Does The World Still Need Money???

I dont really know how to explain this but im going to try anyway!

Does The World Still Need Money???

Say every country in the world eradicated money.

Would it not be alot easier?

No more debt, no more wars over money and oil, no more divisions in society between the rich and the poor!

Im not saying people would work for free, just like a points scheme or something of the like. The more you work, the more you can have.

Im finding it really hard trying to explain what i mean here so if anybody catches my drift please feel free to help me.

Originally posted by MickeyDee
Im not saying people would work for free, just like a points scheme or something of the like. The more you work, the more you can have.

Is that not essentially money?

Originally posted by tdc85
Is that not essentially money?

Unless he means you live within the working points bracket that you have achieved.

eg

80 points to 90 points per week - A particular standard of living with standard luxery items

100 points to 110 points per week - Next stage

etc etc

But that wouldn't work, people like to spend their money on what they want, maybe I read to much into the idea.

Maybe we can do without the Greenback, yen, won, lari, rubles, baht and all pesos of the world.....but if the powers that be do that they will replace it with some other form of currency to track how much people work, kiss arse, steal, ride on other people, inherit thru divorce and death and other ways of getting "money".

Some people work hard for thier moneycurrency and should be able to buy whatever they want with thier money/currency....as long as it's like that ill be happy.

My points scheme was a bad idea as essentially it is just money(although it would stop identity theft and counterfieting).

I dont even know how to descibe what i meant but i'll try.

Say a person goes for their weekly shopping, they get it for free. You may say that the shop will lose out then but they wont because the owner would be getting their stock free. The stock may come from the local farmer who didnt have to pay for the seeds to grow his crop because they were....free.
Nobody would be losing profit because they wouldnt have paid in the first place.

If everything was free there would have to be some certain limitations obviously, but it couls work if all the problems were ironed out.


I really, really wish i hadnt started this thread because im finding it so hard to explain what i mean!!!

Originally posted by MickeyDee
Say a person goes for their weekly shopping, they get it for free. You may say that the shop will lose out then but they wont because the owner would be getting their stock free. The stock may come from the local farmer who didnt have to pay for the seeds to grow his crop because they were....free.
Nobody would be losing profit because they wouldnt have paid in the first place.

Sounds like a form of Communism to me, which would mean the good old question of ''whats in it for me'' arises, why should I run a shop if I can't get money to buy things I want.

There's no reward for increased effiecency and being productive.

Man, now im confused

If everything was free there would have to be some certain limitations obviously, but it couls work if all the problems were ironed out

Then what would be the motivation in working?

Yeah, I know....if you don't work and contribute as everyone else then you can't be in the "free" club.

But where's the motivation in busting you arse in high school, going to college, getting a degree, working hard, then going back for a masters which will get you more money for just having one in many jobs?

There are many jobs that should pay people alot more money...they deserve it.

What about the guys who work hard driving trucks and doing the dirty jobs? That's hard work

And the fancy good lawyers? this is too

Who would determine what is "hard" work?

Why would I work super duper hard if Im gonna benifit the same as everyone else?

It's too complicated



[edit on 23/5/2005 by SportyMB]

MickeyDee, I started an almost identical thread in Ignorance Denied (I was gonna put it in ATS but it's not conspiracy related).



I understand exactly what you're saying: If no-one has to worry about money, we can concentrate on providing for ourselves. Work would be done because it needs doing, not for selfish greed, and people would honour the hard-worker, not the rich guy.

[edit on 23/5/2005 by Al Vereco]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Sounds like a form of Communism to me,

Just minutes before you posted this i thought to myself....that would just be Communism. It would be like living in the Soviet Union but worse.

But i do think the points scheme would work.

Instead of pounds you get points for your work, which you are then able to spend via a money card (debit card).

This would make forging money a thing of the past, although identity theft would probably rise!

ok, let me get my head around this idea...breaking it into its simplist form it is changing pounds into points, with the elimation of coins and notes for a plastic cards.

Sounds like a concept of future money to me, only practical way for a global currency.


[edit on 23-5-2005 by UK Wizard]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
ok, let me get my head around this idea...breaking it into its simplist form it is changing pounds into points, with the elimation of coins and notes for a plastic cards.

Sounds like a concept of future money to me, only practical way for a global currency.

Exactly what i meant.

Forget the no money thing, it would be much better to just scrap coins and notes and rely on plastic cards! This would end the worry of losing £20,000 in a house fire etc because you would just phone the bank and get a new card!!!

i have had this though many times and it would be possible if robots did everything for us. no need to pay the robots and we can all live free. but until that happens we are stuck with money.

