Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 53
The Zeitgeist MovementPage 3 of 11    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
Oh please do not try to sway me with what Bill Gates donated. Bill is an island in the midst of the very rich, powerful and souless. Bill is probably trying to buy some soul. I am not impressed by philanthropists. At all. Ever. My original family had enough to raise children, build a house and very conveniently smear and smut the poor. Other than dramatic failures where the woman was left single handed with the children. Puhleeze...the rich have only one idea. The one's who hold money in their hands strive to keep what they have and often have no mercy. I believe that money corrupts and power corrupts completely. I am, happily, a believer in Marx. Check him out. He was so friggen right. Its not about philosophy, its not about fairness...its all about the greed and wrongness that capitalism generates. He was also ahead of his time re: the environment. We need him now, to reconsider the blank and ugly canvas.
 moonwalkerman
Joined: 2/19/2008
Msg: 54
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 3/29/2011 2:41:01 AM
We are all born naked and with nothing, call it poor. Michael Jordan grew up poor, and now he is rich. Bill Gates had nothing, and now he is rich. Most of those who are rich today, once were poor. Where do you draw the line ?
Marx ? He was never poor, his parents were Jewish and pretty well off. He was supported all of his life financially by Engels. What would he know about being poor, and what it really means ?
I am telling you: poor people want one thing, and one thing only: to have money, and to be rich.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 55
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 3/29/2011 9:20:50 PM
Marx, whether financially supported by Engels was right about the goals and outcomes of capitalism. No. Most poor people do not want money and to be rich. Most poor people want just ENOUGH to feed and have a life that includes the odd incidentals...like travel and education for their children and an outfit or maybe two. And the awknowledgment that all of the grunt work is done by those who have no insurance and reprieve from the horribly comfortable. Some people are content with enough food and a simple life. But...they are always denied. Why? Because it is less than the greedy already have. Kripes. So easy to see, so hard to awknowledge. F...., its elementary and ignored. So what if Marx came from a gold mine, he recognized the final outcomes. Do not ever be born poor. You are screwed big time. Biiiiig time. You will spend your life serving puppets of the plenty. Yee ha. American dream..my foot. Canadian dream ...my foot. In the last thirty years it effectively ended. But. Its good to see the robins returning to the North and its also good to give a "wrong "attitude and resistance to the madness.
 moonwalkerman
Joined: 2/19/2008
Msg: 56
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 3/31/2011 4:26:34 AM
60to70: what is your personal situation ? Are you poor ? Are you ill ? Is your family poor or ill ?
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 57
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/1/2011 12:28:25 AM
Actually Paul...I have enough to live on..for now. And that applies to you too. What gets me off are those who need no approval or reinforcement from the lack of heart and the lack of soul that you so eagerly manifest. People unite against ugly words. Join me. We will be the best club of all.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 58
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/3/2011 7:52:48 PM
On your part also, Paul? M.M.??? Oh no...I am wrong and pitiful and well..I am not. In a given day I give one thousand percent to the one's in my care and all the while, my needs, wants, desires necessarily take a back burner. But at the end of the day...I am ready for some mental stimulation vs. MM. To do something about the inequities I keep writing about, I keep my material wants simple and I understand that my soul is worth more than my residence and my savings account and any hard nosed philosophy never existed and never will. I will go to my final resting regretting man's inhumanity to man. Let me define for you how the Greeks apparently defined laziness and an inability to act:....a paralysis of the soul. And those who do nothing as you so firmly and sternly state may just paralyzed by the very life that should include and welcome them as participants. Have some merry mercy, Paul. Where did we go wrong? Same old, same old.
 moonwalkerman
Joined: 2/19/2008
Msg: 59
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/4/2011 7:17:08 AM
60to70...I see what you are saying. But to describe human behaviour as inhuman is a paradox, because it can never be true. It is just your perception of reality, and how humans SHOULD behave towards each other, based on your own reality. I sometimes have discussions with people about s0-called inhuman behaviour, and they say that people like Hitler were utterly inhuman. Well, he was a human being, so what he and his colleagues did was human. It just reminds us of what humans are capable of.
Anyway, you choose to live your life on the basis of other than material things. We are all free and can do whatever we like. If others choose differently, let them. I am into filming and photography, the equipment is quite expensive, so I need money.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 60
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/5/2011 11:04:32 PM
No..I am not a believer...but I am definitely a skeptic where human intent is concerned. I think you may be more informed of Jesus's responses re: the NT than I am. But as far as today's news and yesterday's news is concerned...I do not for a minute believe that this man Jesus accepted this abnormal Normal unless he had some kind of Karma mentality. Oh well. The poor do exist and they are in your face every day and it really makes me smile as to how generous and forgiving they are....compared to the stiff, rigid and well heeled. You cannot sit on your butt and ignamoniously state that you helped within your capability. You have to not participate in the madness that creates the situation. "Fawn" ...my foot! lol.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 61
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/7/2011 11:24:49 PM
If I was funny that is indeed good. There is not enough laughter. Laughter is a balm. A good thing. If I made you laugh, I was indeed a solution rather than a problem and this man Jesus Christ would absolve all of my lapses. I do not have a Bible. But I can access on this Google thing. By the way...you can know rigid and well-heeled people without touching them. Just listen. Don't ever be fooled by image. I am painting with an older perspective rather than I was just born yesterday. Please. Here in Canada there are only a few provinces where the people truly believe that we are poor BECAUSE of one's lack of trying. How about the States? Hopefully the delusion isn't as great as I am fearing. Poor is more than having just enough to eat...poor is witnessing children everywhere not ever realizing some kind of individual and zesty talent they were born posssessing and NEVER realizing. Oh...whatever, eh?
 ryanrucker
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 62
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/19/2011 6:21:58 PM
as peter joseph points out, what we are dealing with is a ''value dissorder''. our entire lives revolve around something without any intrinsic value. you don't need money to feed the hungry, heal the sick, or build a shelter. you need food, medicine and building supplies. the only thing you need money to accomplish is poverty. i don't know about you, but i don't go to work everyday to accumulate a bunch of worthless paper. i do so because of your values. once that changes...the rest is history.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 63
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/22/2011 10:53:59 PM
Give the world a break and step up to the bat and definitely improve yourself but remember that it ain't part of the corporate and money mongerer and power mongerer agenda. Be connected. They, the whole lot, do not have a soul and will rob you blind, yes sir...Paul K. And if you do not know about diamond mining and oil extraction, you just have to watch the prices. Thats all that is necessary. Monkey business going on. Actually these high oil prices are a good thing. We may have to swallow some ugly stuff but we may just get conscious. Otherwise, if you are wise you will not believe the world will get better automatically because you uhhhh improved yourself. Self-improvement is up for debate both philosophically and in practical ways. Its way more complicated than your physical and subjective personal pat on the back for being IMPROVED.
 ryanrucker
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 64
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/23/2011 7:34:03 PM
paul k,

