite consumption economy to a resource based economy. I intend to contact the author to help correct several errors in this piece.

Bitcoin combines money, the wrongest thing in the world, with software, the easiest thing in the world to get wrong.
Visit www.thevenusproject.com and www.theZeitgeistMovement.com.
1481150588
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481150588

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481150588
Reply with quote  #2

1481150588
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
giveBTCpls
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


View Profile
July 29, 2014, 12:47:31 PM
 #1882

This is, objectively speaking, the only way for future societies to function. Fiat, Bitcoin, and so on, it all will be irrelevant. We are headed towards this, the question is how long will transition be? thousands of years? Maybe, and Bitcoin may serve as one of the first steps into that transition.
We already can make houses pressing a button, tons a day:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYqBxEAtXZA

All of this is going to destroy any attempt at keeping a monetary system of any kind alive. Basic fact of life.

herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
July 29, 2014, 01:32:06 PM
 #1883

All of this is going to destroy any attempt at keeping a monetary system of any kind alive. Basic fact of life.

that's a giant fallacy. It's not the materials that make up prices, not even the workforce. It's demand. Even if you automate the shit out of this world, some things will always be more exclusive than others. For example, location location location.

Who's gonna get the exclusive penthouse? Who's gonna get the house at the beautiful lake?

You have two non-violent options to organize this:

  • Waiting lists.
  • Prices.

Even if you're gonna use waiting lists, some people may trade their positions in these waiting lists with each other, maybe with their positions in other waiting lists. Even then, congratulations, you have invented money again.

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
July 30, 2014, 02:07:01 PM
 #1884

"Critique" of the Zeitgeist movement from a left-anarchist perspective:

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anonymous-the-problem-with-zeitgeist

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
twiifm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
July 30, 2014, 03:22:41 PM
 #1885

I actually like Peter Josephs analysis of capitalism.  But I think RBE is a utopian pie in the sky that'll never happen
Norway
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336


View Profile
August 16, 2014, 05:51:12 PM
 #1886

wrongpassword
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 11

We have art in order not to die of truth


View Profile
August 17, 2014, 07:21:40 PM
 #1887

Serious calculation problems. Technology and free banking in a Friedmanian anarchocapitalist setting is all we need.

Donations here: 1GRxWWxYKEYgCmK1EtsGhC6LMMpRwA7JpF
Citizen Shane
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
September 13, 2014, 08:57:39 PM
 #1888

I'm not specifically a part of TZM but I see where this is going.

There are some fundamental flaws with a capitalistic system, State intervention or not. Most notable are the lack of a systems reference, lack of explicit concern for global resource depletion, and the mounds of structural violence it bestows upon various societies. I think capitalism was the most logical choice for humanity at the time of its inception, and you can perhaps make the argument that is the most sensible system to organize economic activity at the current moment.

However, it should be clear that it is not the end-game. We WILL enter into a post-capitalist age; whether it happens in 100 years, 1000 years, or 10000 years, this will occur. Consider the ways in which population growth, resource use, life support systems, technological advancement, and overall ephemeralization are trending and you will likely begin to understand this on a high level. I do not think we are there yet, but we are rapidly approaching the point (possibly this century) at which a post-capitalist transition is technically feasible. Of course, technical capacity is not the only barrier to such a transition and it would be silly to think such a massive metamorphosis would happen immediately given current constraints. What we are talking about is equal to or greater than the Neolithic Revolution in magnitude. But it is equally silly to conclude that social and economic evolution has come to a halt and our methods of economic organization will remain fundamentally static for the rest of humanity's time on this planet.

The particular attributes of any post-capitalist paradigm are not readily accepted and are not expected to be. Go back 15,000 years and ask a group of hunter-gatherers what the next economic paradigm will be and most would react much like the vehement capitalists of today: they would likely say no such paradigm exists, as the current one is the most logical and in the future it will remain fundamentally the same while possibly refining itself. Of course this analogy is absurd in an absolute regard, but it is axiomatically accurate.

With that said, these attributes are also apparent with the application of some critical thinking. The future economy plays out as an expanded series of "public libraries," in which all (or a vast majority of) industrial production is done in an automated fashion and the resulting goods are available on a basis of access rather than ownership. Hence, simply more complex public libraries with heavily advanced inventory management and distributive capabilities. This sort of system, once it is technically viable, makes currency, property, geopolitical debris, labor-for-income, etc. effectively obsolete relics (or fringe novelties at highest relevance).

