Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 04:51:20 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 261597 times)
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 31, 2014, 01:39:46 AM
 #1901


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. 


Why do you have to make it so hard to understand? Do you charge your children for their meals because food is scarce? The term scarcity doesn't mean finite. It means not enough to go around to meet basic needs. It's about need, not greed. It's a choice, not an equation.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
1481388680
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388680

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388680
Reply with quote  #2

1481388680
Report to moderator
1481388680
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388680

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388680
Reply with quote  #2

1481388680
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481388680
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388680

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388680
Reply with quote  #2

1481388680
Report to moderator
1481388680
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388680

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388680
Reply with quote  #2

1481388680
Report to moderator
1481388680
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481388680

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481388680
Reply with quote  #2

1481388680
Report to moderator
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
October 31, 2014, 02:06:12 AM
 #1902

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.

Progress will be scarce...

There will always be scarcity. If something is not scarce, it is simply excluded from the realm of economic goods. Like sea water.
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
October 31, 2014, 07:41:53 AM
 #1903

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.

Progress will be scarce...

There will always be scarcity. If something is not scarce, it is simply excluded from the realm of economic goods. Like sea water.

Which is exactly the problem. The money value analysis ignores reality in favor of some distorting value theory.

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.
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
October 31, 2014, 09:29:51 AM
 #1904

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.

Progress will be scarce...

There will always be scarcity. If something is not scarce, it is simply excluded from the realm of economic goods. Like sea water.

Which is exactly the problem. The money value analysis ignores reality in favor of some distorting value theory.

No, the things that are not scarce need not be governed by the market mechanism, precisely because they are not scarce. Sea water, sunsets, daylight. Scarce means they are wanted in greater quantity than what is available. The free market makes sure that those resources are channelled to the places where they are most wanted by everybody, not just the governments and wannabe government types.
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
October 31, 2014, 12:02:27 PM
 #1905

That something else being?

work on your reading comprehension

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

Activity: 840


View Profile
October 31, 2014, 03:04:30 PM
 #1906


Why do you have to make it so hard to understand? Do you charge your children for their meals because food is scarce? The term scarcity doesn't mean finite. It means not enough to go around to meet basic needs. It's about need, not greed. It's a choice, not an equation.

Oh, well, that's much easier.  All that would require is for there to be some agency capable of forcing all human beings and nations to cooperate whether they want to or not. 

We'll probably have that problem solved within another 70 years at the outside.  Could be within 30 if we're "lucky."

cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
October 31, 2014, 03:12:53 PM
 #1907


Why do you have to make it so hard to understand? Do you charge your children for their meals because food is scarce? The term scarcity doesn't mean finite. It means not enough to go around to meet basic needs. It's about need, not greed. It's a choice, not an equation.

Oh, well, that's much easier.  All that would require is for there to be some agency capable of forcing all human beings and nations to cooperate whether they want to or not. 

We'll probably have that problem solved within another 70 years at the outside.  Could be within 30 if we're "lucky."


Government agencies don't force parents to feed their children. They choose to. It's just amazing to me how living in a developing nation opens your eyes to how generous poor people can be, especially with food. Maybe the world needs to be beaten back to the stone age in order to find their humanity.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
October 31, 2014, 09:19:00 PM
 #1908


Government agencies don't force parents to feed their children. They choose to. It's just amazing to me how living in a developing nation opens your eyes to how generous poor people can be, especially with food. Maybe the world needs to be beaten back to the stone age in order to find their humanity.

Of course.  But parents who feed their children have legally sanctioned power (at least in most societies) to force their children's cooperation.  The children are not permitted to undertake adult responsibilities.  Decisions are made for their welfare by other people. 

When all human beings are treated the way we now treat children, there will be no further obstacle to feeding, clothing, and housing them all.  Whatever agency is capable f treating them as children is capable of forcing them to cooperate.  And like a good parent, we presume that agency will feed, clothe, and house humans because it chooses to.  We could be wrong about this, but that's the optimistic view at least.
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
November 01, 2014, 09:10:24 AM
 #1909

Quote
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.