the only reason i need money is because 'man' has placed such a tremendous VALUE on it. but what is really valuable are the things i already mentioned. food, water, shelter etc.

to answer your question though...yes i work for money just like everyone else. not because i want to, but because im FORCED to (if i want to eat)... in fact the whole concept blows my mind. i would much rather build your home for the satifaction i get from the whole process of building. instead of being forced to in order pay for my daughters education as well as my own.....weren't you a teacher?? teachers should teach because they like educating future generations, not because they are 'slaves' to the monetary system.


but go ahead and take care of yourself. im sure the world will thank you for it (automatically) of course.
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 65
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 4/25/2011 12:41:12 AM
Money is necessary. The problem is that it is tooooo necessary. All you really need is roof over your head, food to eat, shoes on your feet (two shoes, oh...maybe three pair) ability to pay your utilities and maybe two weeks or so to just get away..and what the heck is wrong with that? Don't get me started. The roof over your head does NOT have to belong to you in order to have a meaningful life. Cheers. Also...a library where you can load up and never let the money and power mongerers sneak up on you and rob you blind. Be aware. The Internet is fast, furious and competent but never comparable to any library anywhere. Knowledge is never gained in bits and bytes that are fast and reading on the computer really, really sucks. Think about it for two seconds. Not comfortable. Zeitgeist is being filled with the gusto of being able to say NO to the droids and the fillers that litter the earth. Hey, celebrate gardening in this the season of growth. Cheers. You friggen need every farm that produces the vegies and fruit that you so compacently expect to eat. Pay attention.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 66
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 5/1/2011 6:27:41 PM
One should not confuse the games played, and manipulations of the monetary system, with what money was invented for. It is only here, because we found that a generally agreed upon representative system of values was easier to carry around than the equal value of goods and services was. Money made value interactions more PORTABLE.

