A Possible Solution To The Worlds Problems A RESOURCE BASED ECONOMY

reply to post by Americanist


Careful, you’re venturing dangerously close to the topic of the thread!

As for behaviours no one is saying that they don’t change only that they change within a limited scope. Environment can be the difference between someone being prone to random outbursts of jealousy or not but it can’t eliminate jealousy all together; it is simply a trait inherent to human (and other animal) behaviour.

If you dispute the genetic contribution to behaviour how do you explain the positive correlation of behavioural traits in monozygotic twins that are raised apart compared to dizygotic twins?

Putting aside long term evolution or genetic engineering then you are not going to eliminate greed, jealousy, apathy, laziness etc. If the claim is that you can then I beg for the evidence.

reply to post by 30_seconds


Then answer the questions.

If it is so clear then it should be simple to address the criticisms that have been levelled against this "theory" yet we're not getting them, we're just being pointed to videos.

And since when did asking questions become associated with being brainwashed?



[edit on 7-6-2010 by Mike_A]

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Btw, look back at the last 60 years... As our tastes evolve, so do the aspects of our behavior.

Sure, but it will NEVER be at the point where humans don't want to kill each other for some nefarious reason or another.

There will always be groups who think they are better and want more than everybody else, who think they deserve more than anybody else.

The little Utopia that the Venus Project is would crumble.

Look it's a nice idea, on paper, but so was communism and socialism. Hell even now were having second thoughts about Capitalism..

~Keeper

[edit on 6/7/2010 by tothetenthpower]

Crumble? Much like we're witnessing now? You're denying the inevitable on this topic.

Our society gets a shot in the arm starting on 4 fronts:

1. No-cost energy
2. No-cost communications
3. A collective wealth of agriculture (redundancy from local growers)
4. Usury is diverted to public works

So you don't blow a fuse debating with me... We don't create energy. We're currently billed for usage of dipoles. Our energy is drawn, and not so long ago one particular bastard decided to incorporate it (last name Morgan), which was a natural progression from banking. Should I tell you where interest payments go? Our food is cranked out by the same corporate masters. Capitalism is a buzz word... Nothing more.

A RBE is not all that difficult when you flush out the bad apples. I'll expound on this when I have some more available time.

reply to post by Mike_A

Putting aside long term evolution or genetic engineering then you are not going to eliminate greed, jealousy, apathy, laziness etc. If the claim is that you can then I beg for the evidence.

Wisdom serves as both evidence and as an eliminating factor.

If you want to get all hoo-haa over who gets the cucumber vs. a grape, go knock yourself out with the apes.

While i think the Zeitgeist Movement , and the Venus Project are a bit on the Bunkum side... There are some avenues of information that are making me lea a little more towards their way of thinking. I'm still not totally sold. I personally think that more community unity and organization to get people more engaged in their day to day experiences and less dependent on the system to be the support net as a means of revitalizing the people to become involved and integrated into whats happening around them on many levels.

Here's some vids that make good points, as well as change some pre-conceptions.

reply to post by Americanist


Hmm no answer to my criticisms, how unusual

With regards to your reply to tothetenthpower you are arguing against the current system not for the system proposed in the OP. I don’t think anyone who has argued against this RBE has said anything, positive or negative, about our current economic model; all we have done is pointed out the flaws in the idea of a resource based economy as put forward by the venus project.

So again, can you, being an apparent supporter, answer the questions I asked on the previous page or are you going to ignore all criticism (again) and post some attempt at a witty retort?



[edit on 7-6-2010 by Mike_A]

Originally posted by Americanist

Originally posted by tothetenthpower

Btw, look back at the last 60 years... As our tastes evolve, so do the aspects of our behavior.

Sure, but it will NEVER be at the point where humans don't want to kill each other for some nefarious reason or another.

There will always be groups who think they are better and want more than everybody else, who think they deserve more than anybody else.

The little Utopia that the Venus Project is would crumble.

Look it's a nice idea, on paper, but so was communism and socialism. Hell even now were having second thoughts about Capitalism..

~Keeper

[edit on 6/7/2010 by tothetenthpower]

A RBE is not all that difficult when you flush out the bad apples. I'll expound on this when I have some more available time.

THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Flush out the bad apples? No, you cannot.

Some people just want to watch the world burn and that will NEVER change.

Greed, hate, competition these are all very much human traits which nobody will ever be able to get rid of.

Sure it can get a lot of better, and I'm sure that with a resource based economy it would, but your Utopia will never come to pass.

Utopia's have always been fictional and non-existant. They are not realistic in any sense of the word.

~Keeper

Originally posted by chrisrand
reply to post by Mikey Sly

 

Its not as immense as you would think. There are entire factories in existence today that are fully automated. They even have certain machines that are capable of repairing other machines, and if it can't be repaired it will be replaced.

Here's the inherent flaw in your plan. I work on electronics and technology and it is not simple. I find myself having to study up and learn new things everyday and that is after years of experience and training. I have had problems so complex that I have wanted to get up and walk away. The only thing keeping me from doing so was my pride and the fact that I was getting paid for it.

I just want you to picture the amount of technology that it would require for nearly everything to be automated.

First, lets assume that there is an already existing computer and robotic system to produce, say, another computer. To start you need the raw materials for the components. Those raw materials will be taken in precise quantities by robots that need to be finely calibrated somehow. Then they need to be mixed in precise ways(more calibration), measure out and laid into form precisely, then one each component is formed they will need to be inserted onto a board in a very precise location. That board will then need to be assembled in a very specific way with others with finely tuned robots in addition to the wires and case. So now you have a computer. But now you need to move it to shipping where you'll need even more calibrated computers and robots to to direct it to its destination. Then you'll need trucks to take it to a hub where it will be further distributed. From that hub it will need to be loaded onto an airplane or truck or train, all of which will need more computers and robotics. Upon delivery to it's next hub it will need further distribution, and on and on. All the while these machines will require maintenance and power. And that's just for one computer. Now how about the tires for the truck or the fuels and oils, the electricity, the engines, the programming? What about upgrades or new products? What about food? Just imagine the complexity of your taco bell without employees. Let alone getting all the products there. The things that happen behind the scenes are so much more complex than you would ever believe. And there's a reason why people are paid more than others. You can't teach me to build a car and fix electronics and be good at both. I can flip burgers sure, but any trained monkey can do that. Thats why I got paid minimum wage when I was doing so. I was easy to replace. Now I'm not and so I get paid more. It would take years to teach someone my job and then they would be starting out where I started years ago. Even still, I don't come close to those above me who have many more years of education and experience.

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by chrisrand

How? Who will maintain them?

A complex system of automatic production and distribution. Also as technology progresses so will the ease of production.

With out money limiting our level of progress whole new systems and technologies can be researched and developed. Nano-technology will revolutionize the way we live. There are plans currently for atomic level 3D printers capable of producing a carbon copy practically anything. Please reference the video below.

Minimal Manufacturing using Nanotechnology and 3D Printing

Considering that the current US lifestyle already consumes 2.5 times the amount of resources the earth has available and you propose to make peoples’ lives even easier across the globe how will you power all these automated machines?

First and foremost our value systems need to change, especially Americans who make up 3% percent of the world, but use 30% of the resources. This will be accomplished through education.

Second, the Earth is more than abundant in producing and receiving natural energy, including solar, wind, wave and tidal power. But as we all know the sun doesn’t work at night, and the wind doesn’t always blow.

That is why we should use a combination of all of the above depending on the geographic location and the availability of the natural resources for that region.

But whats even more stunning is the abundance of geothermal energy available nearly anywhere.

The Geothermal Resource
Below the Earth's crust, there is a layer of hot and molten rock called magma. Heat is continually produced there, mostly from the decay of naturally radioactive materials such as uranium and potassium. The amount of heat within 10,000 meters (about 33,000 feet) of Earth's surface contains 50,000 times more energy than all the oil and natural gas resources in the world.

How will you decide who gets to live where? For example if both I and another five people want to live in a particular apartment with a particular view, how will you decided which of us gets it?