This is exactly the point Joseph makes in the Molyneux discussion.

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.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
November 01, 2014, 11:25:00 AM
 #1910

Quote
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.

This is exactly the point Joseph makes in the Molyneux discussion.
They believe in a magic man that is firm and strong and always stands for principles. Then they also believe the principle of selfishness means you will vow to be non violent even if it's in your own selfish interest. I think libertarianism is a fetish.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
thejaytiesto
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770



View Profile
November 01, 2014, 04:55:54 PM
 #1911

RBU, no money and no private property makes sense. What can you gain if there is nothing to gain (everything can be lended) and properties have no value.

Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
November 02, 2014, 04:00:02 AM
 #1912


They believe in a magic man that is firm and strong and always stands for principles. Then they also believe the principle of selfishness means you will vow to be non violent even if it's in your own selfish interest. I think libertarianism is a fetish.

I've been watching the Hong Kong protests, and those people are committed to libertarian ideals in a way that is profoundly needed and even heroic.  It's very moving, and also WEIRD, to hear a thousand voices singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" from Les Miserables, in Cantonese!  The personal risks and self-sacrifice they are undertaking for the sake of their libertarianism are just stunning.  In a lot of cases you can see the fear on their faces or hear it in their voices, but they are there anyway, even knowing that it means they'll get hunted down like dogs later, or at least blacklisted from every possible profession, if they fail to get international support. And maybe even if they do, since the Chinese government is kind of like that.

And then I look at the irrelevant, stupid greedy crap that American libertarians are worried about, and how most of it seems driven (or at least co-opted) specifically by corporate wealth and greed and complete disregard for the society and people around them. The contrast is like night and day. 

This is kind of like the difference between labor unions in the 1890's "rail barons" era where the US was run by a tiny oligarchy of monopolists that viciously oppressed the laborers, and the people were driven to form unions out of desperation, and then in the 1970s in the US when labor unions had *BECOME* the inescapable monopolies and you couldn't even get a job without paying extortionate "union dues" that did nothing for you, and they had become the instrument of oppression by which the Mafia was sucking American business dry.   

You take the same rhetoric, some sort of version of the same ideals at work on the individual level, and completely different context and driving forces, and it makes it heroic in one instance and just venial in another.  And the venial corrupted versions always try to assert the moral authority earned by the heroic people who were driven to it by desperation and did it even though they faced harsh personal consequences for standing up for their beliefs when nobody else had the courage.

Nothing is the right thing all the time, in every context.  You've got to look around yourself and see the whole picture and decide what's right and wrong right where and when you are.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
November 02, 2014, 05:08:26 AM
 #1913


They believe in a magic man that is firm and strong and always stands for principles. Then they also believe the principle of selfishness means you will vow to be non violent even if it's in your own selfish interest. I think libertarianism is a fetish.

I've been watching the Hong Kong protests, and those people are committed to libertarian ideals in a way that is profoundly needed and even heroic.  It's very moving, and also WEIRD, to hear a thousand voices singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" from Les Miserables, in Cantonese!  The personal risks and self-sacrifice they are undertaking for the sake of their libertarianism are just stunning. 
Do you know the difference between liberty and libertarianism? Ok, I know there are many loose interpretations, but when you say:
Quote
Nothing is the right thing all the time, in every context.  You've got to look around yourself and see the whole picture and decide what's right and wrong right where and when you are
it seems you think they are synonymous. You can have liberty without being libertarian. Perhaps the term was simply tarnished by Ayn Rand followers.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
November 02, 2014, 05:10:39 AM
 #1914


Do you know the difference between liberty and libertarianism? Ok, I know there are many loose interpretations, but when you say:
Quote
Nothing is the right thing all the time, in every context.  You've got to look around yourself and see the whole picture and decide what's right and wrong right where and when you are
it seems you think they are synonymous. You can have liberty without being libertarian. Perhaps the term was simply tarnished by Ayn Rand followers.

