A Resource Based Economy

[markm]

How many Star Trek movies are there already?

Don't you lot watch them?

What for we need waste time energy and resources, let along donations, on poorer attempts to represent interesting societies?

Are you lot even Trekkers at all? Or just timewasters, maybe even underminers seeking to undermine the vision by taking the valuable pocket change people might be able to use to obtain some free time to watch a trek episode or even a whole movie?

Movies have BEEN DONE already. You are not the we you keep talking about, you seem more like a bunch of wannabe grand nagi or high mucketty mucks yakking on and on about how EVERYONE ELSE should do something because YOU DO NOTHING and so that YOU CAN DO NOTHING.

Go scrub the transporter platform with a toothbrush then report for education at the holodeck.

-MarkM-

[1714176990]

1714176990

[deadlizard]

Of course some will choose to live in 'Zeitgeist' communities, others will choose not to.

You forget that the whole idea behind a Zeitgeist society is complete control management of the natural resources of the entire planet. that doesn't leave a lot of room for much of anything else really.

[­­­Atlas_]

It seems LightRider is trying to break Woods's Law:

Whenever the private sector introduces an innovation that makes the poor better off than they would have been without it, or that offers benefits or terms that no one else is prepared to offer them, someone—in the name of helping the poor—will call for curbing or abolishing it.

[markm]

Of course some will choose to live in 'Zeitgeist' communities, others will choose not to.

You forget that the whole idea behind a Zeitgeist society is complete control management of the natural resources of the entire planet. that doesn't leave a lot of room for much of anything else really.

Sure it does, just because the number of planets in the local area went down from 9 to 8 doesn't mean there isn't a planet handy that they could use. Even a tiny no longer a planet like Pluto is a whole heck of a lot of resources, plenty to base an economy on, surely? Or think of the "free" energy available if they pick Mercury for their economic utopia.

Its just a matter of getting out there and *doing* it. Nice thing about using some planet other than Earth is they might find they don't have nearly as many "conscientious objectors" hanging around hassling them too...

-MarkM-

[wb3]

It seems LightRider is trying to break Woods's Law:

Whenever the private sector introduces an innovation that makes the poor better off than they would have been without it, or that offers benefits or terms that no one else is prepared to offer them, someone—in the name of helping the poor—will call for curbing or abolishing it.

I was reading the other day that MicroSoft hardly patented anything and stayed out of Lobbying. The reached a point to give away software in the business model and still make money. The Government then started to sue them and take them to court.

They now lobby with the best of them and their products are far from free. The system doesn't seem to like free or even close to it.

[benjamindees]

No the system hates free.  Taxes are based on profit.  Profit is based on monopoly.  Monopolies are thus encouraged and then regulated and taxed.

[markm]

Well lets try this scientific need determination of what to do, maybe?

How much bread and water (and some vitamins minerals etc in it presumably) do those people scientifically *need*?

If the latest Trek movie proves to have actually solved the problem it was apparently created to solve, to wit that of getting joe public to actually watch movies about resource based society, then is it scientifically necessary to have these folk produce one showing more precisely the now-to-2063 span during which the timetable as last I heard it apparently calls for a major world scale disaster or war or something to occur in order to set the stage, or would it be scientifically adequate to have Paramount produce it?

-MarkM- (more important, is the world scale destruction leading up to Zephram's flight scientifically necessary?)

[wb3]

No the system hates free.  Taxes are based on profit.  Profit is based on monopoly.  Monopolies are thus encouraged and then regulated and taxed.

That is one of the best arguments that I have heard on the Government subverting Capitalism. And it will work, until the people start to speak up. Or worse, start creating their own products. The underground market, if you will.

The biggest problem I see with the system is it is now focused on maximizing profits and forgot about competing. As we will shortly find out, the businesses that got it right and the ones that got it wrong when the cards come collapsing down.

Anyone who buys an old pager system, can start a near free texting service for a town. That will compete with cell phones.

I am waiting for communities to kick into high gear in the face of the Big State.  It always amazed me that every house in a development had a riding lawn mower, where if they all kicked in $5 dollars a month in a 100 house development, they could buy their own lawnmowers and a central shed for everyone to use. But we don't "Trust" each other "YET".  A little scheduling and some trust and the country will change.

[LightRider]

No the system hates free.  Taxes are based on profit.  Profit is based on monopoly.  Monopolies are thus encouraged and then regulated and taxed.

That is one of the best arguments that I have heard on the Government subverting Capitalism. And it will work, until the people start to speak up. Or worse, start creating their own products. The underground market, if you will.

The biggest problem I see with the system is it is now focused on maximizing profits and forgot about competing. As we will shortly find out, the businesses that got it right and the ones that got it wrong when the cards come collapsing down.

Anyone who buys an old pager system, can start a near free texting service for a town. That will compete with cell phones.

I am waiting for communities to kick into high gear in the face of the Big State.  It always amazed me that every house in a development had a riding lawn mower, where if they all kicked in $5 dollars a month in a 100 house development, they could buy their own lawnmowers and a central shed for everyone to use. But we don't "Trust" each other "YET".  A little scheduling and some trust and the country world will change.

[NghtRppr]

If we declared all of the earth's resources as common heritage for all the world's people, and used the methods of science to construct and provide all of life's necessities for all people, then there would be considerable reduction in hunger, crime, war and poverty, not to mention unnecessary suffering due to lack of access of medical care or inadequate educational opportunities.

