The Free World Charter - Page 70

By the way; there is not one scientific method.

Methodological pluralism is the norm in science.

Make no mistake: by supporting the practicality of a world without money you are saying every economist from Adam Smith, David Hume up and till Milton Friedman, Paul Krugman and Ronald Coase is wrong. That is quite a bold statement.

I don't want to belittle your passion, but passion without knowledge is dangerous.

How is the design of RBE based on the scientific method?

Unemployment IS NOT rising with the increase of efficiency in production- it never will

How will you make sure that there is no corruption amongst everyone?

Personally, I would not like to live in a system where you cannot work for your own good. There are many others who feel the same way. People will quickly take what they have for granted and will want more. What will you do about this?

Unemployment is NOT rising in proportion with technology and automation. Technology is advancing exponentially; if they were correlated, none of us would have jobs next year.

o it isn't. You just don't know what you're talking about with your ludicrous videos and laughable assertions. Automation in the service sector has actually been replaced by humans in many areas as the reaction to increasing automation was negative from consumers. Turns out people prefer talking to someone working in a call center in India over talking to a computer. Where does that fit in with your inevitable point A to point B view of history?

On May 27 2012 03:04 HunterX11 wrote:


It's not really some huge surprise or insurmountable problem that when you cut funding to entitlements in a deliberate effort to make them unsustainable, they become unsustainble. The solution is pretty simple: return to the previous sustainable levels of funding.

Adam smith was wrong and he realised it aswel as he saw the widespread corruption and povery spreading in Scotland.

Adam smith the father of capitalism was wrong and he regreted what he wrote. Try finding that in your econ101.

On May 27 2012 03:46 DeliCiousVP wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
Keep it simple, and relevant.




Adam smith is an intressting case the father of modern economics, the invisible hand of supply and demand and the contribution to society by the wealthiest. Adam smith was wrong and he realised it aswel as he saw the widespread corruption and povery spreading in Scotland. The wealthiest becoming wealthiest and the poor becoming poorer.

Indeed

Adam smith the father of capitalism was wrong and he regreted what he wrote. Try finding that in your econ101.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m4Oop0QWb8


__________________________________________________________________________

Everything has to pass the scientific method in order to be considered Correct/Right. Opinions are useless if they are
all systems needs to be tested and tried.

Dont waste your time trying to debunk it based on it not being proved the technology that i speak of exist and work proven, As does the social,psychological studies.

If you find a flaw good for you now help solve it,or pass it on. But most flaws that a normal indoctrinated person finds has more to do with their own oudated values and refrences then actual structual inconsistencies.


It already is automation is more efficient and require less human labour to work. If we degraded our technology we could create billions of jobs. Imagine if we degraded the phone net so you would have to manualy connect every call.

Technological unemployment >Rise in efficiency>Due to automation
Technological unemployment>weakens purchasing power>Weakens the economy
This is why the labour for income is obsolete.


By removing the incentive for it structural there is nothing to benefit from acting in corrupt and descoial.

No one will force you to do anything for anyone. But you will have values that social concern is personal concern thus you will see it as working for your own good.


When a company gets the option to automate they do so discarding its workers and turning even more profits, Ironicly this greedy behaviour is causing the systems collapse.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Haha maybe im just crazy and we are the ones that are replacing the machines then. Because it cant go both ways so which one is it? are machines automating our jobs or are we taking their jobs?

You still did not explain how unemployment is not rising exponentially with the exponential growth of technology. All you did was explain why you think it should. It is not. Can you find me a graph/statistic that shows the exponential increase in unemployment?

On May 27 2012 00:59 DeliCiousVP wrote:

Not my area of expertise.

On May 27 2012 03:46 DeliCiousVP wrote:


Everything has to pass the scientific method in order to be considered Correct/Right. Opinions are useless if they are
all systems needs to be tested and tried.

Dont waste your time trying to debunk it based on it not being proved the technology that i speak of exist and work proven, As does the social,psychological studies.

If you find a flaw good for you now help solve it,or pass it on. But most flaws that a normal indoctrinated person finds has more to do with their own oudated values and refrences then actual structual inconsistencies.

On May 27 2012 04:50 DeliCiousVP wrote:

They are not taking into account jobs that have been automated earlier such ATM personal but rather what is currently automated.
http://realitypod.com/2010/10/statistics-show-how-robots-are-increasing-unemployment/
Obviously we have bunch of sources on this in the Z sites but this time ill offer a less accurate soruce without a Z in it.

I cant answer questons that are negatives/Invalid/answered look back to what i answered before and remember if you do not look at the material represented to you, odds are your question will remain unanswered to you.

The DeliCiousVP guide to RBE:

Step 1: Abolish the money system.
Step 2: ?
Setp 3: Abundance!

On May 27 2012 04:50 DeliCiousVP wrote:

They are not taking into account jobs that have been automated earlier such ATM personal but rather what is currently automated.
http://realitypod.com/2010/10/statistics-show-how-robots-are-increasing-unemployment/
Obviously we have bunch of sources on this in the Z sites but this time ill offer a less accurate soruce without a Z in it.

I cant answer questons that are negatives/Invalid/answered look back to what i answered before and remember if you do not look at the material represented to you, odds are your question will remain unanswered to you.

On May 27 2012 05:27 DeliCiousVP wrote:


Step1:Social reforms/regulation of the markets/Valueshifts/charity organizations provided with subsities
Step2: Create abundance for the nessceties of life without a pricetag. Start placing the nesscery infrastructure to exit the monetary system.
Step3: The monetary system is now 100% obsolete, and values have shifted from ownership to access, social concern is personal concern.

On May 27 2012 05:46 Toasterbaked wrote:

You do not take into account that the creation and the development of robots create new jobs. The article only shows the jobs replaced by robots, rather than the general unemployment rate (accomodating the new jobs and the amount of jobs lost).

I've followed this thread for a long time, and the reason I asked such questions were because I felt that you could not answer them sufficiently. Even if you feel that you have answered these questions, can you answer again?

How will you fully automaticise society in the next few years?

What will happen when there is a lack of people that do a critical job to the function of society? (such as looking over and maintaining robots)

Nothing about the RBE can be applied if it cannot work.

On May 27 2012 05:57 DeepElemBlues wrote:
Presumably you've watched all these videos so maybe you could just answer the questions.

Also "The Zeitgeist Movement is not a political movement" is probably the funniest thing I've heard all day.

Summary: Essentially the same plan as Great Leap Forward. Must assume results will be the same without scientific proof of a different outcome.

What will happen when there is a lack of people that do a critical job to the function of society? (such as looking over and maintaining robots)