That saying about the fish does sound especially French. I had a Parisian roommate for a while, and he entertained me with various French ways of saying things, that were much like that. It makes a reasonable point, and it hits the mark (in a typically oblique French way) related to understanding money IS a medium of exchange.

It is quite true that cash is useless, if no one has anything you need, that they are willing to give you for it. That's what "medium of exchange" is all about. But to clarify things, if you instead had a tremendous list of skills to offer, and the people with food didn't need any of those skills, you'd STILL go hungry. And if you are the most talented person on the planet, leading a huge caravan of every imaginable trinket and valuable tool ever made, and you get stuck in the desert... you will find that it doesn't matter what you have to offer, if there's no water to be had, you are going to die.

In the distant past, people DID directly exchange what they liked to do, for what others liked to do, and "money" wasn't needed. We could do that again, but it would only work by setting up collectives of independent groups of people whose skills and senses of satisfaction were all carefully balanced and coordinated so that all needs were answered, and all desires met. That would be lovely, but I see little hope of bringing such a thing into reality. For one thing, it would necessitate that people never grew and changed; that they never developed new ideas or interests. In other words, like the Marxist dream, it would require that they not, in fact, be "people."
 60to70
Joined: 7/28/2008
Msg: 67
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 5/1/2011 8:48:37 PM
Frankly Igor...its already happening right under your nose. No need for collectives. Only a need to jam democracy's worst curse: apathy. People growing...how idealistic. You only grow when you are able to pay the bills. Self actualization is dependent on basic needs being met. New ideas and interests are dependent on basic needs being met. Otherwise, welcome to the real, raw world of 2011. An underworld of deceit and very logical deceit. F. the power mongerers, the money mongerers and all of the rest that play ugly games with basic needs and awful denials regarding basic human dignity and freedom to live a life. Get deceitful and watch your back. Or get radical and demand some necessary change. Again...a fork in the road. Pick the right one. And do not place your future compacently in the hands of those who consider themselves your saviour. What a joke. It costs plenty to be the president of the U.S.A. and here in Canada we have a disease called Harper.
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 68
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 4:00:27 AM
Adam-Antium:


So I take it from the silence on this thread that there are no persuasive arguments against the proposal of a resource-based economic model, and that people are either in agreement or feel unable to refute the train of thought?

If anyone has any, then by all means present them. A basic understanding of what it is you're trying to refute along with a mature and logically sound approach is advisable though.


There has just recently been a discussion about the matter, which is probably why no one is answering you, everyone is probably disinterested in the subject.

You can find this discussion on thread page #3 in the "what would a perfect world look like" thread, linked below.

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/15292654datingPostpage4.aspx

The discussion consists of the following posts:

90, 91, 95, 96, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 109, 110, 112, 114, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, 127, 128, 129, 160, 161, 162, 166.
 gingerosity
Joined: 12/10/2011
Msg: 69
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 4:19:10 AM

The discussion consists of the following posts: 90, 91... 162, 166.


Just go straight to msg 162. Once the possibility of abundance is removed then money-prices will always be essential for rational distribution of resources. The free market and stateless society of anarcho-capitalism is then the logical course for freedom.
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 70
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 1:59:28 PM
>>>So I take it from the silence on this thread that there are no persuasive arguments against the proposal of a resource-based economic model, and that people are either in agreement or feel unable to refute the train of thought?

No, rather it means that you are on Page 5 on a thread that started over a year and a half ago, which is very similar to the thread on the Venus Project, which started 4 years ago and is also 5 pages in.