To SportyMB:

It’s not that complicated really. I’ve thought much about this.

Someone would have to work our how much work was needed to provide us all with basics, heating, electricity, food, health etc. Then you roughly divide that out among the working populace. So, let’s say for arguments sake, your average person will need to work 2 days a week and this will ensure everybody has all that is needed for comfortable survival. Then you work out the fun bit, entertainment (arts/film/theatre), education and expansion (science) and figure out what’s needed there.

Everybody should have a turn with the crappy work, no one should be above it really. Jobs would be more flexible for those who like to flit about and jobs would be steady for those who are happy where they are. There will be people who will want to work more than the two days and those who will work less, I think it would balance out.

To the original poster: money isn’t the problem per se, after all its just paper. It’s the attitude towards money, the buying and selling of it and charging interest. It’s also capitalism, a nasty system of ripping each other off. Imagine the pharmaceutical industry being run for people and not profit!

Unfortunately, the powers that be like it this way, this crappy way of living (working for money as opposed to working for the greater good, i.e. living a full life!). Lets go back to the days when things were made for real, in the last two years I have had a TV go wonky, DVD player, MP3 player, two mobile phones all go bust on me. But lets also go forward with technology and science but without the constraints of capitalism!

When is this madness going to end?

Anyone see that scifi episode on TV (outer limits or twilight zone or maybe movie) where people were given a lump sum at birth and were terminated when the count got to zero?? Pretty cool - party hard and fast and go out soon or milk it and live (not Logan's Run BTW)....

If you mean a cashless society, that is doable today and this will pain the NWO doomsayers, but is not a bad thing if security were upped a bit. Smart card with biometric and PIN authentication....

Others methods get too close to socialism/communism and that is a bad driver for incentivizing excellence but I'm sure there are some schemes on the edge of plausibility that might work....

Money will never be completly eliminated. Its one of the most effective control schemes in the world. We need money to eat, to have shelter over our heads, clothing to keep us warm, luxuries to waste time with, and transporatation to work. Its a rather clever cycle that keeps itself running indefinately really. We have been bred at birth that we have to have money, that its the end all be all of life becuase without it you fail to exist basically, so we put our nose to the grindstone and toil to make the paper that we are told keeps us alive basically. Actually just eliminated the cost of land would do a great stride towards helping out the human situation. A plot of land can provide lumber for shelter, food to eat, and a place to live. Just that simple change could do so much, but the "ownership society" seems to prevent any level of personal freedom in that respect.

It’s not that complicated really. I’ve thought much about this

Then can you please elaborate? not to be a smarty pants...I really wanna know.

Specifically try to hit the questions I ask in my other post? If you don't mind.

Im not so cool with the idea of having all my currency..call it dollars, yen, marlboro miles or camel cash..whatever...I dont like the idea of having it ALL in the form of 1's and 0's. I like to have a little material cash stashed under my mattress in case a Y2K happens when I least expect it.
Ofcourse money is gonna be the lest of my problems if that happens...but it'll still help.

Originally posted by SportyMB

Then can you please elaborate? not to be a smarty pants...I really wanna know.

Specifically try to hit the questions I ask in my other post? If you don't mind.

Ill have a go at answering your questions. But first I have to repeat myself.
"Someone would have to work our how much Work was needed to provide us all with basics, heating, electricity, food, health etc."

This will answer your question on "Who would determine what is "hard" work?” Well, someone will, like someone always determines what is.

We need to work out what Work is necessary for actual living, as I stated above. That task alone should show us what Work there needs to be done and what type (does it require highly skilled people? How many? Can it be flexible?) Many variables that someone with the time and resources can easily work out.

"Then what would be the motivation in working?" The motivation for work used to be about survival or slavery, now it is about money, which ensures our membership within the society. People do work for reward, at the moment it comes in notes and coins, it could come from anywhere. The reward will also be meaningful lives, in our work and play. Imagine, really really try to imagine a world where our science and pursuit of knowledge/love/meaning isn’t hampered by capitalism.

"And the fancy good lawyers?" What about them? Seriously, in the UK we do not have armies of fancy lawyers, a few barristers and solicitors to deal with the court *shrugs* I don’t see the issue! Society could do with a whole new rework after it changes the economy madness.

"Why would I work super duper hard if I’m gonna benifit the same as everyone else?"
Indeed, a lot of people work super duper hard in a job that is an utter waste of time for that individual and the environment. To only put in a week a month to ensure everyone is looked after (that is what you would like yes?) isn’t working hard. People will have to rework their lives to get round the idea that work doesn’t define you, "What do you do?", "I’m an accountant” Definition from your job sucks, that is not who you are, or me.