A Resource Based Economy

[Sjalq]

Price mechanism, price mechanism, price mechanism!

RBE folks please explain to me if you think money is emergent (naturally occurring)?

And if so what fundamental problem does it solve?

Everything is emergent, as we live in an emergent universe.

Money has outlived its usefulness, as it was developed in response to real or perceived scarcity, along with the development of early forms of government and society. We currently enjoy a highly technical society that can produce far greater resources for people through the full use of our technical and scientific capabilities. Unfortunately, the dominant monetary system and associated institutions resist such progress due to distorted values.

Money is no longer needed, as its current dominant function is to deny people what they need to survive if they fail to have enough of it.

A resource based economy requires that we learn what resources we have available on this planet and use them intelligently to provide a higher quality of life than the richest people enjoy today. Without such knowledge of our current resource availability, we are left with a flawed monetary system and a wasteful, destructive and abusive pricing mechanism that is functioning only to improve its own arbitrary and irrelevant metrics at the expense of human life and ecological stability.

Let me phrase the question like this
"What problem does (or did in your view) the pricing mechanism solve?"

Please focus on only that question as I am aware that you believe mankind is now at the point where you believe we can function without a pricing mechanism.

[1713556504]

1713556504

[1713556504]

1713556504

[1713556504]

1713556504

[1713556504]

1713556504

[1713556504]

1713556504

[LightRider]

Price mechanism, price mechanism, price mechanism!

RBE folks please explain to me if you think money is emergent (naturally occurring)?

And if so what fundamental problem does it solve?

Everything is emergent, as we live in an emergent universe.

Money has outlived its usefulness, as it was developed in response to real or perceived scarcity, along with the development of early forms of government and society. We currently enjoy a highly technical society that can produce far greater resources for people through the full use of our technical and scientific capabilities. Unfortunately, the dominant monetary system and associated institutions resist such progress due to distorted values.

Money is no longer needed, as its current dominant function is to deny people what they need to survive if they fail to have enough of it.

A resource based economy requires that we learn what resources we have available on this planet and use them intelligently to provide a higher quality of life than the richest people enjoy today. Without such knowledge of our current resource availability, we are left with a flawed monetary system and a wasteful, destructive and abusive pricing mechanism that is functioning only to improve its own arbitrary and irrelevant metrics at the expense of human life and ecological stability.

Let me phrase the question like this
"What problem does (or did in your view) the pricing mechanism solve?"

Please focus on only that question as I am aware that you believe mankind is now at the point where you believe we can function without a pricing mechanism.

Pricing attached opinionated value metrics to materials, goods or services based on perceived relative worth, desirability or necessity. It is usually easier to do this when there is an agreed upon currency scale that can be used across distance, culture and time. This system hinges on the currency in which it is valued in and the entity who enforces its use, and therefor subject to abuse, waste and increasingly negative consequences.

[vegasbitcoin]

LightRider,

I'm with you 200%, and I hope and pray this will come true one day. But as you can see we need a collective conscience to believe in this system. And I really don't see folks doing that. For some off reason people think we need money to survive. It's just fear of losing control. I will push for this movement when the time is right. We have much more to learn until then. Now I will go back in stillness, and keep detaching myself from this society:)

P.S thanks again for people like you much love.

[Findeton]

You haven't answered my arguments. So I'll repeat it, because it looks like we've reached your soft spot:

There's no scientific theory on whether you should use nuclear power plants or solar panels. You are comparing science with politics and morality and that's absurd. You might think that you haven't entered the realms of morality and politics but you HAVE. Maybe you will disagree on this subject, but then I must conclude that your reasoning is blocked by you sect/cult.

Science says something like: nuclear power plants harvest a lot of energy per mass of uranium, and create nuclear waste. Solar cells are created through a process that contaminates a lot of liters of water and releases a lot of CO2, and harvest energy from the sun with a 15-20% efficiency. Science, and the scientific method, does NOT tell you which option to choose. Science just shows you how nature works, and it's you that have to decide how to apply that knowledge to fullfill your dreams/objectives/morality.

