EPTBut more seriously, i wonder when people finally realise that money is nothing more then a way of making trade more efficient.
The Free World Charter - Page 14
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
But more seriously, i wonder when people finally realise that money is nothing more then a way of making trade more efficient. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:29 Yorbon wrote: People who are saying the world is too much about money, care too much about money. But more seriously, i wonder when people finally realise that money is nothing more then a way of making trade more efficient. Most people know that, more so anyone who understands economics. and thats 1 of the many counters that have been brought up in this thread to show why its illogical. | ||
|
Kuja
United States1759 Posts
On May 05 2012 07:42 Talin wrote: Ohh yea, because with out regulations problems like racism wouldn't set in right?...or capitalism. Much like people complain today that having a government is the source of all problems, and if we really had a real free market without nasty regulation getting involved, everything would be swell. This way we only have a half solution and it's not capitalism's fault that it blows now. Plus an obligatory mention of Austria somewhere in there. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:33 Goozen wrote: Point taken Most people know that, more so anyone who understands economics. and thats 1 of the many counters that have been brought up in this thread to show why its illogical.  However i do think it depends on the people surrounding you. (i realise bringing this doesn't sound particularly positive to people surrounding me.. ): ) | ||
|
Ender985
Spain910 Posts
| ||
|
DeliCiousVP
Sweden343 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:23 Goozen wrote: Public healthcare? public education? controlled prices on food? its not 100% but has a load of aspects and if u read what i linked before http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz you will see that such things have been attempted here. Also you ignore that i said that socialism isnt whats discussed by the OP. No sweat bro you win im sure its all just a scam and the works of 5 naive fools cuz obviously there is tons of proof nothing like that would over work enjoy. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:08 DeliCiousVP wrote: Yes There are alot of places where you can get this information, But i get the impression you are more intrested in trying to debunk and riddicule then actualy take in information and will spend your time question the integretity of everything. https://www.google.se/#q=Zeitgeist&hl=sv&prmd=imvns&source=univ&tbm=vid&tbo=u&sa=X&ei=yIelT4GQNfT04QT4veCnCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CKoBEKsE&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=5b23f1c1728a9645&biw=1920&bih=1070 Propaganda movies are not evidence. The movie maker just gets to cram down his message with no retort. It's all half-truths aimed at painting a very specific picture. For example, the movie describes the federal reserve system only partially and calling it a 'private' bank is a complete joke. The reality is much more complicated than the movie portrays. The reality is that the money supply doesn't just grow as some endless spiral of debt to pay debt. It must grow as a baseline because of population and economic growth. Oh, and printing money HURTS bankers as the money they loan out is repaid with less valuable money. I've seen all this exact same propaganda before. It's all lies. You've been had. | ||
|
DeliCiousVP
Sweden343 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:29 Yorbon wrote: People who are saying the world is too much about money, care too much about money. But more seriously, i wonder when people finally realise that money is nothing more then a way of making trade more efficient. What if you have abundance, whats the point in trading? We dont trade Air with each other do we. And who decides who owns what to trade to begin with. | ||
|
Aphasie
Norway474 Posts
| ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:51 DeliCiousVP wrote: What if you have abundance, whats the point in trading? We dont trade Air with each other do we. And who decides who owns what to trade to begin with. Yup, if we had infinite resources that would be true. But we don't and we don't have the technology to make it a reality either. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:45 DeliCiousVP wrote: No sweat bro you win im sure its all just a scam and the works of 5 naive fools cuz obviously there is tons of proof nothing like that would over work enjoy.Never said it was a scam just said its not realistic and nonviable due to many of the issues brought in this thread and the fact they talk about ideals without how they will practically come around. Also i can probably find 100million religious fanatics who will say why their religion is right and why everyone adopting it will solve all the worlds problems and they will present tons of proof. OK, but how do we get from 'here' to 'there'? There are so many variables regarding what specific changes in society would actually precipitate such a massive shift in global operations, that speculating how it might unfold is almost pointless. The only thing we can say for certain is that it WILL happen when enough people want it. Spreading the word about a free world will not lead us to a transition, spreading the word IS the transition. We are already in it. All we need is a sufficient will of the people to bring about the necessary changes. A figure as low as 1% of the world's population may even be enough to start an unstoppable chain-reaction, but how it actually unfolds is anyone's guess! This basically shows you the main problem, they offer what they claim is a practical solution whiteout saying a practical way to achieve it. | ||
