A planet with no money

[DrEvil]

Just an observation but some people in this thread seem to be confusing money with an economic system. Money is merely a tool that facilitates barter of goods and services. It's the HUMAN BEING that is using the money that defines the outcome. In a way this thread is like saying, a world without guns would be far better when history clearly shows that not to be true. Greed is part of our makup and helped create civilisation. Here is a short documentary on this very subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0VHiONkot8

 

[DT-waw]

Quote from DrEvil:

Greed is part of our makup and helped create civilisation.

up to current times, yes. but it may not be part of our civilisation in the future.
greed together with fear are not positive emotions and are starting to cause MUCH more problems than benefits. peaceful cooperation without competing with each other may turn out to be way more effective in the near future

 

[DrEvil]

Quote from DT-waw:

up to current times, yes. but it may not be part of our civilisation in the future.
greed together with fear are not positive emotions and are starting to cause MUCH more problems than benefits. peaceful cooperation without competing with each other may turn out to be way more effective in the near future

I didn't say that greed was part of civilisation, I'm saying that it is hard wired into HUMAN BEINGS. Greed drove HUMAN BEINGS among other hard wired traits to survive and advance civilisation. This trait might dissapear as we evolve over the millenia. Perhaps this is a coversation that should happen in a million years time. In socialism GREED results in capital being gained at the end of a barrel of a gun. In free capital markets GREED results in capital being gained by providing better service/goods to our fellow human beings. History is not on the side of your socialist arguments.

 

[DT-waw]

the question arises is capital or corporate profits more important than the quality of life?

let's say we produce 200,000 tanks and 50 aircraft carriers plus 3,000 fighter jets. hey, its good for the economy! GDP rises!
but these are weapons of destruction, nothing beneficial may come out of it.


fear and greed. if you are driven by these two, you'll ultimately always be unhappy or even worse.

there's also another emotion which drives the consumption and economic growth, but not the happiness or bliss: jealousy.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/O9we864sMns&amp;hl=pl_PL&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/O9we864sMns&amp;hl=pl_PL&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[DrEvil]

Quote from DT-waw:

the question arises is capital or corporate profits more important than the quality of life?

let's say we produce 200,000 tanks and 50 aircraft carriers plus 3,000 fighter jets. hey, its good for the economy! GDP rises!
but these are weapons of destruction, nothing beneficial may come out of it.


fear and greed. if you are driven by these two, you'll ultimately always be unhappy or even worse.

there's also another emotion which drives the consumption and economic growth, but not the happiness or bliss: jealousy.

Ok let's look at societies that were non-capitalistic, there was communist china, USSR, Nazi Germany take your pick. Plenty of deadly weapons, millions upon millions of their own people slaughtered for speaking out. It is a FACT that free markets with small government which protects the rights of the INDIVIDUAL has raised more poor people out of poverty than any socialist regime.

It comes down to this, you have two camps:

Oligarchy (where a small number own and control the capital and resources). Monarchy system, all forms of colectivism (communism, fascism, socialism), dictatorship, current day social-democracy systems (EU) that really have litte to do with democracy.

Republic (small government with court system to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, and protect border, with free markets allowing everying to trade freely). Examples are the original U.S republic up till the new deal, referendum based democracy (i.e real democracy) in Switzerland.

You are vilifying the 2nd camp when it has comparively done little harm. The real enemy of manking (evident from history) is the first camp.

You don't think Cave men and women had FEAR (to run from a dinosaur) and GREED (to hoard as much food as they can get incase of hard times). Imagine if they hadn't! We would not be having this conversation!

 

[DT-waw]

of course, fear and greed play their role and are useful under certain conditions.
but in our current western world they became a predominant trait, filling the lifes of millions when there's no real threat or danger from :

> the wild beasts,
> terrorists (this threat is pure fake and psychosocial warfare manipulation)
> scarcity of goods, food, energy
> global warming
etc.
these are all nonexistant threats, all made up for one purpose: monetary gain, power, prestige.


in an old world, technologically speaking when majority people had to work manually 10 hours a day, when there was no machines, internet, communication, modern factories, automation- I prefer capitalism over socialism!

I lived in socialism in my childhood and teenage years and i know very well what are the shortcomings of socialism. You need to take a step back and see beyond socialism-capitalism which both belong to an old paradigm - living in low-tech, dependent on human labour environment.

history is history and conditions are always changing. just like in the markets

 

[DrEvil]

Quote from DT-waw:

of course, fear and greed play their role and are useful under certain conditions.
but in our current western world they became a predominant trait, filling the lifes of millions when there's no real threat or danger from :

> the wild beasts,
> terrorists (this threat is pure fake and psychosocial warfare manipulation)
> scarcity of goods, food, energy
> global warming
etc.
these are all nonexistant threats, all made up for one purpose: monetary gain, power, prestige.


in an old world, technologically speaking when majority people had to work manually 10 hours a day, when there was no machines, internet, communication, modern factories, automation- I prefer capitalism over socialism!

I lived in socialism in my childhood and teenage years and i know very well what are the shortcomings of socialism. You need to take a step back and see beyond socialism-capitalism which both belong to an old paradigm - living in low-tech, dependent on human labour environment.

history is history and conditions are always changing. just like in the markets

I agree that they are non-existant threats. The major man made threat facing mankind is the same as that throughout history, the threat of the oligarchs/controllers (be they openly tyranical or covertly tyranical). They are the predators and the majority are the dumbed down prey. There have been times in history where the prey have equalled the equation by getting off their fat asses and insisting that the rule of law is applied fairly. I am surprised that you think that the predators are not going to try to use new high-tech to maintain and further expand control. How are you going to convince them to give up their domination and control?

As an aside, our species is only one major natural disaster (think giant asteroid collission etc) from extinction or going back to the law of the jungle. Then those that survive (if any) will need their FEER and GREED instincts to survive against the wild.

 

[bearice]

Quote from DT-waw:

let's say we produce 200,000 tanks and 50 aircraft carriers plus 3,000 fighter jets. hey, its good for the economy! GDP rises!
but these are weapons of destruction, nothing beneficial may come out of it.

If USA does not manufacture weapons of destruction then other countries will manufacture weapons of destruction and attack USA. Today no country thinks of attacking USA because USA has the most powerful army. So weapons of destruction are beneficial.

 

[DT-waw]

from a local point of view, yes military is necessary to protect wealth and population.
from a global point of view its a wasted time and energy by every nation.

 

[DT-waw]

let's add hiv, hepatitis viruses, bird flu, swine flu to the list of manufactured threats which do not exist.

we can pretty much subtract half of the economy or money flow without ANY negative impact in the REAL life and prosperity of a mankind as a whole!