Random thoughts

[Lexus]

Yeah, people will probably just ignore this. And this is probably not the best sort of forum to post it. But still, I wanna post it here. See what people think of it.

A society where money doesnt exist.

Let me explain. First of all, what is money? Its a tool for trade. Instead of giving people something back directly when you want their services you give them money, a sort of omni tool for trade. In theory, money is the perfect trading tool. However, it has a very nasty side effects. First of all, you can horde it. This creates inequality. Unnecessary inequality. Also, we have become a consumer society. Money has become our purpose in life. We start wars in order to get more money. Human life, happiness and progress have all been cast aside for more money. While in essence, money is worthless. Its just printed paper. Would you ever give me a car if I handed you enough printed pieces of paper? It has no real value, other then the value that we have given it. I think that is unnatural. No where in the rest of the animal kingdom do you see animals giving so much value to basically worthless things.

So, how would (according to me) a society without money work? Its based on this simple thing. If you work (and I define work as providing a usefull service to society as a whole, aka being a farmer, barber, producer etc) you can have full access to basically every other service. After all, you provide your service for everyone who wants it, and if everyone does that, everyone can go to everyone for their things. So, a farmer grows the food, a food producer collects it and turns it into actual food. They both provide a service so they both get access to the food. A barber cuts the hair of everyone who wants a haircut, including the farmer and the food producer, so he gets their food as well. You know what I mean?

Of course, this works only if there is someone who controls the distribution of this. Limits have to set. I mean, it would be weird if people can get unlimited supplies of everything because they worked for a month. It needs to be somewhat spread out over the years. This used to be a nearly impossible task that would spawn huge bureaucracies. That was back in the day where there werent any computers. Now we have computers that are capable of properly dividing the available resources over everyone. That are able to set limits.

This would also mean, a lot of jobs will disappear. Get rid of money, and youll get rid of the entire financial sector. No more banks, no more companies that make money by sending paper around. No more utterly pointless companies that provide no real service to society as a whole. Well thats good, because that means we can get A) more farmers and B) get rid of the 40+ hour work week. We can reduce it to a 20 hour work week or something. Which means more free time to do things that are also important. Like intellectual development, science, art and culture, being there for your kids, sports, hobbies etc etc.

There would also be no more taxes to pay to the government. After all, the government is providing a service, so it doesnt need to pay for its employees. They get paid out by everyone for providing the service. Which also means the government can basically spend infinite amounts of workforce on large scale infrastructural developments. Things that used to be to expensive can now be done for basically free.

Doesnt this sound good to you?

Discuss, give your opinions, point out flaws, whatever.

[Shirow]

I think it's a nice pipe dream but you will just run into the same situation, I think. Enterprising people will come up with something awesome (e.g. LCD TVs) and they will only trade them for something equally awesome (e.g. a Ferrari)

Something will always bubble up to replace currency, even if it's gold, diamonds, carrots or whatever... civilization would have to erode tremendously to be able to move past currency.

It is sort of a nice idea in theory though.

[sinaptic]

Funny you should mention this; I just heard a radio interview with some academic (sorry, the name escapes me) who was basically saying the same thing. In fact, he seemed to think that global society right now is going through the “growing pains” of such a transition, even though we may not be aware of it. This isn’t to say it is going to happen tomorrow or even in the next century, but eventually.

I agree that this is where we should be heading, but realistically it really isn’t going to happen anytime soon, and certainly not in our lifetimes. However, I do think society will evolve out of the need for money (stands to reason, money after all, is the result of a prior societal evolution) if we don’t end up destroying ourselves first, which I personally believe is the more likely scenario – but I suppose that’s a different subject best left for a different thread, hehe.

[Jib]

You sound like a hippy. :)

I agree with Shirow that it sounds nice and theoretically could work but it doesn't work well with human psychology.  Some people always have to have the most and be the best.  I don't agree with you about money slowing our progress.  I feel the opposite, working 40 hrs at least, having wars, this pushes our technology and science to the limit constantly. 

Looking at your post again it sounds like you introduced a form of money. "...this works only if there is someone who controls the distribution of this."  If someone is deciding how much of something someone gets then on his computer there is probably some sort of number to tell you how much they deserve.

This got me thinking about retirement.  In a paper money society you can horde money for when you are old and unable to perform any work.  In your society the person in charge of distribution would be taking care of the elderly and allowing them access to resources and services.  Now would a retired individually be eligible for more goods and services if they worked as a farmer compared to a town drunk?  If so then you have arbitrarily defined a money system, if not then you would quickly have a very lazy country once people realize there is no need to work.

I'm am just thinking out loud.  I do agree that there has got to be a better system/government idea then any that we currently have or have tried.