|
Lumi
United States1612 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
People realized that "money" are needed is some form thousands of years ago. I don't know why someone is trying to reinvent the wheel all over again. And again, money are not the problem , the problem is the human nature itself. We are greedy and violent species that is going to destroy itself... It's that simple. | ||
|
Spitfire
South Africa442 Posts
On May 05 2012 03:32 SnipedSoul wrote: Who is going to oversee the distribution of resources and ensure it remains fair throughout the world? yup | ||
|
Domus
510 Posts
I would like it if countries enforce a fairer distribution of wealth though, both in and out of their countries. The distribution of wealth has gone insane in the last couple of decades. Even in supposedly social countries like the Netherlands (where I live), the paycheck of the crisis is 100% placed on the lower and middle class, while the rich will not notice any difference. It is also visible in other countries, like the UK, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and I don't think that it is beneficial to anyone when there is a couple of ultra rich when the rest of the population is struggling to pay their mortgage or even have some food on the table, and not have a chance to raise your kids because both parents need to work full-time. Also, there is a clear balance shift going on on the global theater. The eastern markets, like China and India are gaining in strength incredibly fast, and China in particular is making huge investments in the West, South America, and Africa. Simply said, they are making friends everywhere with their money, and they are not going to play our way when they have this strong dominant position. We will have to play it their way (somehow I don't think that they are going to ban money ). The good thing is that China has not stagnated like big parts of Europe and the USA, they are actually doing some very cool new stuff, and hopefully this will lead the world into a brighter future in 30 or 40 years. | ||
|
DeliCiousVP
Sweden343 Posts
On May 06 2012 06:01 Lumi wrote: We have a resource based economy. Money is just a universalizer so that the guy with the fish can trade with the guy with the chair, even if the guy with the chair doesn't want any fish. Money has been a universal evolution to all original examples of moneyless resource-based economies. Ugh please get a clue and stop pointing your finger at things that really aren't the problem. The concept of wealth is probably what you'd like to do something about and so you should just be advocating socialism, not this laughing stock. In a Resource based economy there is no such thing as trade, because there is no ownership resources are made abundant and if they are not research power is allocated into solving the problem, We dont have enough money to feed everyone on the planet but we have enough food for 10 billion people all thou were only 7. Our current system is so flawed its collapsing in on itself because, We have always discovered jetlag betwen Consesus and whats actually possible. Old ideas are used in new systems. What im talking about now is actually possible but there are those that havent reached the consesus stage yet, This causes the jetlag. We are nothing more then monkeys and reading many comments here shows exacly how much identity people have invested in being Right rather then being rational. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On May 06 2012 05:51 DeliCiousVP wrote: That's a different question altogether.What if you have abundance, whats the point in trading? We dont trade Air with each other do we. And who decides who owns what to trade to begin with. Abundance is not the only thing to consider. Also relevant is possibility of extra consumption and added value of more consumption. (those should correlate, in evolutionary sense). Personally, i feel the non-trading of air is perfectly acceptable within this view. Your last question: no one, markets evolve and emerge, not be created. You can shut one down, but not delete it; you can make a market more accessible, but not create it. (per definition; markets are not anything real, it's metaphysics in order to understand) In this sense, there is a market for air, only no one values air enough to hold in possession. And i can't say i blame them. | ||
|