All arguments against such a system appear to be products of status quo bias, ignorance, or truncated frames of reference. Most people confuse a proposition like "I philosophically disagree with this system" or "my static view of human nature and its role in human behavior precludes this system from existing" or "I cannot fathom resources being allocated properly without market forces" with an actual opposition to the proposition that "this system or something otherwise post-capitalist will emerge at some point during the future of humanity." Only after you understand this dynamic can you open your eyes and stop pretending that you have any control over the potential of the global zeitgeist.

Bitcoin is awesome. It's a pathway to open-source currency and value transfer within a capitalist framework. The system I have described and that TZM supports is a future pathway to total open-source economics in an entirely new framework.
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
October 25, 2014, 12:59:36 AM
 #1889

Three questions which point out the failures of the monetary market system. What do you propose to do about it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xGyKuyGhaE

Bitcoin combines money, the wrongest thing in the world, with software, the easiest thing in the world to get wrong.
Visit www.thevenusproject.com and www.theZeitgeistMovement.com.
calchuchesta
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 117


View Profile
October 25, 2014, 03:02:47 PM
 #1890

Three questions which point out the failures of the monetary market system. What do you propose to do about it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xGyKuyGhaE

Honestly there are no clear answers, what we know for a fact is the system can't solve all the problems, the system as we know it it's too limited. Can it be stretched forever? i dont know, if not, then what are the alternatives? I don't know. RBU is one? no one knows. It would need a worldwide centralized computer and all nations agreeing on this. This alone is delusional as hell.
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
October 27, 2014, 03:54:23 AM
 #1891

Three questions which point out the failures of the monetary market system. What do you propose to do about it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xGyKuyGhaE

Quote
1) Given the market economy requires consumption in order to maintain demand for human employment and further economic growth as needed, is there a structural incentive to reduce resource use, biodiversity loss, the global pollution footprint and hence assist the ever-increasing need for improved ecological sustainability in the world today?

Yes. It's the price. As resources get too used, and become scarce, their supply, and thus price, will go up. Things like cost of oil, gas, and other resources going up will make us look for cheaper alternatives, like solar, wind, nuclear, wave, and other more easily acquired, though less dense, sources of energy. Removing barriers to being able to bring lawsuits against companies that damage other's property (the environment those others live in), the barriers which are ironically instituted by regulations created by the environmental protection agencies meant to prevent pollution from happening in the first place, will help a lot too. (For example, we can't sue BP and Horizons for the oil spill, because they made a deal with the EPA that they will pay a relatively minor fine for the damage, as proscribed by prior environmental regulations and related punishments for damages, in exchange for protection against any future lawsuits by private entities).

Dude makes a blatant mistake here by claiming that the market "promotes and rewards infinite consumption." Yes, if we could consume infinitely, then the company creating that product would be able to make infinite products, but in the real world, real scarcity forces the market to look for alternatives when things we consume become more scarce. So, price of the scarce thing goes up, companies look for alternatives, jobs involved with the old consumption product die, jobs around a new product gets creates, and we move on to consuming something else. (Do note that, right now, mining out, refining, and burning oil is still much more efficient than mining materials for, creating, and using solar panels and batteries. We know this because one is much cheaper than the other, the price telling us how scarce and efficient each option is.


Quote
2) In an economic system where companies seek to limit their production costs (“cost efficiency”) in order to maximize profits and remain competitive against other producers, what structural incentive exists to keep human beings employed, in the wake of an emerging technological condition where the majority of jobs can now be done more cheaply and effectively by machine automation?

Human beings are able to perform much more diverse jobs than machines, and are much easier to teach complex tasks than computers. As long as this is true, we will still need human beings to perform jobs machines can't, OR perform jobs that machines are too expensive to use for. So the premise that "the majority of jobs can now be done more cheaply..." is false. Farming equipment can do the job much cheaper than human farmers, but we need humans to design, maintain, and operate it. Office software can create and manage documents and spreadsheets much faster and easier than dozens of humans with pencils, papers, and calculators, yet we need people to design and code this software, and know how to use it. Likewise, a fast food place that uses a burger making robot will not be able to compete with a fast food place where unskilled labor humans can be taught to make different types of burgers and other food items every few months. Robots are cheap only because they can make a lot of the same thing over and over, but the machines themselves are extremely expensive, so buying one of these pretty much locks you into producing a single type of item for a long time. And time is ALWAYS limited in our lives, so there will ALWAYS be something out there that we would rather hire someone else to do for us (clean house, walk dog, watch baby, cut lawn, etc.) The main limits are not machine automation making jobs obsolete, since that has been happening for centuries and has been creating more and more different jobs in the process. The main limits are the legal and regulatory limits to whom you can hire to do what and for how much.

