What if we create a financial incentive to get more people thinking and talking about an alternative economy?
This idea was discussed briefly in another thread a while back, I thought I'd start this thread to share ideas and possibly get something started. I propose we start a website and hold a contest that awards a cash prize for the best transition plan. To determine the best plan everyone is welcome to review and rate the plans. Lets say the duration of the contest is six months, after six months the person with the highest rated plan will receive the prize money. During the six months people can contribute money to the prize pot if they wish. My hope is that a cash prize will encourage people to submit plans, and reviewing better plans will inspire more contributions to the prize pot.
It's a pretty simple concept, but I don't really know where to go from here. Any feedback is very welcome!
This could actually work.....seeing that we are still largely motivated by cash.....
It'll keep us busy 'making plans' for months....no?
....and we should expect some very good ideas to be presented, especially based on the previous posts of many TZM supporters, because other than a few 'Science based Forums' frequented, THIS PLACE has some of the smartest folks I've encountered on the WEB...so far.....for the most part, I sincerely feel honored to be in such company.
....Or, will this exercise just become another distraction, another diversion from the reality we all face...but refuse to look at? ....I sure don't know......not for certain, anyway
My only 'personal' concern and belief about these kinds of things is that I believe the 'Best Plans have already been proposed' (some of them, thousands of years ago)....and that for whatever reason, excuse or justification, we as a collective, albeit a still evolving one, 'select' to ignore or forget them, preferring to make 'our own' plans instead.....
I think everyone here already knows the solutions/remedies I'll be offering.... ..... But If this takes off....I'd even contribute a few bucks to the winner
Last edited by droneBEE; 01-05-2017 at 07:49 AM.
During the past year I have come to realise more and more that plans for the transition are almost meaningless. What matters is to BE the transition. It's already happening.
Why are plans meaningless? Because the transition is organic, it's collective, people make it, all of us. It unfolds in complex ways, in unpredictable ways. A plan is made by someone or by a group of people, who then hopes it will be followed by the rest. However you cannot enforce it on people, and things never go according to plan. Besides, what happens is that other groups of people have other plans (even if so slightly different) and the planners end up fighting about what's the best plan and not even starting to put the plan into action, and not achieving anything real.
Let's not be a planner. Let's be a doer. Let's materialise the transition in small steps, in small achievements. Let's not talk about how to get to an imaginary "RBE" world, but focus on what we are now doing to improve the world. Let's start sharing! If we initiate ways of being/doing which are successful and make us happy, they will spread like wildfire.
Right On Phil......Making plans is rather the simple part (we all make plans), making friends for a future Fight against the Machine is really Hard Work.....Ask me how I know....
Changing the direction this World is heading? An insurmountable, yet not impossible task awaits us all....Are we up for it?
We can only start with 'ourselves' as the First Order of Business.....and avoid telling other's what 'we want them' to do.....because its a good way to lose support....
The contest doesn't have to be for the best transition plan. It's the financial incentive that is important. How about this instead? We start a website and hold a contest for the best essay describing what a world without money might look like. People can submit their essay to be reviewed and rated. People can donate to the prize pot if they wish. The person with the highest rated essay after six months will receive the prize. We could be very creative in how we advertise this contest. “Win $100,000 for writing a short essay!” “Share your vision, and win $???????” If the contest takes off is there any limit to how high the prize pot could go? Would better essays and an ever rising prize pot be exciting enough to make the contest eventually go viral?
Let's start sharing! See COMMUNITY as part of this site We can share the things we Know here 'Books to read',
Originally Posted by Phil
Movies to watch, Documentaries to watch, Movies to watch, Music' YOUTUBE and internet links. Any other group anyone cares to open. One way we might make this Place less confrontational and more of an Educational experience for all of us. Those groups links could then be Ref to in FORUM thereby saving repetition and I believe enhancing all of our experiences.
I really like this idea! If we can attract people to the website with the prize, having a stock pile of information would be perfect to educate and encourage more submissions. Most people have no idea that an alternative economy is even an option. In my view it's very easy to understanding an RBE and its potential, the problem is that people are just not aware of it.
Originally Posted by Thymelawde
I'm curious, if we do start this contest what would your submission look like in a nutshell?
