The Ten Cannots

[F3SS]

Because in bartering items do not have a relative value.

And I doubt gold would rule, there is not enough of it and does not increase in the same rate as the rest of the economy. Basing your money on gold is the same as basing your money on good faith, only heavier.

Fine, but your not helping here. I understand what you are saying but I'm reaching far to get Leonardo to just spit it out already. I'm beginning to feel like this whole exercise is rhetorical. See below.

This is what you said in your previous post...

But do you, do any of us? We have only ever lived in a world with money - with currency - and this reinforces our natural greed and selfishness. So, how much do we really know about our actual human nature, that we haven't distorted through applying systems allowing a few to accumulate and control, and leaving the many to grasp for that control?

Whoa man, come down from your trip. Look to cavemen. They hunted and gathered and probably killed each other. That was a world without money and is basically what I've been saying all along. Anymore of this and I think you'll be flame baiting.

[questionmark]

okay that makes more sense. I guess in a perfect world without trading everything would be free. And everyone I guess could love heor jobs and love shareongans helping people. Best uthopia I can picture without currency. To bad humans suck

I am afraid you don't understand bartering, because bartering you either have something the bloke you want something of wants or you are not getting it. That is certainly not "free". Just more complicated.

And mutual credit means Joe Doe did something (gave something) to you so you owe something to Joe Doe (either good or service). That does it not make it "free" either.

[F3SS]

It is mutual benefit, not mutual credit. And yes, it does require a paradigm shift in the way we think, but it is a perfectly viable replacement for the current system we have which only leads to misery for most.

Thanks for the philosophy class. It wasn't as hard as I thought. I had the answer all along but it I didn't think you were going this route. I did sort of say it, although I dismissed it. You are talking about a spiritual enlightenment. You know as well as I do that isn't going to happen. Maybe in 50,000 years or more but I doubt it.

Edited August 28, 2013 by F3SS

[Leonardo]

Fine, but your not helping here. I understand what you are saying but I'm reaching far to get Leonardo to just spit it out already. I'm beginning to feel like this whole exercise is rhetorical. See below.

Whoa man, come down from your trip. Look to cavemen. They hunted and gathered and probably killed each other. That was a world without money and is basically what I've been saying all along. Anymore of this and I think you'll be flame baiting.

I don't know what things are like where you live, but where I am we have philosophy, science, radio, tv, computer games, etc. We are quite removed from those "cavemen", even if we still retain the atavistic impulses.

We have minds. Those little things that people don't use very much but are rather good for overriding those 'baser impulses'.

[Leonardo]

Thanks for the philosophy class. It wasn't as hard as I thought. I had the answer all along but it I didn't think you were going this route. I did sort of say it, although I dismissed You are talking about a spiritual enlightenment. You know as well as I do that isn't going to happen. Maybe in 50,000 years or more but I doubt it.

Rubbish. It is something we could accomplish within a few generations. But we won't do it, because our socio-economic system has taught us to think only about ourselves, not humanity.

That is the problem (or one of the big problems) with our current system.

And it's not a "spiritual enlightenment", as if it was some New Age mystical experience. It is based in practical ethics.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Leonardo

[F3SS]

K Leo... I'm going back to reality now.

[Leonardo]

K Leo... I'm going back to reality now.

There is no need to be condescending. I do realise what I am discussing is a thought-experiment. All I asked was for you, and others, to actually think about it - not practice it.

Why the antipathy to even considering this as a thought-experiment? Is it so foreign to our nature to even consider others, no money, mutual benefit?

I can entertain those thoughts without believing in them. Why cannot others?

[spartan max2]

edit

Edited August 28, 2013 by spartan max2

[F3SS]

Rubbish. It is something we could accomplish within a few generations. But we won't do it, because our socio-economic system has taught us to think only about ourselves, not humanity.

That is the problem (or one of the big problems) with our current system.

And it's not a "spiritual enlightenment", as if it was some New Age mystical experience. It is based in practical ethics.

Says the guy on a capitalist produced computer on a capitalist fed Internet. If it's such rubbish what are you doing supporting it.

[Leonardo]

Says the guy on a capitalist produced computer on a capitalist fed Internet. If it's such rubbish what are you doing supporting it.

Please read the post I made just previously.

Why are you so antipathic to even contemplating such a system? I am very interested to know.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Leonardo

[F3SS]

There is no need to be condescending. I do realise what I am discussing is a thought-experiment. All I asked was for you, and others, to actually think about it - not practice it.

Why the antipathy to even considering this as a thought-experiment? Is it so foreign to our nature to even consider others, no money, mutual benefit?

I can entertain those thoughts without believing in them. Why cannot others?

I don't mean to be condescending but I feel like you're luring me into it. The problem is that I have considered it and you didn't accept my vision. But the reality is this enlightenment, or not, or whatever it is your looking towards isn't going to happen in a world with 7 billion humans entrenched in human nature. The isolated Buddhist Monks are doing what you are espousing but that obviously hasn't caught on en mass.

Edited August 28, 2013 by F3SS

[Leonardo]

I don't mean to be condescending but I feel like you're luring me into it. The problem is that I have considered it and you didn't accept my vision. But the reality is this enlightenment, or not, or whatever it is your looking towards isn't going to happen in a world with 7 billion humans entrenched in human nature. The isolated Buddhist Monks are doing what you are espousing but that obviously hasn't caught on en mass.

Did you really?