So, to answer this question, the structural incentive is competition itself, driven by our need for things to be new, unique, and different, and by our ever scarce time, which means companies have to diversify and customize the products and services they can offer, and do it quicker, meaning those people who used to make shoes by hand, can now instead use those shoe-making robots to design a bigger variety of shoes, invent much more complex and technically advanced shoes, or make custom shoes that are very specific in design and function to each customer that orders them.

As for the "thinking machines" fear. we used to do all math on paper using nothing but pencils. Calculators came about, and instead of losing all our math skills to calculators, we simply used them as tools to make more complex math easier for everyone. Advanced calculators, and eventually computers came out, and instead of losing all our math jobs to computers, we are simply focusing on doing much more abstract math, such as calculating financial forecasts, mechanical loads on a construction design, or interaction of radio and magnetic fields for complex communications systems, at a MUCH higher and more complex level, letting computers do all the nitty gritty mathematics stuff. Even the much more advanced and involved stuff. This frees the financial analyst, bridge engineer, or communications systems designer, to focus on the larger picture and more abstract and complex designs, rather than have them slave in front of a paper and pencil, or even a calculator, for weeks for every single tiny change in their idea (changes that are now processed and results given for in seconds). These "scary" more and more complex thinking machines that are being shown as boogie men will simply keep making the job of thinking and processing data easier for us, just as calculators have improved on the abacus, and computers have improved on the calculator. So, for example, instead of losing your architectural design job to a thinking robot that can design architecture just as well as you could, you will work to come up with architectural concepts, like "Colonial mixed with Greek, X meters wide, Y meters deep, Z meters tall," the thinking robot will whip up the best design combination it can think up of, and you will spend your time tweaking to make sure it looks pleasing, unique, and functional, without having to recalculate every window and every load bearing wall's structural integrity.


By the way, side comment, his claim that "All it takes is 20% to 30% rate of unemployment to destabilize society into disorder and outrage" is complete and total bullshit. I won't even ask where he got that number from, but for the longest time women didn't even work, meaning that unemployment was near 50%. Right now, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000), 59% of the population in US is employed. That means that, right now, in USA, about 40% of the population is unemployed. No "disorder and outrage" here. At least not yet.


Quote
3) In an economic system which inherently generates class stratification and overall inequity, how can the effects of “Structural Violence” - a phenomenon noted by public health researchers to kill well over 18 million a year, generating a vast range of systemic detriments such as behavioral, emotional and physical disorders – be minimized or even removed as an effect?


"Structural Violence" is a made up bullshit term for "some people are not skilled enough to produce and survive in this world as others." There is no answer to this one, because we are all different, and some people will simply be more skilled, more driven, and more clever to survive than others. Moreso, there SHOULDN'T be an answer, because this difference and competitiveness is what drives us to create, invent, and come up with ways to survive more efficiently in the first place. A business that is committing so-called "structural violence" on a group of people by producing a product those people are not able to produce more efficiently, DRIVES those people to invent a completely new product that itself will be more efficient, or more useful, than that business's product. Overcoming of "structural violence" is the key to progress, and will not happen without it. This is why the idea of everyone being taken care of, and everything anyone ever wants can be provided to them, is the idea of nothing changing, everyone sitting around being content and not doing anything, and our race becoming a dull, boring parasite.

So, in short, Peter Joseph is still a moron with no understanding of the thing he criticizes, and no creativity or imagination.

herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
October 27, 2014, 02:24:49 PM
 #1892

yes, I've long stopped wasting my time with this Peter Joseph. He's a retard spouting the same cliches over and over again.

Right, in order to criticize the market economy, you first have to understand it. It's remarkable that diverse (social-/communist-) anarchist movements 200 years ago, before the information age, were intellectually much further developed than he and the whole Zeitgeist sect are.

The point of (left-) anarchists really has always rather been that free exchange and barter and markets may be fine and good, but the wealthier class would lobby the state in their interests, or, if there weren't any, create a state to protect their interests and their property.

But it's no wonder that PJ doesn't address that, as he's an authoritarian with a hierarchical mindset himself.

Also, the discourse of left-anarchism for 200 years has been less about the theoretical foundation of a more free and egalitarian society (as there was an agreement by and large), but more about the strategies of how to get there, i.e. how a road to actual implementation would look like, a discourse that is wholly and absolutely missing among the Zeitgeisters.