[Lexus]

Everyone gets just as much. No difference at all. A factory owner earns just as much as a factory worker, and they earn just as much as a politician. The computer only has to divide the amount of resources over the amount of people who are eligible for getting it. Then instead of a lot of classes, we got 3 classes: those that work, those that dont, and those that cant.   

On the matter of retirement, obviously a farmer gets more then a town drunk, but thats simply because the farmer has worked his entire life, contributed to society by producing resources, and the town drunk never did any of that.

If the difference between working and not working means you got a monetary system, ok, maybe. I wouldnt call it like that as you cant horde it, cant change it, cant access, and it has no physical representation, nor is it subject to inflation or anything.

And it is slowing our progress. Technological progress isnt the only kind of progress. And what good are all these fancy new gadgets if its slowly killing the world and youre never around to enjoy them? Look at our work rate. Look at the dramatic increase of people who are bipolar or have a burn out. Those things arent natural. The increase isnt natural. Its a symptom of something much bigger. The symptom of the constant stress of constantly having to be better then everyone else. The constant stress of achieving more and more out of a single person. Our minds cannot comprehend it. We cannot hold this growth rate. We are not build for this. We have almost perfect lives compared to a 100 years ago. We are relatively safe from all kinds of sicknesses, we all got good homes, enough to eat, why would we want more if its good already? I think its time that we severely decrease the pace of our 'progress' and take in account other things that are important as well. We should consolidate on what we have now, before we go to far and shoot ourselves back to the dark ages. 

[Jib]

If a factory owner makes the same as a factory worker why would someone take the extra responsibilities of running a factory when they get payed the same as everyone else.  Some would argue that human nature can be changed.  http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/do_our_genes_make.php.  Coming from capitalism the acquisitive society it is hard for me to imagine happening.

"We have almost perfect lives compared to a 100 years ago."  and a 100 years ago people could say the same thing.  Imagine how much has changed since then and then how much could change in the next 100 years, exciting.

To make sure we are on the same page you are advocating socialism.  A lot of people believe that it is the best government.  I haven't heard of a country really doing a good job of implementing it and making it work though.  Is it better than capitalism?  I'm not sure.  We could go back and forth for a long time about the advantages and disadvantages of each system. 

[Drewthetexan]

This is a tough one.  I think a moneyless society is a very romantic idea, and presupposes a human ability to be satisfied with what is necessary to survive, and not want "more".  It also suggests a ubiquitous sense of equality across humanity where one does not seek power over another.

From an evolutionary standpoint, one from which we are not far removed from, competition was, and still is, a fundamental tenet of life. I think one of the theories about our becoming bipeds is that it became advantageous for developing into a hunter/gatherer role, where the males who could travel farther and bring back more food were more apt to provide for their young and mated more often.  What was the currency of the time?  I'd say food and reproductive rights.  This were really the only viable commodities.

As primitive society developed, and evolved from hunter/gatherer to agrarian, food became plentiful, yet we still were subject to competition, and even as the needs of society were met further, there was still more competition - in large part because of population growth.   

I can't find a reference to it, but there is a social psychology theory, akin to Maslow's hierarchy of needs but entirely different in itself, that as our needs are met we then have time to want more.  As our wants are met, we still desire more.  It was broken up into 5 categories, I think, where as we achieve a level of certain needs being met, we then can focus on less important things to our survival.   

I think the fundamental failing in a society without a currency is the economic viability.  Consider the limitations of resources.  If we are equally entitled to the goods and services available, after all my needs are met, what distinguishes my access to things I want?  How do we assign value to the things we have or want? Does the government homogenize our wants so that we are all equally represented?

Way back before Earth became an overpopulated dumping ground for human debris, the barter system was the form of currency where someone could cut someone else's hair in exchange for a chicken, or couple of ears of corn, or whatever.  But if all you do is cut hair, how would you get food from a bald farmer?  Would you have to find another farmer you can exchange with?

In the scenario Lexus presents, the barber still has access to his share of the food supply, but then the bald farmer does not require the services of the barber.  There is an inherent inequality in the services performed here.  Given all the various professions and varying needs, does this wash out in the end?

[Lexus]

If a factory owner makes the same as a factory worker why would someone take the extra responsibilities of running a factory when they get payed the same as everyone else.  Some would argue that human nature can be changed.  http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/do_our_genes_make.php.  Coming from capitalism the acquisitive society it is hard for me to imagine happening.

"We have almost perfect lives compared to a 100 years ago."  and a 100 years ago people could say the same thing.  Imagine how much has changed since then and then how much could change in the next 100 years, exciting.

To make sure we are on the same page you are advocating socialism.  A lot of people believe that it is the best government.  I haven't heard of a country really doing a good job of implementing it and making it work though.  Is it better than capitalism?  I'm not sure.  We could go back and forth for a long time about the advantages and disadvantages of each system. 