Ye gods, that bitch who had the hots for sociopaths and mass murderers?  If anybody took her seriously they need their heads examined.
LightRider
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1488


I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.


View Profile WWW
November 02, 2014, 05:52:12 AM
 #1915

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69h_pWoLpHk

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
November 09, 2014, 07:18:58 AM
 #1916

I've been watching the Hong Kong protests, and those people are committed to libertarian ideals in a way that is profoundly needed and even heroic.  It's very moving, and also WEIRD, to hear a thousand voices singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" from Les Miserables, in Cantonese!  The personal risks and self-sacrifice they are undertaking for the sake of their libertarianism are just stunning.  In a lot of cases you can see the fear on their faces or hear it in their voices, but they are there anyway, even knowing that it means they'll get hunted down like dogs later, or at least blacklisted from every possible profession, if they fail to get international support. And maybe even if they do, since the Chinese government is kind of like that.

And then I look at the irrelevant, stupid greedy crap that American libertarians are worried about, and how most of it seems driven (or at least co-opted) specifically by corporate wealth and greed and complete disregard for the society and people around them. The contrast is like night and day. 

So, what are the specific differences between those in Hong Kong and those in America? (Besides the difference in how dangerous the governments are in each place)

Cryddit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 06:11:48 PM
 #1917

Specifically?

I'd say that the American libertarians, as a movement, have mostly been "captured" by monied interests who are cynically using the libertarians to promulgate policies beneficial to those monied interests - with no regard whatever for whether the policies are also beneficial to the libertarians being used. 

The American libertarians, as the mouthpieces of corrupt monied interests,  mostly wind up speaking out in favor of the right of employers to pay as close to nothing as the labor market will bear, to provide nothing in the way of benefits, etc...  to make a 'race to the bottom' in terms of compensation for labor.  Most of them aren't employers, and would not benefit at all from such policies; in fact most of them would do substantially worse under those policies.  On the liberties that they would actually benefit from - free speech, freedom from surveillence, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, freedom of religion, right to fair and speedy trials, and so on....  they are silent because agitation in favor of *those* liberties would not serve those who have captured their movement.

The movement in Hong Kong is much younger, and this kind of "capture" hasn't yet had time to take place.  Further, with the Beijing government much less responsive to speech in general and the Chinese labor market already deeply buried in that same kind of 'race to the bottom' for compensation, it's not clear that that kind of capture would be as beneficial for the corrupt money in China as it has been for the corrupt money in the USA.

Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
November 09, 2014, 06:54:37 PM
 #1918


They believe in a magic man that is firm and strong and always stands for principles. Then they also believe the principle of selfishness means you will vow to be non violent even if it's in your own selfish interest. I think libertarianism is a fetish.

I've been watching the Hong Kong protests, and those people are committed to libertarian ideals in a way that is profoundly needed and even heroic.  It's very moving, and also WEIRD, to hear a thousand voices singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" from Les Miserables, in Cantonese!  The personal risks and self-sacrifice they are undertaking for the sake of their libertarianism are just stunning.  In a lot of cases you can see the fear on their faces or hear it in their voices, but they are there anyway, even knowing that it means they'll get hunted down like dogs later, or at least blacklisted from every possible profession, if they fail to get international support. And maybe even if they do, since the Chinese government is kind of like that.

And then I look at the irrelevant, stupid greedy crap that American libertarians are worried about, and how most of it seems driven (or at least co-opted) specifically by corporate wealth and greed and complete disregard for the society and people around them. The contrast is like night and day. 

This is kind of like the difference between labor unions in the 1890's "rail barons" era where the US was run by a tiny oligarchy of monopolists that viciously oppressed the laborers, and the people were driven to form unions out of desperation, and then in the 1970s in the US when labor unions had *BECOME* the inescapable monopolies and you couldn't even get a job without paying extortionate "union dues" that did nothing for you, and they had become the instrument of oppression by which the Mafia was sucking American business dry.   