The buildings will be developed in such a way that most views will be full of natural beauty and harmony with nature. But people will have all the freedoms of choice they want. If they want to live in a city apartment then they can chose to do so. Or if they like a single family home in the woods, they can do so as well.

Who will do all the menial jobs like scrubbing public toilets or working boring jobs in factories that can't be magically automated?

There won't be menial jobs, instead every facet of life will be built in a way to minimize upkeep and increase longevity of products. Thus even things like toilets will be able to be cleaned by themselves.

Check out the video "The Story of Stuff"

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by chrisrand

Who is going to become a fire-fighter and risk their life pulling my lazy arse out of a towering inferno for no reward?

All buildings will be built in a fireproof manor, but if it is needed all buildings will be able to put out their own fires by using sprinkler systems similar to the ones used today.

Who is going to build and maintain the vehicles that make this free travel possible? It can’t all be done by machines; some has to at least be operating them.

It will not be entirely machines, that are true, but it will be eventually 95% automated. The people who will work on it will want to work on it; there will be a large number of people who will want to work on it because it will benefit them and humanity.

Then who makes decisions? Will everything be design by committee?

The absolute first thing that will need to happen is a full assessment of all the worlds’ resources and a systematic cataloging of all the worlds knowledge in to centralized computer. Then when an important subject needs to be amylases it won’t be decided by politicians, but rather an unbiased well informed computer system. And if you think this is a crazy idea, it is already in development by HP.

Think about it this way. In today’s society we vote in a politician who knows nothing of science, biology, sociology and we expect them to fix these social and scientific problems. Instead we will vote in ideas!

What about laws?

We need a change in our value system and once that happens we can do away with laws. And yes there may be people who don’t want to adhere to common law or natural law. They will be they will be treated to find out what the root cause of the abhorrent behavior is.

Originally posted by Mike_A

If there are no barriers to free movement and your needs are catered for wherever you are what happens when the south of France ends up with a population of 2 billion?

This is a hypothetical question and I will answer it hypothetically. I don’t think this will happen because there will not be a mass migration of 1/3 of all people to a small region. People will be able to travel freely and will likely not live in any one location permanently. But this system is ever changing and will be able to adapt.

Why would anyone produce films, televisions shows or distribute music?

People will want to produce films, television and music for the love of it, it’s the main reason why they do it today. With out the burden of financial gain we will see a huge influx of creativity in humanity, which is one of the main goals of TVP.

Why would anyone become a teacher?

They will want to become a teacher for the love of being a teacher and being around children. Ask a teacher today why they want to be a teacher, the reasons won’t be different.

Who will be the hospital orderlies or nurses?

Again, there are people who want to be doctors and nurses. But machines will aid in as much of that work as possible. Even with our modern level of technology robotic surgeons are able to do complex procedures. Think about it, a robot does not need to take a break during a 12 hour surgery, it does not shake, and it does not forget to leave surgical objects in the patient.

Who is going to build the infrastructure needed for all of this automation?

Using a method called extrusion many facilities will be pre-manufactured and will only need to be placed in order, similar to knex or legos. Think about it like squeezing a toothpaste bottle, when the paste comes out it’s in the form of a cylinder because of the tip. If you change the shape of the tip then you change the extrusion.

If it is possible why hasn’t every major manufacturer moved towards a 100% automated production process?

Eventually they will, its called technological unemployment. But one of the reasons why they don’t do it right away is because its not politically correct. There would be a major strike against the company and people would not want to buy their product. But if they do it slowly people will not notice. Like the old analogy of boiling a frog.

Who decides who makes up the judiciary? Or are you suggesting that there will be no crime? If the latter can you back this optimistic assumption up with any hard evidence?

There will eventually be minimal crime, it may never be entirely irradiated.
If all the basic needs of a society are met, then their will be a great reduction in petty crimes. I can give concrete evidence of this at work.

In the film I recommended you watch, “Future by Design” the founder of TVP Jacques Fresco tells a story of living with a remote group of natives. In their society the have complete abundance of resources and in the past 1000 years of their existence they have had not one war and not one major altercation within their society or with their neighboring tribesmen.

reply to post by Mike_A

With regards to the WW2 example can you provide evidence that this was not done on the back of massive debt; for example can you detail contracts where Lockheed, for example, said that it would produce X fighters for free?