Ah, good ole' Jacque Fresco. I watched a documentary on him years ago and I almost bought into it. His logic is the same logic that used to make me wonder why people go hungry while food sits on the shelves in grocery stores collecting dust. Then I learned economics. He's a great engineer which is why he thinks like one rather than an economist. All he sees is that we need X tons of resources to have futuristic cities and also that we have X tons of resources in the ground. It seems like all we need to do is get from A to B, problem solved. Getting from A to B is the hardest part though. Who's going to be in charge? Who's going to do the work, when and how much of it? Those are questions that simply cannot be centrally planned as long as we have scarcity of labor and people with bizarre notions of being individuals. When we have robot slaves, he's going to be all set. Until then, stick to the engineering Jacque.


That being said, I definitely want a house that's been extruded, has no crevices or seams, that's positively pressurized and can be hosed out when dirty.

[The Script]

Well lets try this scientific need determination of what to do, maybe?

How much bread and water (and some vitamins minerals etc in it presumably) do those people scientifically *need*?

If the latest Trek movie proves to have actually solved the problem it was apparently created to solve, to wit that of getting joe public to actually watch movies about resource based society, then is it scientifically necessary to have these folk produce one showing more precisely the now-to-2063 span during which the timetable as last I heard it apparently calls for a major world scale disaster or war or something to occur in order to set the stage, or would it be scientifically adequate to have Paramount produce it?

-MarkM- (more important, is the world scale destruction leading up to Zephram's flight scientifically necessary?)

What are you talking about?!?  What does Star Trek have to do with this topic?

[benjamindees]

Star Trek is a futuristic technocracy powered by magical crystals where everyone wears jumpsuits and follows the orders of a bald man with a French name.

[The Script]

Star Trek is a futuristic technocracy powered by magical crystals where everyone wears jumpsuits and follows the orders of a bald man with a French name.

I've seen the show, I just don't see the connection to reality.    Who obeys Frenchmen?  (Just kidding, Grondilu.) 

[wb3]

Star Trek is a futuristic technocracy powered by magical crystals where everyone wears jumpsuits and follows the orders of a bald man with a French name.

Apparently no one goes to the bathroom in the future. 

Anyone ever hear of a bathroom in Star Trek.  Sonic Showers, but never a bathroom.  Must be the Jumpsuits. 

[deadlizard]

Must be the Jumpsuits. 

Dumpsuits if you will   

Thank you, I'm also available for children's parties

[The Script]

Must be the Jumpsuits. 

Dumpsuits if you will   

Thank you, I'm also available for children's parties

Ahahahhaha!  Yes!   

[LightRider]

Okay, what resources are available that are not being utilized?  What sources of renewable energy, and what technologies, can be used to power machines like cars and steel mills for example?  How high of a standard of living can your ideal society produce given current technology?  Is it something along the lines of India/China or more like Western Europe?

Zeitnews.org is a website dedicated to pointing out the incredible new technologies and scientific discoveries that are taking place. You might also find it interesting.

[LightRider]

http://www.channelaustin.org/streaming/ch16

Zeitgeist LIVE is streaming right now, for those who are interested.

[markm]

The resource based economy is desribed using stuff right out of Star Trek, like each individual being free to develop their potential. Star Trek seems to be a "resourcce based economy" and it is one that already has gone through a whole lot of the problems of trying to use movies to promote such a society, including such tactics as pretendig it is a far distant / purely imaginary future in order not to scare people who might object to a suggestion that it is just around the corner.

Supposedly the latest movie tried changing a lot in order to again find a way to get "normal people" instead of people who already bought into the idea of resource based societies to watch the shows/movies.

Also progressively attempts have been made to move the portrayals back in time closer to our current time, possibly because of a perception that one maybe need no longer pretend to be speaking about a time centuries away when speaking of a resource based economy.

This a a whole lot of investment and a huge body of trekkers some quite dedicated all aimed at the concept of a resource based economy.

Even putting it into a fiction surrounded by all kinds of "unbelievable" technology doesn't seem to go very far though in defusing people's ingrained / conditioned disbelief in such an economic model. It seems that to some people the proposed economy is maybe even harder to believe possible than faster than light transportation (which is afterall "merely a technical innovation or breakthrough").

The technical innovations / gadgets are mere metaphors and plot devices, one would hardly credit a person as actually being a Trekker if they were unaware that getting from "here" to "there" is not a matter of physical engineering but, rather, one of social engineering.

-MarkM-

[LightRider]

The resource based economy is desribed using stuff right out of Star Trek, like each individual being free to develop their potential. Star Trek seems to be a "resourcce based economy" and it is one that already has gone through a whole lot of the problems of trying to use movies to promote such a society, including such tactics as pretendig it is a far distant / purely imaginary future in order not to scare people who might object to a suggestion that it is just around the corner.

Supposedly the latest movie tried changing a lot in order to again find a way to get "normal people" instead of people who already bought into the idea of resource based societies to watch the shows/movies.

Also progressively attempts have been made to move the portrayals back in time closer to our current time, possibly because of a perception that one maybe need no longer pretend to be speaking about a time centuries away when speaking of a resource based economy.

This a a whole lot of investment and a huge body of trekkers some quite dedicated all aimed at the concept of a resource based economy.

Even putting it into a fiction surrounded by all kinds of "unbelievable" technology doesn't seem to go very far though in defusing people's ingrained / conditioned disbelief in such an economic model. It seems that to some people the proposed economy is maybe even harder to believe possible than faster than light transportation (which is afterall "merely a technical innovation or breakthrough").

The technical innovations / gadgets are mere metaphors and plot devices, one would hardly credit a person as actually being a Trekker if they were unaware that getting from "here" to "there" is not a matter of physical engineering but, rather, one of social engineering.

-MarkM-

The Venus Project does not invoke technologies that are not yet realized or currently infeasible. I don't see what a work of fiction has to do with this discussion.