Somewhere in there you will find people with the contrary opinions you seek.
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 71
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 2:13:52 PM
>>>A Resource-Based Economic Model is about using the technology we have to create an access abundance of the necessities of life, erradicating the need for any price mechanism whatsoever.

Would you have computers in this Resource Based Economic Model? I mean, you have to agree- computers, television, any form of entertainment- these things are not a "necessity" of life.

As are recreational drugs, skateboards, dog breeding contests, and an untold number of things- I'm sure you can use your imagination on this- basically think of something you don't NEED, and there's another thing to add to the list.

If your goal is to end money altogether, then you need to do more than offer people necessities. Our culture, and the people in society, would have to be wiped out- hell, the entire concept of trying to be better than someone else would have to be wiped out.

As it has been said in this thread already, Money is merely a representation of value- you work, and your work, depending on how you and your employer value your skills, is represented through money- and you use that money, and what it represents, to buy goods and services- which these goods and services are valued equally based on the same concept of represented value.

So to end money, you would have to do more than just give people what they need to feel comfortable- you would have to end the human concept of value. And that's pretty difficult...

http://capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 72
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 3:49:56 PM
>>>That is why these things need to be discussed.

I agree that there are problems with our current situation. I agree that solutions should be sought after- but I disagree with your solution. In fact, I find it is in the direct opposite direction we need to go in, and uses far too many incorrect assumption on how the world works(specially, I believe the concept that we can feed hundreds, thousands, millions or billions of people with current technology and no one has to work as way naive)

>>>In fact, I have recently come onto the forum so forgive me for not respecting the unspoken rule that it was somehow decided that this thread should stay dead.

No, it just seems egotistical to me for someone to believe that, when entering a new thread that everyone should line up and start addressing what you spoke about- especially when there are tons of responses you could address already...No, you will only respond to criticisms made when YOU are here, not prior to your joining...

Again, awfully egotistical stance to take...

At the end of the day, all this really means is, if anyone has made any valid or powerful points previously in this thread, they have to repeat themselves- otherwise, you won't read them.

>>>However they do make things possible and facilitate higher standards of living.

Agreed. But they are not necessities- and you said only necessities would be supplied, and your goal is to eliminate money through offering the necessities.

Which begs the question; What of luxuries? Money won't exist, nor will jobs- so where will televisions come from, if they do continue to exist in the Zeitgeist world?

>>>For example you and I would not be aware of each other's existance let alone have this exchange if it weren't for technology.

Exactly my point- we would not be permitted to have a discussion through this medium if the Zeitgeist world existed. Moreover, this technological advance would not have been able to be made in the Zeitgeist world.

>>>Those aren't needs. They are wants.

...

Yes they are Adam. That's why I said "basically think of something you don't NEED"

I fear I will have to be repeating myself alot in this conversation...

>>>It isn't necessarily my "goal" to "end money"..... My "goal" is to do my part in helping move humanity away from that self-constructed death-wish.

And it seems the solution you are suggesting to end this "self-constructed death-wish" is to "end money"

Am I mistaken? Do you not see ending money as an absolute necessity?

Again, it seems you want to play semantic games....I'm not allowed to talk about the elephant in the room- you claim you want to end money- I attempt to discuss this- and your response is you're not attempting to end money, you just want to end self-destruction caused by....money....

>>>What are you basing this assertion on?

Ummm competition is an important point of our society....Capitalism depends on people competing....you wish to end competition, and employment, and money, offering people the necessities of life, which they are expected to be satisfied with.

>>>We as a culture are essentially children, or more accurately, teenagers right now. A child doesn't have to be killed first in order to grow out of having an imaginary friend.

First off, that statement, that you view all of society and culture as children and immature teenagers- that completely validates everything Paul said about you feeling you know better than everyone else, and feel it is your place to IMPOSE your standards on everyone.

Secondly, while a cute analogy, dodges the issue- People compete with one another- it is completely natural, and can be a great strength. The absolute best things in this world made by man were made because of competition. You wish to eliminate this- a basic human condition, and the source of so much good, from longer lifespans to traveling to the moon- and claim we will all be better for it?