I am not Jacque Fresco, I am only a supporter of TVP and TZM. I can not answer this question, but I can ask it for you when I do meet Mr. Fresco.

Why would anyone bother inventing a better kettle or mobile phone when this would lead to few advantages for society and produce no reward?

I believe people will continue to invent more effective and productive products. Their incentive is the knowledge that they are helping out humanity. There would be no reason to hold back the invention as they are today.

Who is going to demolish all the old cities and who is going to do the hard and dirty job of mining them for their resources?

Cities will be converted back to nature, by nature. Have you seen the History Channel special series Life after People? All 9 full episodes are free on their website.

Why haven’t the 400,000 Venus Project members pledged their entire assets towards this “phase 3 experiment city” yet?

We are in the activism phase of the movement and we need to spread awareness before we begin to create an experiment city. It is just not feasible to create an isolated Resource Based Economy city within the Monetary System.

Where is the evidence?

Evidence for what? I’ve asked you to watch the films. There is plenty of evidence there. You have complained about not wanting to watch them because they are 88 minutes long, but I have spent that long replying to your posts and others, which I am happy to do.



[edit on 6/8/2010 by chrisrand]

reply to post by tothetenthpower



I will stop watching the Zeitgeist if you can tell me what is the disinformation.

Could you find me something that tries to solve the problems with the world with a comprehensive evaluation of the problems while using the scientific method to reason a possible solution to them.

reply to post by And Why


Thank you very much for posting those videos. I have seen them myself and it would be prudent for those questioning the movement to watch them as well.

There is a lot to digest with TVP and TZM. If you want more information please check out their respective websites and watch the films. And if you already have done so there is a more comprehensive video called The Zeitgeist Movement Orientation Video which would be great for you.

Google Video Link

There are also three wonderful lectures by Peter Joseph and he has a weekly radio address that answers users comments and questions.

The lectures are titled "Where are we know?" "Where are we going?" "Social Pathology"

Thank you for your interest and understanding.

I am sure someone has pointed this out already but I got such a good laugh at this. it assumes everyone will work equally for the benefit of all. Have you looked around you lately. All this would do is allow all the slackers to live off the producers.

There has to be value for value or the welfare class would just get a higher standard of living for doing nothing. People have to work to produce and make this abundance available for all and unfortunately we can't even get everyone to work in a monetary system economy they still find ways to live off others so what maikes you think they will suddenly change thier ways?

The only fair way to produce goods and services so that slackers do not take advantage is trading value for value. If you want to be part of an abundant society you have to contribute your fair share. There are only two ways to ensure it; one is by force such as communism the other is the free market you don't work you don't eat unless your disabled or something.

reply to post by hawkiye


I am sorry but I can not to begin to address your concerns because you have not read my original post on the basic facets of a Resource Based Economy nor have you watched the highly informative film. It will do you much good to do so. I promise you will not be disappointed.

Originally posted by chrisrand
reply to post by hawkiye

 

I am sorry but I can not to begin to address your concerns because you have not read my original post on the basic facets of a Resource Based Economy nor have you watched the highly informative film. It will do you much good to do so. I promise you will not be disappointed.

I did read your post and watched the film. You cannot address my concerns because you have no answer so you chose to avoid it instead. It's simple concern and you have avoided it the entire thread I am sure. Simple logic tell us that the people will divide in to two classes as they always do; producers and non producers. In your society you provide no answer as to how you will motivate and change the behaviour of the non producers who seek a to live off the labors of others and contribute nothing themselves.

The claim is if everyone has abundance they will have new encentives to like the moon and stars.... Incentive to do what? Whose going to maintain the machines that do everything for us? Who is going to maintain the machine that cleans the sewers? Who is going to mine the metals it will take to make all these machines? Who is going to take the time to learn the mathematics to maintain the more complex machines when they can be partying or what ever other hobby they love doing? Who is going to grow the silicon crystals for the solar panels? Who is going to dig the geothermal tunnels or lay the pipe pull the wire etc. Machines can do a lot but many things will always take a human touch to be done right or run the machines and all machines require maintenance.