You mentioned something about villages, and hunters, but I don't think you actually took the time to consider the world without money, because you dismissed the idea out-of-hand rather than even entertain it. And, for the second time, what I am suggesting for thought is nothing to do with "enlightenment" or any religious outlook. But you continue to make such comparisons in a derisory manner.

Why is an idea derisory, unless it harms?

But, never mind. I think I have learned enough about the relationship between people and money by the responses I go. Thank you for attempting to respond sincerely, and having concluded what I have concluded I understand why you could not.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Leonardo

[spartan max2]

I see what your saying now.

Hippie communes tried this. Most of them ended up failing

their might still be some around though idk

[questionmark]

I see what your saying now.

Hippie communes tried this. Most of them ended up failing

their might still be some around though idk

Maybe back then. Nowadays it is used very effectively there where people refuse to pay sales taxes. There are large bartering clubs that are working quite effectively... to the dismay of some governments trying to figure out how to tax that without it costing more than it brings.

[Leonardo]

I see what your saying now.

Hippie communes tried this. Most of them ended up failing

their might still be some around though idk

My thought experiment was to not think of it in isolated, small communities. But thanks for attempting to think about it.

[F3SS]

Did you really?

You mentioned something about villages, and hunters, but I don't think you actually took the time to consider the world without money, because you dismissed the idea out-of-hand rather than even entertain it. And, for the second time, what I am suggesting for thought is nothing to do with "enlightenment" or any religious outlook. But you continue to make such comparisons in a derisory manner.

Why is an idea derisory, unless it harms?

Yes really. That is the world I see without money. It is you who hasn't entertained the thought. You have only insisted others do.

Again, I didn't dismiss the idea. I only dismissed the idea of it becoming a reality. Short of an apocalypse, it won't be.

And for the second time, I said 'enlightenment, or not, or whatever you want to call it'. Give it a freaking name already so we can end the confusion. Stop speaking in riddles and tells what you want us to say because everything we say you dismiss.

Harms what? Do you want me to admit I don't want to live in such a world? Ok fine. I don't. But I haven't hid or suppressed that. Maybe it harms you? I don't know. Maybe philosophy isn't my thing. That's why I don't visit those threads. Maybe you should start a world without money thread in the philosophy section.

[F3SS]

You should take this up with Frank Merton. He's the guy who can give you what you're looking for Leo.

[spartan max2]

Maybe back then. Nowadays it is used very effectively there where people refuse to pay sales taxes. There are large bartering clubs that are working quite effectively... to the dismay of some governments trying to figure out how to tax that without it costing more than it brings.

I actually thought about joining a hippie commune once lol.

That system works when the people are all voluntary part of the community.

[spartan max2]

My thought experiment was to not think of it in isolated, small communities. But thanks for attempting to think about it.

Ffs man get off your high horse. You basically mean like a world wide hippo commune. Best way to show what your saying because hippiecommunes are real

[questionmark]

I actually thought about joining a hippie commune once lol.

That system works when the people are all voluntary part of the community.

Nobody forces anybody to trade with anybody. So somebody freeloading, even in hippie communes, tend to be treated as those who have no money in the cash economy. With one difference: Once they kicked you out your "money" becomes worthless.

[Leonardo]

Yes really. That is the world I see without money. It is you who hasn't entertained the thought. You have only insisted others do.

Again, I didn't dismiss the idea. I only dismissed the idea of it becoming a reality. Short of an apocalypse, it won't be.

And for the second time, I said 'enlightenment, or not, or whatever you want to call it'. Give it a freaking name already so we can end the confusion. Stop speaking in riddles and tells what you want us to say because everything we say you dismiss.

Harms what? Do you want me to admit I don't want to live in such a world? Ok fine. I don't. But I haven't hid or suppressed that. Maybe it harms you? I don't know. Maybe philosophy isn't my thing. That's why I don't visit those threads. Maybe you should start a world without money thread in the philosophy section.

No. My intention was to ask people to consider such a world, and see how many would actually make a valid attempt to do so.

No-one did. And I appreciate you say you did, but all you really did was to dot isolated, primitive villages all over the world. You never considered the infrastructure we have in place, and would want - in the main part - to keep.

But, the whole point of it was to see how willing people were to look outside their current world-view and, basically as evidenced by yourself and others, they are quite unwilling. I'm not sure if this is down to simple resistance to change, or if there are other factors in play such as a hypothetical addiction to money/currency.

There is a side note about how people are quite willing to talk about changing things when they feel it might benefit them - as the rest of this thread illustrates - but not when they are unsure.

[F3SS]

I actually thought about joining a hippie commune once lol.

That system works when the people are all voluntary part of the community.

Thank you. That's it. It works on a voluntary level.

[questionmark]

Thank you. That's it. It works on a voluntary level.

All works at a voluntary level. As soon as a big enough bunch seez "I don't like this ****" and stops participating the story is over.

[Leonardo]

Ffs man get off your high horse. You basically mean like a world wide hippo commune. Best way to show what your saying because hippiecommunes are real

Honestly, I never considered what I was presenting for thought was similar to the 'hippy commune' lifestyle, and still don't. My intent was not to preach "love, peace and happiness" and I never stated those were requisite.

And I'm sorry you feel that how I write is "being on my high horse". It's just how I write, that's all.

[spartan max2]

Honestly, I never considered what I was presenting for thought was similar to the 'hippy commune' lifestyle, and still don't. My intent was not to preach "love, peace and happiness" and I never stated those were requisite.

And I'm sorry you feel that how I write is "being on my high horse". It's just how I write, that's all.

Everyone working for each other mutuale benefit. Sharing everything to whoever needs it or wants it.

Classic hippie commune.