Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45
Like Tree73Likes

Thread: Money and Religion

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenGear View Post
    money is a form of currency that arose during the age of the mercantile economy. Its a lot more efficient to trade with a commonly valued piece of gold than trading different types of resources directly.

    Good point, introducing money definitely made trading much more efficient, and having more access to more things would have improved the lives of many. The problem is that the introduction of money also brought about extreme inequality. The way I see it, inequality cannot exist in a world without money. Imagine we lived in a money-free world today, is it possible for inequality to exist? If so, how?
    droneBEE likes this.

  2. #32
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    11
    Even if money did not exist inequality would still be possible.

    economic inequality in that case would derive from differences in class based on economic prowess. for example: a land owner who possesses more resources (king) can leverage his position by creating access restrictions to his/her land.

    the monetary system does create a lot of psycho-social problems in the world (all very well outlined in the TZM Book) but the monetary system in not the cause, its the culture.

    it can be argued that because the culture derives from the economics of a system; if you get rid of money you can get rid of inequality, but I would beg the question.


    to get rid of inequality, we would have to agree on an access-economy where everyone is inherently permitted access to resources. In such a society, even if some form of monetary exchange existed, there would still not be any inequality; at least not built into the system or perpetuated b the system.

    other forms of inequality can still exist, racism and sexism derived inequality for example. but it would not reduce people's access.


    PS: I am not trying to play devil's advocate but the idea that all problems can be resolved via the implementation of an RBE is a little farfetched
    Last edited by GoldenGear; 2 Weeks Ago at 08:04 PM.
    HAL9000 likes this.

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    784
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenGear View Post
    PS: I am not trying to play devil's advocate but the idea that all problems can be resolved via the implementation of an RBE is a little farfetched
    You're right in that there would still be problems because no one can actually know what new issues we arise. But a NLRBE would be designed to actually tackle them from there most fundamental roots. So the way I see it is that our most critical/extensive problems would be the ones that we would be trying to solve first. And by doing this, the Culture & Values of the people can be altered to fit more fair/equal ways of thinking & behavior.
    GoldenGear, Brad* and HAL9000 like this.

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,059
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenGear View Post
    Even if money did not exist inequality would still be possible.

    economic inequality in that case would derive from differences in class based on economic prowess. for example: a land owner who possesses more resources (king) can leverage his position by creating access restrictions to his/her land.

    the monetary system does create a lot of psycho-social problems in the world (all very well outlined in the TZM Book) but the monetary system in not the cause, its the culture.

    it can be argued that because the culture derives from the economics of a system; if you get rid of money you can get rid of inequality, but I would beg the question.


    to get rid of inequality, we would have to agree on an access-economy where everyone is inherently permitted access to resources. In such a society, even if some form of monetary exchange existed, there would still not be any inequality; at least not built into the system or perpetuated b the system.

    other forms of inequality can still exist, racism and sexism derived inequality for example. but it would not reduce people's access.


    PS: I am not trying to play devil's advocate but the idea that all problems can be resolved via the implementation of an RBE is a little farfetched
    I'm not as certain.... Could any of this (capitalism) be accomplished.....without 'money' or something of value to 'exchange' or 'pay' the ARMY (people/slaves) that the KING (President/Prime Minister/Country) will need to 'do' anything? I think not...

    Without the ability to create and HOARD cash...or more importantly (also ignored), control over the LAND (and what's below it) ....CLASSism can finally be eliminated, no?.... We can finally 'kill off' the kings, queens and their entire wannabe lot of greed loving, bottom feeding deeply disturbed trouble makers and tribal members....

    That will be a good day IMO...
    Last edited by droneBEE; 2 Weeks Ago at 04:41 AM.
    Brad*, Ernest and HAL9000 like this.

  5. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenGear View Post
    a land owner who possesses more resources (king) can leverage his position by creating access restrictions to his/her land.
    Can you give an example of how a person could restrict access to land if money did not exist?
    GoldenGear and droneBEE like this.

  6. #36
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    11
    A historical example would be by using monarchical government rules.

    for example, a king who derives his power directly from god (monarchy) can simply decree that people will no longer have access to potable water without being subjugated to a slave contract.

    now, we're moving more into very abstract economic-philosophy but the idea I wanted to relay is: a new more effective economic model won't solve all problems. An access-economy will be an amazing development, but even if it happened tomorrow, cultural problems will still persist (at least for a few generations)
    droneBEE and HAL9000 like this.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,059
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenGear View Post
    A historical example would be by using monarchical government rules.

    for example, a king who derives his power directly from god (monarchy) can simply decree that people will no longer have access to potable water without being subjugated to a slave contract.

    now, we're moving more into very abstract economic-philosophy but the idea I wanted to relay is: a new more effective economic model won't solve all problems. An access-economy will be an amazing development, but even if it happened tomorrow, cultural problems will still persist (at least for a few generations)
    Don't you mean...whereby the 'Monarch makes up the rules'.....??

    How did the Monarch acquire the power (wealth) he wields without some form of currency (gold, silver, precious and non precious stones....and promises) to 'pay' the forces (army) that are required in order to 'take' what never belonged to him?

    For many, many years.....I've been wanting to 'see' an example (just one!!) of any sort of 'DEED provided by GOD' to anyone, much less from some self proclaimed, self enriched Landlord, who only gained such power through inheritance or after 'stepping' on the plenty....

    Alas my friends, no such evidence of GOD granting exclusive Land Rights to anyone exists....because this entire trip has all been a giant CON GAME....and we are its victims....
    HAL9000 and Brad* like this.

  8. #38
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    11
    I don't literally mean a "god" gave him power. But that is the monarchical argument. the king is a special divine entity. just like kings today. for example the king of Morocco is considered the "first Muslim" and the leader of the faith


    there is no need for a currency, religion or some other method can be used. Money systems have just evolved to be the most effective means of power consolidation because all societies agreed that money has value.
    from then on you can get in depth about the agreed upon exchange rates.

    "power resides where men believe it resides" - GoT

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    784
    Who gave the King power if it can't be a God?

    Us .... the masses & a belief. I believe that's all it would take for a Monarchal type government to have this type of control over the people even without a form of Money. Some deep Indoctrination from an early age would get the people to follow as long as you keep them away from other forms of Knowledge/Education. Just look at today and you can see this in full display in a lot of the customs people follow just because we were thought early on that this is our way of life.
    HAL9000, droneBEE and Brad* like this.

  10. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    120
    Why is it that the basic ideas of so many religions are so similar to one another? Within a relatively short period of time, thousands of civilizations around the world recognized an 'evil force' that made people sin. Is there really a supernatural man with a pitch fork and goat horns pulling the strings? Or, could it be that money is actually that 'evil force'? Could it be money that has separated us from the natural world and from each other? Could it be money that has us trapped in this ridiculous state of immoral, destructive behaviour? Is money Literally the Devil? After all, money was around long before these religions were founded.....
    Ernest likes this.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
web statistics
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1