And no laws LOL... So what do you do with murderers? They also claim all crime is ultimately motivated by the monetary system and scarcity, BS! That Joran Vandersloot kid was wealthy and killed two women no scarcity there. The whole thing has so many holes in it. The simple principle of contributing value for value is ignored. I agree the current monetary system needs to go because it is a ponzi scheme and also ignores value for value. But this fantasy while it has some good ideas about advanced technology it ignores human behaviour and blames it all on having a monetary system. There are good monetary systems and bad.



[edit on 8-6-2010 by hawkiye]

reply to post by chrisrand


Thank you for the answer, to avoid excessive quoting I’ll just list my question then reply to your answer.

Q – How? Who will maintain them?

I don’t think you answered this question, you gave one example of 3D printer but these can’t be used for everything (food for example) and they are not maintenance free.

Q – Considering that the current US lifestyle already consumes 2.5 times the amount of resources the earth has available and you propose to make peoples’ lives even easier across the globe how will you power all these automated machines?

With regards to changing value systems that is irrelevant because what this Venus Project Proposes would massively increase the amount of energy required.

On geothermal, exactly how much energy would be required, how many plants would be needed to serve this and what about the problems such as local cooling? I want figures.

Q – How will you decide who gets to live where? For example if both I and another five people want to live in a particular apartment with a particular view, how will you decided which of us gets it?

No you’re not answering the question; all six of us want to live in the same apartment, in this exact location. How do you decide who gets priority?

Q – Who will do all the menial jobs like scrubbing public toilets or working boring jobs in factories that can't be magically automated?

It’s a nice dream to say there won’t be menial jobs but it’s not evidenced. As above, all machines need to be maintained and/or replaced and you can’t have machines do it all with an infinite chain of machines each designed to maintain the one before it. But what about things that don’t involve manufacture such as doing back room administration (how are you going to eliminate that?).

Q – Who is going to become a fire-fighter and risk their life pulling my lazy arse out of a towering inferno for no reward?

Yours is not an answer, how exactly are you going to make building completely fire proof? We already have sprinkler systems yet we still have fires. You might as well say “magic”.

Q – Who is going to build and maintain the vehicles that make this free travel possible? It can’t all be done by machines; some has to at least be operating them.

Where do you get this 95% automated figure from? And how do you know people will want to do this work? How will it benefit them personally?

Q – Then who makes decisions? Will everything be design by committee?

Again yours is not an answer; you can’t just say “computers will do it” that’s like running into traffic and shouting “god will keep me safe!” A computer cannot decide who is right in a dispute for example, and who is going to program it and who will decide how it is programmed?

Q – What about laws?

Hang on! So we’re going to do away with laws yet still “treat” people with abhorrent behaviour? So how do you know what an abhorrent behaviour is? Who decides what that is, who treats them and what if they can’t be “cured”?

Q – If there are no barriers to free movement and your needs are catered for wherever you are what happens when the south of France ends up with a population of 2 billion?

Of course this was a slight exaggeration but do you really think that the nice sunny places won’t see massive immigration if you suddenly said that people could live where they want and that there were no laws?

But again you haven’t answered it, you’ve just made baseless claims that people will want to move around and that “we will just be able to cope”. There’s plenty of evidence that people will move to the desirable locations, immigration figures bear that out, but none that people want to keep moving around.

Q - Why would anyone produce films, televisions shows or distribute music?

I’m sure people will want to write, direct and star in various forms of media but what I doubt is anyone else’s desire to do the boring stuff like makeup, editing, producing, distributing, session recording etc.

Q – Why would anyone become a teacher?

Again it’s a total none answer, “they’ll do it because they want to” but how do you know? In the UK teaching has a huge retention problem and I doubt this is isolated to the UK. You won’t be able to get rid of the difficulties associated with teaching such as unruly pupils so there will always be pressures and stress.

Q – Who will be the hospital orderlies or nurses?

I asked about orderlies and nurses not doctors, you gave an answer about doctors. So who will do the menial work, cleaning up blood and other bodily fluids, wheeling patients around or lancing boils etc?