Originally Posted by droneBEE
Here's my idea - simply let free market capitalism dominate the economy without actually becoming anarchists, until capitalism is practically rendered obsolete (i.e. essentially the point where the transition will have predominantly completed).
If anything will make for a smooth transition, I don't believe anything else will do as well as free market capitalism.
Let people engage in buying/selling/trading anything they want & not having to buy/sell/trade if they don't want to, as long as there are no individual or collective victims (no contract killing permitted; no making or taking anyone as chattel permitted or kidnapping or taking anyone hostage, for ransom, permitted; no stealing/mugging/robbery/fraud permitted; polluting land/air/water severely restricted or prohibited; etc.).
When I say free market capitalism, I mean there still is the state and government. Without the state and government, there is no capitalism at all. There has to be government and the state to act as the political and economic referees & playing field, but it should refrain from intervening. That also means there are still taxes or tariffs.
Taxation is not theft & by definition cannot be theft; taxation is the fee paid to acquire recognition of ownership of property. Taxation can be unfair, excessive, complicated, etc. Taxes should be kept fair, low, and simple, for example a 10% flat tax on any income, regardless of source or manner (e.g., wages, tips, stock market investments, savings account interest, etc.).
The state should not own property that is not necessary for essential government functions or other such needs, or at least refrain from owning more property than it needs to own. The more involved government is, in the ownership of things such as public parks, or welfare programs, the more localized it should be.
There can be some exceptions, such as roads or other means/methods of public transportation, since it is far more streamlined and economically efficient for such infrastructures to be collectively owned and maintained. Freeways/expressways can be maintained/managed at the broader level of territory they span, but local roadways ought to be more locally maintained/managed. Governments should be encouraged to involve private contracting to build & maintain roads, or to operate & maintain public transportation systems. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to gather more feedback from travelers to make sure they're getting quality service from private contractors. Keep government out of the way of taxi or ride sharing services. If someone wants to build their own private roads, they ought to be permitted to do so; one limitation could be that right of ways and publicly owned roads for access to any part of the highway system should take precedence or priority when it comes to whether a private company can own a route or not; another limitation could be that if a private company makes its roads publicly accessible, it may charge a toll but it cannot refuse service to anyone without a good enough reason (health/safety reasons, etc.); exceptions would be if private companies build a route through a region that would otherwise be impractical (e.g., they build a tunnel through a mountain or bridge over a river). Basically that means that anyone should usually be able to reasonably get from one place to another; reasonable would be something along the lines of not having to regularly take a route that substantially circumscribes a perimeter of more than 3/4 of a revolution; some exceptions would be if the natural terrain makes it impractical (e.g., hills, mountains, lakes, streams, rivers, oceans), roadwork or road construction is taking place, special zoning places limits or restrictions on roadways (such as for protection of unique & natural sites), or large airports.
Welfare can and should exist, and taxes should be used to fund it. For similar reasons that taxation is the fee one pays to acquire recognition of ownership of property, taxation could also be considered the fee paid to the collective of society for the property of which they take ownership. What I mean is this - suppose there are 100 people, and there's a 1 square mile plot of valuable, useful land, and they're trying to determine who owns it; initially we could start off by saying that it's undefined, no one owns it and everyone owns it at the same time. They decide that anyone who wants a plot of land can pay to the rest of the group of people $10 per square foot, and the rest of the group divides that money evenly among themselves. Those who want to own 100,000 square feet of land can pay $100,000 to the rest of the group; it's the trade-off with the collective of society for the recognition of the ownership of that property. The taxes we pay also serve essentially a similar role; it's the fee paid to those who don't own land in exchange for the recognition that the individual or company that paid for the land and the taxes owns that land. I think the true free market capitalist would appreciate the perspective that welfare implemented in this fashion has nothing to do with being a social program, but simply a valid form of trade. What we do now is practically & essentially the same thing, but in a crude, roundabout way; the problem is that it's very inefficient, and involved too much cumbersome overhead. I don't claim that it would work far more efficiently, but I certainly do wonder; I also wonder if politicians purposely keep things this way so they and their party (or cronies) can hold onto & remain in power.
I'm a little out of fuel right now; if I think of more details I'll add them later.