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
Fabrizio89
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 833


View Profile
October 27, 2014, 08:56:24 PM
 #1893

Technology is the key here, not much to talk about politics and economics. We are already seeing the effects of it and entering in an era of abundance, if you follow trends and numbers you will see many practical examples, like the number of overweight people is now higher than malnourished ones.

https://1broker.com/m/r.php?i=2479
Trade stocks, commodities, currencies with bitcoins! Up to 200x Leverage.
AtheistAKASaneBrain
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602


View Profile
October 28, 2014, 01:37:57 PM
 #1894

Really, the tough part is the the transition between our current capitalist system, and some future post scarcity system. Once you get fully to post scarcity, if there is even a market, the prices are so low that everything is basically free. So no one has jobs, but there is such an abundance of production that they can still have all they want. The problem is when we are loosing tons of jobs to automation, but the transition to post scarcity is incomplete, and there are still market sectors where there is a scarce supply of important products. How do those who loose the jobs pay for the things that still are expensive?
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
October 29, 2014, 12:04:39 AM
 #1895

yes, I've long stopped wasting my time with this Peter Joseph. He's a retard spouting the same cliches over and over again.

Right, in order to criticize the market economy, you first have to understand it. It's remarkable that diverse (social-/communist-) anarchist movements 200 years ago, before the information age, were intellectually much further developed than he and the whole Zeitgeist sect are.

The point of (left-) anarchists really has always rather been that free exchange and barter and markets may be fine and good, but the wealthier class would lobby the state in their interests, or, if there weren't any, create a state to protect their interests and their property.

But it's no wonder that PJ doesn't address that, as he's an authoritarian with a hierarchical mindset himself.

Also, the discourse of left-anarchism for 200 years has been less about the theoretical foundation of a more free and egalitarian society (as there was an agreement by and large), but more about the strategies of how to get there, i.e. how a road to actual implementation would look like, a discourse that is wholly and absolutely missing among the Zeitgeisters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUtv5E6CkLE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cnuRRWZxSE

Bitcoin combines money, the wrongest thing in the world, with software, the easiest thing in the world to get wrong.
Visit www.thevenusproject.com and www.theZeitgeistMovement.com.
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
October 29, 2014, 03:31:27 PM
 #1896


i wasn't talking about the trite freemarket vs zeitgeist and molyneux vs joseph discussion, i was talking about something else, and you pretty much confirm my suspicion.

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
October 29, 2014, 09:13:37 PM
 #1897


i wasn't talking about the trite freemarket vs zeitgeist and molyneux vs joseph discussion, i was talking about something else, and you pretty much confirm my suspicion.

That something else being?

Bitcoin combines money, the wrongest thing in the world, with software, the easiest thing in the world to get wrong.
Visit www.thevenusproject.com and www.theZeitgeistMovement.com.
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 02:35:38 PM
 #1898

Really, the tough part is the the transition between our current capitalist system, and some future post scarcity system.

In order to believe in "post scarcity," you must believe that in the future, all technological progress and innovation will stop. Otherwise technological progress that makes things less scarce will only open up our resources and time to create ever more complex technology and inventions, which will in turn be scarce until we figure out how to make them more efficient.

abrahamlitcoin
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81

♔ of ♥


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 02:53:59 PM
 #1899

Really, the tough part is the the transition between our current capitalist system, and some future post scarcity system.

In order to believe in "post scarcity," you must believe that in the future, all technological progress and innovation will stop. Otherwise technological progress that makes things less scarce will only open up our resources and time to create ever more complex technology and inventions, which will in turn be scarce until we figure out how to make them more efficient.

So its basically supply and demand?

Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
October 30, 2014, 09:51:48 PM
 #1900


In order to believe in "post scarcity," you must believe that in the future, all technological progress and innovation will stop. Otherwise technological progress that makes things less scarce will only open up our resources and time to create ever more complex technology and inventions, which will in turn be scarce until we figure out how to make them more efficient.

I am willing to entertain the possibility that at some point technological progress may in fact stop.  Eventually there are laws of physics that constrain what can exist and what can be made out of the 90-odd stable atoms.  Once you climb to the end of THAT curve, and gain control of all the matter and energy you want, it's hard to understand what else may be done.

But, at that point we're also talking about immortal post-human entities having no recognizable resemblance to ourselves, living in Dyson spheres made of computronium and using computers the mass of Jupiter.  We're talking about beings who can send their encoded consciousnesses riding laser beams around the galaxy and have new bodies built at the destination, or exist simultaneously in many different bodies, light-years apart, and reintegrate their consciousness into a single coherent (though not necessarily to us today) experiential reality at some later time in some other place, or custom design and fabricate (and at will, become) new biological lifeforms.

What "post-scarcity" looks like is difficult for us to imagine or understand.  We are still a "species" instead of having whatever biology (or lack thereof) we decide we want.  We have DNA, instincts, desires, and abilities which are still influenced by biological evolution, and by the time we hit post-scarcity (if in fact post-scarcity is a thing that can happen) that will no longer be the case. 

Pages: « 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 [95] 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!