You take the same rhetoric, some sort of version of the same ideals at work on the individual level, and completely different context and driving forces, and it makes it heroic in one instance and just venial in another.  And the venial corrupted versions always try to assert the moral authority earned by the heroic people who were driven to it by desperation and did it even though they faced harsh personal consequences for standing up for their beliefs when nobody else had the courage.

Nothing is the right thing all the time, in every context.  You've got to look around yourself and see the whole picture and decide what's right and wrong right where and when you are.

They are taking a big risk. Unless the protests evaporate, it will be met with violence. The game is to  covertly introduce provocateurs to escalate tension until violence breaks out. The first victim may be a policeman (sacrificed by the government to mislead the public). If my kids were there, I would beg them to stay away.
orsotheysaid
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 155


View Profile
November 09, 2014, 06:58:04 PM
 #1919

I've been watching the Hong Kong protests, and those people are committed to libertarian ideals in a way that is profoundly needed and even heroic.  It's very moving, and also WEIRD, to hear a thousand voices singing "Do You Hear The People Sing" from Les Miserables, in Cantonese!  The personal risks and self-sacrifice they are undertaking for the sake of their libertarianism are just stunning.  In a lot of cases you can see the fear on their faces or hear it in their voices, but they are there anyway, even knowing that it means they'll get hunted down like dogs later, or at least blacklisted from every possible profession, if they fail to get international support. And maybe even if they do, since the Chinese government is kind of like that.

And then I look at the irrelevant, stupid greedy crap that American libertarians are worried about, and how most of it seems driven (or at least co-opted) specifically by corporate wealth and greed and complete disregard for the society and people around them. The contrast is like night and day. 

So, what are the specific differences between those in Hong Kong and those in America? (Besides the difference in how dangerous the governments are in each place)

America has freedom, yes freedom, compared to China. These people have big balls and are feed up of the situation, they are taking a big risk.
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
November 12, 2014, 02:37:46 PM
 #1920

Specifically?

I'd say that the American libertarians, as a movement, have mostly been "captured" by monied interests who are cynically using the libertarians to promulgate policies beneficial to those monied interests - with no regard whatever for whether the policies are also beneficial to the libertarians being used.  

The American libertarians, as the mouthpieces of corrupt monied interests,  mostly wind up speaking out in favor of the right of employers to pay as close to nothing as the labor market will bear, to provide nothing in the way of benefits, etc...  to make a 'race to the bottom' in terms of compensation for labor.  Most of them aren't employers, and would not benefit at all from such policies; in fact most of them would do substantially worse under those policies.  On the liberties that they would actually benefit from - free speech, freedom from surveillence, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, freedom of religion, right to fair and speedy trials, and so on....  they are silent because agitation in favor of *those* liberties would not serve those who have captured their movement.

The movement in Hong Kong is much younger, and this kind of "capture" hasn't yet had time to take place.  Further, with the Beijing government much less responsive to speech in general and the Chinese labor market already deeply buried in that same kind of 'race to the bottom' for compensation, it's not clear that that kind of capture would be as beneficial for the corrupt money in China as it has been for the corrupt money in the USA.

So, American Libertarians are Libertarians, who believe in the free market, including believing that the free market will be enough to raise wages to sustainable amounts without the need for government intervention (which, ironically, is how China wages have increased from practically nothing, to relatively good wages they have now), and Hong Kong Libertarians are not libertarians, but are pro-democracy socialists?

America has freedom, yes freedom, compared to China. These people have big balls and are feed up of the situation, they are taking a big risk.

Ah, so the difference is that Hong Kong libertarians actually have gripes with regards to freedom of speech and assembly, and American libertarians are free enough, and should shut the fuck up about it and not protest (or, put another way, America should become like Hong Kong in regards to libertarian protestors). Okay.

Pages: « 1 ... 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!