You've got anything to back that up other than your smug sense of righteousness?

>>>First is the process of inflation,

Which is because the Government stopped using a money system based on actual value. That was a terrible mistake, which can be rectified by returning to a gold system, or a similar system that uses actual value to back our money- not abolishing value altogether.

The fact that federally sponsored banks have ruined the dollar doesn't mean the system of money is ruined concept...you want to throw out the baby with the bathwater...

>>>the second is technological unemployment.

Are you seriously using a Luddite argument?

Luddite, if you didn't know, is a term for people who hate technology. It appeared during the industrial revolution, when jobs began to become automated, and thus jobs that would take dozens of people now took one or two. People would riot over it, smashing machinery and demanding we stop using technological advances.

What happened then? Why didn't the world become overwhelmed with employees who had no skills and thus, could not be employed?

Because people learned new skills- they became engineers, human resource managers, and other such occupations that take actual skill and understanding.

The same is true for a modern world- if you can't find a job on a factory line, then maybe you should go to college, or take on a trade. Our Government in Canada helps people afford the costs to better themselves- and, when the next generation is looking for work, they have parents who have accumulated enough wealth because of their new skills to give their children an even greater chance to succeed.

Jobs becoming obsolete because of technology is not a new concept- and its existence does not require we abandon Capitalism...

>>>You can see why Marx called technological unemployment the "contradiction of capitalism".

I can't see how quoting Marx is going to help you in this debate

>>>There is no constant let alone any baseline for what humans consider "valuable". Value in this context is a societally determined abstract.

I agree completely.

For instance, Burger King can sell their cheapest burger for 2.29$, while McDonald's can sell theirs at 1.59$, and the small business owner could sell theirs at 4.75$

Going purely on cost, McDonald's would be the best bargain- but to some people, Burger King's just tastes better- or the small business is the way to go, because they know they are helping the local economy.

Value is determined by the consumer- and if enough people don't want McDonald's cheap-assed burger, well, then, McDonald's will go out of business.



Reguardless, you cannot eliminate value- people value their cars, their family, their jobs, and they even value their...values...demanding people stop valuing things is like demanding people stop breathing...

I can tell from your insistence that you didn't the link I provided. Thats a shame. It explains why money, and more specifically value, is in fact important, and the source of all the good in the world. It really is worth a read....after all, I bothered reading about Zeitgiest and watching two of their movies....the least you could do is read my link...
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 73
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 4:37:11 PM
Jiperly:

Hahaha, ya... "and f u c k jazz too" (Danny Boodman T. D. Lemon 1900)
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 74
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 4:46:02 PM
Huh? Whats wrong with Jazz?
 CressB
Joined: 7/1/2011
Msg: 75
view profile
History
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/18/2012 4:57:58 PM
It's form one of the best scenes ever to be in a movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di9-WxQaD34&feature=youtube_gdata_player

the quote is said at the last two seconds of the above vid. It is well worth watching. Watch the vid and you'll understand why I used the quote.
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 76
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/19/2012 2:44:42 PM
>>>How so? Do you think we need to ditch every piece of technology and go back to caveman times?

Lol did I say that? I suggested that many of the conveniences of everyday life would have to be abandoned simply because we wouldn't have people working- at least, not in the conventional means.

>>>Such as?

Huh? I specified what that was when I said "specifically"....I mean, you quoted me saying it...

>>>. Of course there will be jobs, but only because people truly want to work in the roles that they do.

I don't think it would be that simple.

Lets say we have 100 people living in the Project Venus colony (Or whatever you want to call it) - and in order to feed 100 people a for a year, at least 10 full time jobs must be held to keep the food running- even if everything is automated, someone would have to maintain and supervise the automatons.

People- some people- would HAVE to work, for the good of the community. Otherwise, what if people just choose not to? What if the majority of people cannot handle/understand or choose to not understand the automation systems?

>>> but only because people truly want to work in the roles that they do.

