Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 60
Like Tree77Likes

Thread: The solution to society's problems...

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,119
    IMHO; Despite my faith in science and its promise to future societies....science alone (or robots) won't save us or our planet....that's just something the human race must come to terms with....we must stop waiting for someone or something else to do the work we all know needs doing....for our survival we must collectively change/condemn the 'reptilian' mindsets that push us against one another in order to finally reach our full potential as Human Beings....

    As an old guy ruminating in these pages....and along with the technological advances in communication, I've never in my life felt more hopeful or optimistic that it really is possible to make the necessary changes before we kill ourselves off....

  2. #12
    Max
    Max is offline
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1
    I think the root of the problem is that in order for a society to function we have to exchange services and goods. A few centuries ago we used the barter system which now it ss being updated with the use of currency.
    How come we only have this rule to go by? Why we have not thought of another one? Why do we have to exchange something in order to live? Surely there must be something else that we could do?
    Ernest and RhythmAnarchy like this.

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    637
    Sure there are other ways. You have gift economies. Simply said, you give a person that needs something, that what he/she needs. The person is morally obligated to give something back, usually a bit more or less perceived worth than what was received. This works in smaller communities, where every body can keep a balance in their head from who you owns still something and who you still have to give something. Barter was only used with people outside the community.

    Currency was introduced as record keeping. Grain was stored centrally in the village of city, and coins were distributed, where a coin equals a cup of grain. Those coins were used to buy other services and goods. Some of the grain will turn bad, so you have a depreciating currency.

    You also had gold coins, usable in a country, so the king could give the army gold for buying food on the road, and use taxes to get the gold back. This measure was also often used in villages and cities, but by just writing down the amounts (often chalk on a slate) and expunging mutual debts (clean slate).

    Then you had money representing an unseen amount of gold, where more can be loaned than there actually is in the bank.

    Now you have money that represent future services and goods.

    (paraphrasing from a lecture about "Debt, the first 5000 years")

    So we had already different types of currencies. Commodity based, precious metal, mutual debt...

    Why do it like this? Because if you want a community with more than a 150 people, you need a method of record keeping. Why need a larger community? To allow for specialization. If everybody acts as generalists, progress is very hard and fall back to very generic goods, not specialized goods. Why do we now use those interest bearing debt based currencies now? Because because of industrialization forced a growth of society, and we needed currencies that could expand with it. Will we keep using those? No. Society is in overshoot en will shrink, so depreciating currencies will be used soon. You see this in some 10 year bonds already having negative interest rates.
    droneBEE, RhythmAnarchy and Ernest like this.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    940
    You have gift economies. Simply said, you give a person that needs something, that what he/she needs. The person is morally obligated to give something back, usually a bit more or less perceived worth than what was received.
    I understand Gift Economics as giving with no equal expectation of return. No fame nor fortune is expected in return, one gives because it's the right to do, not an investment in a portfolio.

    The 150 constant needs some revision due to internet influence.

    edit;
    You also had gold coins, usable in a country, so the king could give the army gold for buying food on the road, and use taxes to get the gold back. This measure was also often used in villages and cities, but by just writing down the amounts (often chalk on a slate) and expunging mutual debts (clean slate).
    Quantum economics

    Fundamental Concepts

    The following concepts are the cornerstones of quantum economics.
    Money

    Bank money is indisputably the starting point of Bernard Schmitt’s analysis. Referring to double entry bookkeeping, he shows that the emission of money is an instantaneous event taking place every time a payment is carried out by banks. Since no positive asset can be created out of nothing, quantum economists maintain that, far from being a net asset, money is a purely numerical vehicle issued by banks in a circular flow defining its instantaneous creation and destruction. Money is therefore nothing more than a means of payment, a numerical vehicle through which payments are conveyed from purchaser to seller and whose existence in chronological time coincides with that of the payment it conveys: a mere instant.
    Income

    Quantum economists introduce a fundamental distinction between money and income. Money has no positive value whatsoever; and income is the very object of economic payments. While money is emitted by banks at zero cost, income is the result of production. According to quantum economic analysis, when banks grant a credit to the economy they do so by lending it the income generated by its own productive activity, not through money creation.
    Last edited by RhythmAnarchy; 10-25-2015 at 06:55 AM.
    droneBEE and Ernest like this.
    Everything Is Possible. Nothing Is True.
    (ψ = Σanψn)
    What do you know when the time is up and the door to the box is opened?
    It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    east coast
    Posts
    406
    I agree. In my mind, religion and politics are ways of coping and dealing with scarcity. Take away scarcity and a lot of the religious and political dynamic will either become irrelevant or shift away from their traditional issues.
    Last edited by fsir; 01-23-2016 at 04:55 AM.
    Ernest, Neil and HAL9000 like this.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,119
    Quote Originally Posted by fsir View Post
    I agree. In my mind, religion and politics are ways of coping and dealing with scarcity. Take away scarcity and a lot of the religious and political dynamic will either become irrelavent or shift away from their traditional issues.

    Under a capitalist system, Scarcity is a purposely designed illusion, while Abundance (for the well off) is the reality. Creating a SHARING economy would offer the entire world abundance instead of the select enrichment of our Aristocracy...

    Our planet is capable of sustaining 'all' of us if just a few of us stop TAKING, TAKING, TAKING......(being humans, they won't stop w/out a convincing force)
    fsir and Ernest like this.

  7. #17
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    37
    I do not see scarcity as the key problem, scarcity isnt helping, but imo it is not a key strategic root cause.