Q – Who is going to build the infrastructure needed for all of this automation?

Your answer is not demonstrated and there is zero reason to believe it would work. But that’s not what I meant anyway, I’m talking about all the systems to clean away rubbish and move it to wherever it’s supposed to go or the system that is meant to deliver goods to your door. That’s a hell of a lot more complex than squeezing toothpaste.

Q – If it is possible why hasn’t every major manufacturer moved towards a 100% automated production process?

It hasn’t bothered companies up to now to completely up and move to another country with cheap labour. I don’t see any reason to believe that they would be more afraid of becoming fully automated.

Q – Who decides who makes up the judiciary? Or are you suggesting that there will be no crime? If the latter can you back this optimistic assumption up with any hard evidence?

In what sense is the man who advocates this view claiming that there is an unnamed tribe that doesn’t have war concrete evidence?

Crime is not based solely on resources; you have to deal with it somehow.

Q – With regards to the WW2 example can you provide evidence that this was not done on the back of massive debt; for example can you detail contracts where Lockheed, for example, said that it would produce X fighters for free?

If you’re going to use it as your own argument you really should know the details. Please do ask him.

Q – Why would anyone bother inventing a better kettle or mobile phone when this would lead to few advantages for society and produce no reward?

It’s just another idealistic view of the world. People could do this because they are helping human kind now but most don’t; it’s not because of our economic system.

Q – Who is going to demolish all the old cities and who is going to do the hard and dirty job of mining them for their resources?

The Venus Project claims that cities will be demolished. But your system doesn’t make sense either; you are going to move people out of existing cities into these new ones but still keep the old ones and just let them decay for hundreds to thousands of years? Where is the real estate going to come from? How much natural land are you going to destroy and not replace what about the animal and plant life that requires this space?

Why haven’t the 400,000 Venus Project members pledged their entire assets towards this “phase 3 experiment city” yet?

With 400k people you have more than enough to create an experimental city. What is activism going to do? According to the website’s FAQ a city is meant to be built before this is rolled out world wide anyway so the plan most definitely is to build a city within the monetary system. So why haven’t all these people heeded the call and actually done it? I can’t see any barrier.

Where is the evidence?

I’ve watched the video and there is no evidence at all. It’s just him chatting about himself and showing a series of models; no reference to any actual research, no working prototypes, no reference to third party research that backs up his claims. So where is the evidence?

Cont

Thanks again for the answers you have given but I think you missed out probably the most crucial;

If I can get all my food, water and anything else for free why would or should I bother contributing? That’s the key, I don’t care about helping anyone else, as long as I’ve got my big screen TV, something to eat and drink I am fine. So why should I bother helping anyone else?

Originally posted by Mike_A
If I can get all my food, water and anything else for free why would or should I bother contributing? That’s the key, I don’t care about helping anyone else, as long as I’ve got my big screen TV, something to eat and drink I am fine. So why should I bother helping anyone else?

It is interesting to note that the majority of the information on the internet is contributed freely. this forum for instance has many moderators as well as thousands of posters who contribute freely because they want to.

Youtube has millions of people that make blogs and educational videos and most of them are not partners, the ones that are, im sure if all of there needs are met, would make these videos without pay.

the majority of websites on the net that contribute to society through education, do so because they want to do it, and again, if they had all their needs met, the ones making money right now, would do so for free.

sourceforge again is full of people creating things for free, not to make money but to advance society for the love of it.

teachers firefighters, inventors, musicians, video makers etc, do what they do because they love it, and would continue to do so for free if they didnt need to work to make money.

i think the majority of people do things for money because they have to, take away the need to survive and i feel that you will still have these people doing what they do, for free.

an important factor that is being left out here, is the need for human beings to have recognition for what they do. this resource based economy would do well if it recognised peoples commitment towards society.

my 0.2 cents

reply to post by Pan7her


A five minute post or a video log is not the same as spending 8+ hours a day maintaining production machinery, working on a farm or cleaning up bodily fluids in a hospital.

I’m sure you’d get a few people who would help out, at least initially, but how many? How will they feel about the people who don’t contribute? Won’t this produce massive morale problems?