Science doesn't tell you if you should gun somebody. Science just tells you that the bullet will hit that person at a certain velocity and it will probably provoke his death. Should you shoot that somebody? should you build that bridge? Should you use currencies or a resource based economy? Should you create prisons? Should you live in a planned economy society? Science won't decide any of that for you.  Science will (maybe) make some predictions on the result of your decision, but making the decision is absolutely out of the realms of science, and of the scientific method.

[Sjalq]

Pricing attached opinionated value metrics to materials, goods or services based on perceived relative worth, desirability or necessity. It is usually easier to do this when there is an agreed upon currency scale that can be used across distance, culture and time. This system hinges on the currency in which it is valued in and the entity who enforces its use, and therefor subject to abuse, waste and increasingly negative consequences.

Specifically "and the entity who enforces its use"

OK, previously you agreed money was emergent. If I wasn't clear, let me clarify I meant, money existed in a stable form before governments began enforcing it, do you agree?

Also do you agree that the opinion of whether I want a $5 latte even when a cheaper alternative is available, it is still my right to expend my resources on an overpriced item if I so choose?

[jtimon]

You claim to be engineers, yet you show little knowledge of the scientific process at work. I wonder if you ever did any science at all in your life, and with what results.

You just shout insults.

[jtimon]

Summarizing:

As findeton said, science doesn't tell you what is good (after reading Nietsche I'm not comfortable using that word) or bad, just creates models that predict how nature will act. Using these models models to attain a specific aim is engineering. To chose these specific aims you need morals.
Since I don't believe in natural law nor absolute values, I feel imposing morals to others is wrong.

Money is not needed to survive, it's just needed to trade. If everybody valued goods and services the same way, we couldn't even trade.
If you reject trade, you have to chose between self sufficiency with no specialization nor division of labor or some people imposing values to others (kind of communism).
If you accept free trade, you have to chose between some form of money or barter as a tool for trading.

1) Do you believe that absolute values exist?
2) Do you reject free trade (and thus freedom)?

If you answer yes to one of these questions, you should put that at the beginning of all TZM materials so people like me could stop listening and don't waste their time.

[Findeton]

Summarizing:

As findeton said, science doesn't tell you what is good (after reading Nietsche I'm not comfortable using that word) or bad, just creates models that predict how nature will act. Using these models models to attain a specific aim is engineering. To chose these specific aims you need morals.
Since I don't believe in natural law nor absolute values, I feel imposing morals to others is wrong.

Money is not needed to survive, it's just needed to trade. If everybody valued goods and services the same way, we couldn't even trade.
If you reject trade, you have to chose between self sufficiency with no specialization nor division of labor or some people imposing values to others (kind of communism).
If you accept free trade, you have to chose between some form of money or barter as a tool for trading.

1) Do you believe that absolute values exist?
2) Do you reject free trade (and thus freedom)?

If you answer yes to one of these questions, you should put that at the beginning of all TZM materials so people like me could stop listening and don't waste their time.

Yeah that's a good summary.

[LightRider]

1) Do you believe that absolute values exist?

No. In an emergent universe, things change constantly, and as such, our values must be updated according to our new found knowledge. The problem is that we have not done so, and held to the distorted values and associated institutions that began centuries or millenia ago.

2) Do you reject free trade (and thus freedom)?

There is no freedom. We all are subject to the laws of nature and the common reality we share. Anyone who promises you freedom of some sort is just looking to control you for their own benefit.

[Findeton]

There is no freedom. We all are subject to the laws of nature and the common reality we share. Anyone who promises you freedom of some sort is just looking to control you for their own benefit.

lol   

(Cult)

[Sjalq]

Pricing attached opinionated value metrics to materials, goods or services based on perceived relative worth, desirability or necessity. It is usually easier to do this when there is an agreed upon currency scale that can be used across distance, culture and time. This system hinges on the currency in which it is valued in and the entity who enforces its use, and therefor subject to abuse, waste and increasingly negative consequences.

Specifically "and the entity who enforces its use"

OK, previously you agreed money was emergent. If I wasn't clear, let me clarify I meant, money existed in a stable form before governments began enforcing it, do you agree?