Crushinator
Netherlands2138 Posts
Posts backing both 'sides' show only a very limited understanding of economic theory, often citing concepts and research as though they completely back their side of the story. The truth is often much more complicated, so please employ some nuance and avoid grand sweeping statements. There is also a large amount of confusion regarding terminology. For example the terms Capitalism and Socialism are ill-defined, all economies that exist in the real world are mixed to a certain degree. The choice is not between two opposing ideologies, and any argument that aims to absolutely support the other while denouncing the other is, frankly, ridiculous to most people with some sort of relevant education. Please define your argument well, specific problems in specific markets with specific solutions. Try to back up your argument with some sort of theory. Chances are, smarter people than you have already done a much better job explaining the concepts that apply to your argument. If you oversimplify your argument and start talking in terms of evil-capitalism and benevolent socialism, or the other way around, it will simply turn into another internet shouting match in which neither side learns anything. Avoid false dichotomies. The term 'laissez-faire' does not refer to free markets where there is no regulation. Laissez-faire is simply a prevalent attitude within a company or industry. It means that companies will only comply minimally with written laws and will otherwise engage in profit-maximizing behavior, without regard for any other social goals. It is possible for an industry to have a laissez-faire attitude even if they operate in a heavily regulated market. Similarly, it is possible for companies operating in very free markets to place strong emphasis on social responsibilty. This is actual quite common all over the western world. But especially so in Japan and Korea, where societal pressures cause companies to believe it is in their own best interest to voluntarily comply to certain, unwritten, social standards. The point is, if you use a technical term, please make sure you are using it correctly. There is also confusion among people who agressively defend free markets. Economic theory does not lead us to always believe that markets function best when left to their own devices. In fact, pretty much all models of imperfect markets (which all real-world markets are to some degree) suggest considerable room for government to improve overall welfare. Models have shown that things like offering incentives, subsidies, regulations, temporary protectionism and much more can lead to more overall welfare, given the right conditions. The only thing I can think of that pretty much always leads to deadweight losses are taxes. Arguments for libertarianism are primarily ethical, not economical. Sadly, basic economic classes usually do not teach models of imperfect markets, but limit themselves to the relatively simple cases of perfect competition and monopoly. While this is understandable due to time constraints, it does create the problem that many people feel that they have much greater knowledge of economics than they actually do. If you have only very limited knowledge of economics, please make sure that what you are posting is accurate, especially if you are going to state it authoritatively. If you don't know shit, ask questions instead. From the socialist camp, there is the common claim that people have been brainwashed somehow by undefined evil corporations employing powerful lobby groups, with unlimited control of 'the media'. The statements are always vague and almost never is any supporting argument, or any evidence offered. This is not actually an argument for anything, it is a completely invalid and worthless way of reasoning and little more than an ad hominem. "You are just against central planning because you are brain-washed", is what they are saying. Please formulate your actual argument so we can consider them, and yes people will actually try to debunk everything you say because that is how critical thinking works. In short, please try not to be an idiot. It scares off all the good people | ||
|
DeliCiousVP
Sweden343 Posts
http://www.amazon.com/The-Best-That-Money-Cant/dp/0964880679 I also suggest looking at the actualy Freeworldcharter video and pick one point in the video that you feel dont make sense. and go on a smal tangen on why you dont feel its right. Speak with your emotion sometimes they offer greater clarity. | ||
|
drumsetjunky
United States136 Posts
The only way it MIGHT is if we literally could get things FOR PRACTICALLY FREE. Lets look at Star Trek. On Earth its pretty much a Utopian society right? People work for the good of mankind, food is free, most basic necessities are free. You can walk up to a Replicator and ask for a steak dinner and all it takes to make it is energy. We're too far off from this kind of technology. Here is the root of the issue. "everything is reducible to the motive of self-interest" -- François de La Rochefoucauld When we boil it down, we're all primarily interested in how things effect US. | ||
| ||