Socialism doesnt work in a monetary system. Its to expensive, and because money is limited, it simply cannot to be supported. Especially if the birth rate, and with that, the tax rate decreases.

In my proposed system, there would be no such limitation, as the government is no longer dependent on taxes. It can basically do whatever it deems necessary as it does not pay for the health care, but rather, it forces the health care to take care of everyone that needs it. And because they take care, and thus provide a service, the people that work there get paid in terms of goods.

Though yes, it would require a rather drastic change in how humans (especially western people) think. Dont say its not possible. We have all seen what communism did, and how the vast majority of people where pretty happy with it. Especially at the beginning. It worked for a while. You can have people do difficult work for just the basic amount of stuff a human really needs. And then Im talking about our current welfare level, not something way below that.


As for Maslow, at the top of his pyramid, youll see individual development. Aka, doing the stuff thats fun. Learning new things, time for hobbies, traveling, doing stuff that interests you. But what if I would look at a current humans needs? Ill see one thing at the top of his pyramid: more money, I want more money. For what sake? All his primary needs are fullfilled, all his secondary needs as well. Why does he need more money? For more tv's? Cars? I find it a somewhat empty existance if you only exist to consume. If your entire life is based around consuming. I cant blame the person, its our entire economy thats based on it. All our growth is entirely dependant on the amount of consumption. If the consumption stalls, so will our economy. So were in a spiral that leads to the destruction of our society, because at some point, more is simply not possible. Then the system has overstretched itself, and it will collapse tearing everything down.

I prefer to avoid that, by replacing the system with something more sustainable, less resource consuming before the whole thing comes crashing down. Though I doubt I or anyone else will succeed. Well, you cant blame me for at least trying.

[Shirow]

I think you're over-generalizing by saying everyone's highest level of desire is more money.

[Leviathan]

never mind all of the fools that are scrambling to buy gold.  when the shit really hits the fan the only two metals worth any value whatsoever will be high carbon steel and lead.  you can't eat lead but you can damn sure protect what you have with weapons.  in today's modern electronic society we are only a few days away from unrecoverable anarchy and complete political collapse.  When shipments of food stop coming in (because teh internets will be down) then people will migrate in search of food.  then the violence starts.  i hope it never happens.  but if it does i feel horrible for all of the poor people who live in places without guns.  they will be at the mercy of criminals who never followed the gun laws in the first place.  no virgin or food cache would be safe.

Levi

[Lexus]

never mind all of the fools that are scrambling to buy gold.  when the shit really hits the fan the only two metals worth any value whatsoever will be high carbon steel and lead.  you can't eat lead but you can damn sure protect what you have with weapons.  in today's modern electronic society we are only a few days away from unrecoverable anarchy and complete political collapse.  When shipments of food stop coming in (because teh internets will be down) then people will migrate in search of food.  then the violence starts.  i hope it never happens.  but if it does i feel horrible for all of the poor people who live in places without guns.  they will be at the mercy of criminals who never followed the gun laws in the first place.  no virgin or food cache would be safe.

Levi

Nah, the whole system will collapse. Spending billions on banks wont save the system. Oh no, it will only buy us some extra years. But in 2-5 years it will come back, bigger then before, and then it will consume the whole system.

Communism or something that looks like it will get another chance, just like the fascists. Well just repeat history again. Some minority is going to be screwed (likely the muslims) and after wards some other political system will come out dominant. I hope its my own system. Well I better hurry with making it known to the world :P

[Drewthetexan]

never mind all of the fools that are scrambling to buy gold.  when the shit really hits the fan the only two metals worth any value whatsoever will be high carbon steel and lead.  you can't eat lead but you can damn sure protect what you have with weapons.  in today's modern electronic society we are only a few days away from unrecoverable anarchy and complete political collapse.  When shipments of food stop coming in (because teh internets will be down) then people will migrate in search of food.  then the violence starts.  i hope it never happens.  but if it does i feel horrible for all of the poor people who live in places without guns.  they will be at the mercy of criminals who never followed the gun laws in the first place.  no virgin or food cache would be safe.

Levi

Nah, the whole system will collapse. Spending billions on banks wont save the system. Oh no, it will only buy us some extra years. But in 2-5 years it will come back, bigger then before, and then it will consume the whole system.

Communism or something that looks like it will get another chance, just like the fascists. Well just repeat history again. Some minority is going to be screwed (likely the muslims) and after wards some other political system will come out dominant. I hope its my own system. Well I better hurry with making it known to the world :P

Ah, the big SHTF.  I expect to see it in my lifetime.

[Lexus]

The odds are that most of us here will see it happen in their lifetime.

[Drewthetexan]

I just hope I have enough popcorn and beer.  I'm taking notes from a buddy on how to brew it.  You know, in case I can't buy it anymore.

[Jib]

don't worry popcorn is easy to brew