    I think that Money, Hierarchy and Secrecy are humanity's key civilization scale root problems and have been at the core of most instances of human organisation since antiquity.

    Take War. Many join the army for lack of job alternatives(money). War is a Racket, (Money:War profiteering, Secrecynly a few know the real reasons). So War starts with lies and propaganda(secrecy). But then military groups are hierarchic(hierarchy), Clack is told that a Brass doesnt know why the US wants to attack several countries (prepared before any made up casus beli so its a War Crime) but that hes following orders from above(hierarchy+secrecy). Even Smedley Butler said he just followed orders without knowing it was all a Racket(M+H+S). Most Soldiers dont want to die or kill people, but rely on what they're told and follow orders(mostly). The journalists that spread propaganda or fail to reveal it follow the line(hierarchy) that the owners(money) push or are out of a job(money), so the mainstream media push the war lies. Even public media can be jeopardized also because they are also hierarchic and the gov that heads it is non-democratic but hierarchic.

    In Canada, people working for gov agencies that were supposed to protect the public, were fired by the hierarchic agency(hierarchy) and lost their jobs(money) because they blew the whistle about truths that people should know (public safety) and its clear the majority of Canadians would have wanted these to get medals or praises instead of the opposite, and in another case parent and children have died from cancer because in that case no one informed(Secrecy) the public about known cancer causing toxins leaking in drinking water for fear of superiors(hierarchy) laying them off/harassing/suing them(money). If people die (War, Toxic leak, etc) because things are kept secret, and they are kept secret because of the influence of Hierarchy Money and Secrecy over people.

    On top of that you have Organized Crime and Secret Agencies (CIA, MI6, Mossad/ISIS,etc) which operate in Secret (Secrecy) that are Hierarchic and deal with money(Drugs, etc) . If media ownership wasnt enough, Operation Mockingbird shows secret organizations (FBI/CIA, but it could be others) DO have key media individuals on the payroll. The thing is many people within the system might not agree with what the organization they are a part of is doing, a lot of people, but they are influenced by a very few at the top as well as by systemic forces (without a person deciding but through the dynamics of the systems/social tides) through the mechanisms of Money, Hierarchy and Secrecy.


    "Under a capitalist system"
    In the feudal dark ages with Kings (which is basically a Warlord that can kill whoever doesnt call him King), things werent much better yet there was no Wall Street or Capitalism. In most cases the King leveraged Hierarchy, Money(pay henchmen/soldiers) and Secrecy/Lies(chosen by god, divine right, assassination plots,etc). Beneath the facade of Capitalism or Monarchy, are key causes, if you replace "Capitalism" with something else, like USSR, that also has money(conflicts of interest between individuals and society or other individuals, corruption, inequality of power), hierarchy(enforce undemocratic decisions, curtail information) and secrecy(allows undemocratic/criminal/unethical actions to persist), it wont matter imo.
    Last edited by IceWendigo; 01-22-2016 at 06:52 PM.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,212
    Quote Originally Posted by droneBEE View Post
    Under a capitalist system, Scarcity is a purposely designed illusion, while Abundance (for the well off) is the reality. Creating a SHARING economy would offer the entire world abundance instead of the select enrichment of our Aristocracy...

    Our planet is capable of sustaining 'all' of us if just a few of us stop TAKING, TAKING, TAKING......(being humans, they won't stop w/out a convincing force)
    I'm trying to figure out why you keep insisting that scarcity is an illusion. Yes, there are some situations where people do try to make something, such as diamonds, seem like they're more scarce than they actually are; but it's still scarcity (someone has exclusive control over the resource and they're hoarding it). But just because there are situations where people have tried to create the illusion that something's scarce doesn't mean all scarcity is an illusion; this is what's known as a "hasty generalization" fallacy (e.g., "some birds are red things, therefore all birds are red things", or "some birds are red things, therefore all red things are birds"). The reason people put effort into trying to make something that's scarce appear more scarce than it actually is, is because there's real scarcity driving them to do that in the first place. On the other hand, if there were no scarcity, people would not bother wasting their time trying to create the illusion that there is scarcity. It's absurd to claim that scarcity is an illusion.
    Last edited by Neil; 01-22-2016 at 08:02 PM.
    HAL9000 likes this.

  9. #19
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    37
    maybe "irrelevant" or "artificial" might be more clear than "illusion", in any case scarcity is not the core problem imo

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,212
    Quote Originally Posted by IceWendigo View Post
    maybe "irrelevant" or "artificial" might be more clear than "illusion", in any case scarcity is not the core problem imo
    well, artificial is rather synonymous with illusion, at least in this situation. I don't think saying it's irrelevant is realistic; the people who are homeless, living in poverty, or who are victims of crimes, war, etc. might take exception to the notion that it's irrelevant. What you refer to as the root problems of society (money, hierarchy, and secrecy) are all the consequences of scarcity, or things that branch off of the root.

    When scarcity (supply) of something in demand goes down, the need for money (the price) also goes down.

    If you no longer have scarcity and thus no longer need money, then you also don't need a job, which means you'll no longer have a boss (no more hierarchy).

    The economic purpose for secrecy is to protect assets. Whether it's the password to your bank account, a trade secret, military plans/intelligence, or a map to hidden buried treasure, they're only needed if there's scarcity. If there is no scarcity, then there is no need to keep any of those things secret, because it will no longer have an adverse effect to disclose any of those things to everyone else.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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