Also do you agree that the opinion of whether I want a $5 latte even when a cheaper alternative is available, it is still my right to expend my resources on an overpriced item if I so choose?

Cult or no cult, the issue of the pricing mechanism is absolutely key to this whole issue. If pricing is truly the appendix of societal behaviour then the RBE view is correct.

So again;
*Is the money naturally emergent or only due to enforcement? (Question to follow on this one)
*Do I have the right to misspend my own resources on what someone else deems irrational expenditures?

[TiagoTiago]

If money is such a terrible idea, why did it emerge in the first place? What purpose did it serve?

You can ask that about anything

[Bitcoin_Silver_Supply]

There is no freedom. We all are subject to the laws of nature and the common reality we share.

That really sums up the movement for me, absolute collectivism.

I don't doubt that you and other advocates have good intentions, but this is why I will never comply with such an ideology.

[Sjalq]

If money is such a terrible idea, why did it emerge in the first place? What purpose did it serve?

You can ask that about anything

You can, if you can not find a good answer then maybe it was a terrible idea. Pricing however was the basis for the accurate prediction of the end of the soviet empire.

[TiagoTiago]

I heard about this experiment where they found out that when told there is no such thing as freewill people tend to act less like nice people....

[Sjalq]

I heard about this experiment where they found out that when told there is no such thing as freewill people tend to act less like nice people....

Lostya man...

[TiagoTiago]

I heard about this experiment where they found out that when told there is no such thing as freewill people tend to act less like nice people....

Lostya man...

It seems when people get convinced their decisions aren't really their own they feel less responsible for doing bad things and do them, while when people are convinced they are responsible for their decisions they are nicer to people (and to puppies etc). At least that is what the results of that experiment suggest.

[anderxander]

There are more "educated" people on the planet that have been "educated" by the school system than in history. Yet the population continues to explode.

Today's education system and society at large is no measure of a relevant education. Our values are distorted, causing aberrant behavior that has negative consequences. With a relevant education, people would understand that a population cannot grow beyond the resources of a finite system such as our planet.

Then how can any scientific conclusions be drawn today about the link between education and population growth?

How are you going to "educate" people and enforce their compliance with said "educating"?

What is an undistorted value? Aren't all values "distorted" by the subjective emergent nature of the universe?

The hope is you'll go away because you're annoying and just keep blindly defending your ideas with anything you can pull out of your ass. Your whole movement is a joke and you only jeep giving it a worse reputation by continuing to post. Shut up and go do something productive.

At least you've admitted that your goal is not to have a productive or intellectually honest discussion or argument, but to cease any talk about these ideas at all. For someone so insistent that other people be productive, that seems futile and unproductive to me. Thank you for being honest about your goal though.

Yeah because there is no intellectual or productive conversation to have with anyone in your movement because its a moralistic ideaology that mistakes philosophy, economics, and social science as science and you're attempting to impose this value system on others either through persuasion on forums, documentaries, or whatever "education" system you're proposing.

[anderxander]

 "Aristocracy is a form of government in which the best qualified citizens rule". So I still see no difference in essence between what you advocate and what The Venus Project advocates.

The "best qualified" "educate" the "less qualified"

[jtimon]

1) Do you believe that absolute values exist?

No. In an emergent universe, things change constantly, and as such, our values must be updated according to our new found knowledge. The problem is that we have not done so, and held to the distorted values and associated institutions that began centuries or millenia ago.

Ok, so we must change our values. But should the government make us learn values?
What's the difference between absolute values and "non distorted values"?

There is no freedom. We all are subject to the laws of nature and the common reality we share.

lol    

(Cult)

Actually more like an old philosophy. But since I want to flow too, I want to know if there's going to be a government in my way to teach me how to do it, to rule on top of nature. I'm not proposing to abolish the laws of nature if that's what you understood.

Anyone who promises you freedom of some sort is just looking to control you for their own benefit.

I promise you freedom, but not for controlling you, just to create a counterexample: you will be freer if you use free software instead of proprietary.
Don't you like the word freedom?