Exactly my point, though- what if the number of people who understand the automation- or even understand actual physical farming- is a grand minority? What if, in the hypothetical 100 people, only 2 or 3 people understand how to effectively run a farm, and everyone else simply are not comfortable in such a role, or feel it is beneath them, or do not wish to work in such a role at all? It certainly looks to me that some people are being forced to work- and for no pay. In fact, all the rewards of their work would be taken from them, with nothing to show for it?

>>> When you think about a world without a need for money, you erradicate the need for around 95% of a ll jobs because they no longer have a basis

What makes you think that? Bankers I'd imagine would disappear, but manufacturing jobs, engineering jobs, distribution jobs, management jobs and agricultural jobs would still be around, just to name a few....

According to the CIA World Factbook, the sectors people are employed in are (this is excluding the unemployed)

farming, forestry, and fishing: 0.7%
manufacturing, extraction, transportation, and crafts: 20.3%
managerial, professional, and technical: 37.3%
sales and office: 24.2%
other services: 17.6%

95% of jobs would be quite the exaggeration

>>> In fact, I dare say that a far higher number of people will actually contrbute towards the fucntioning of society and the infrastructure and the systems because they aren’t made into slaves by money

Lmao because the people who currently volunteer the most are on welfare....

>>> And considering my podcast show consists of nearly 7 hours of misc. q&a and 2 hours of specific q&a there’s not many angles I haven’t covered. So who needs to repeat themselves?

Ummm....this thread isn't associated with your podcast....you are the new person here, so yea....what you do outside of this forum is your own concern....I mean, I could see that being a valid argument if I was commenting on your videos or your website, but that's not the case...

>>>Uhhhh, nope. No I didn’t say that. If you look back you will notice that you are trying to put the word “only” in my mouth when it doesn’t belong there.

How about you offer some clarity, then?

Can you offer a list on what will and/or will not be supplied to you for survival in the Venus Society?

>>> People for some reason expect me to present all this evidence and iformation for them, in text format,

Isn't that the point of a discussion/debate? Telling people that they have to prove YOUR point is kinda missing the point...

>>> But until you see it for yourself and find out for yourself how it works you’ll never truly understand it.

By all means- set up the Venus Society's colony without me, and show me it when it's done. But you won't convince me unless you converse with me. I won't go on your ideas on faith alone- if faith is good enough for you, don't let me get in your way- but if your goal is to express your political theory, then actually expressing it is a necessity.

>>>Depends what kind of “luxuries”

Way to not answer the question...All I know from your answer is owning 5 cars or a Continent is a luxury that is not permitted.

>>>wants are societally determined

Beg your pardon? I have to convince everyone in our society to get what I want? What if I'm unpopular? What if I want is unpopular? Then I'm just shit outta luck? And you claim this is MORE freedom- that I need permission from everyone in town to desire something?

>>>Take yourself for instance. I dare say you have at least one hobby. Something that you are truly passionate about. Something that you relly enjoy and as a result, you are damn good at. Something that you invest a certain amount of your free time and in some cases money into. This hobby, if it earnt you enough money to live on, would automatially be your job right now,

So I'd be playing Minecraft and Guitar Hero for a living?

Something tells me that that'd what the vast majority of people would do- embrace self-indulgences, followed by a violent outcry if the people who supply us with food stopped delivering it to their door.

>>> Because the jobs that are difficult/time consuming/baseless/dangerous/monotonous to do are automated,

Wouldn't the people who maintained or developed more automatons be the new slaves, then? After all, they would be ESSIENTIAL for the survive for EVERYONE.

I bet alot of people would want to sign up for that....a life of chilling out and doing whatever you please, or a life of, essentially, slavery..

>>>Second televisions would exist, however far more robust than they are today....

Uhhh....I didn't ask what TV's would be like in the Venus Project....I asked where would they come from? Clearly it would *not* be a necessity of living- so where would they come from? Would someone just hammer a Plasma TV with internet connection in their garage, and give it away to anyone who wants it? Or would the Venus Project supply things that aren't a necessity?

>>>Can I ask, what you’re basing this assertion on exactly?

Television is not a necessity to life. The Venus Project is about supplying the necessities of life, and about denying the use of money. "Jobs" would be treated like hobbies- so even if there was a television factory, there wouldn't be consistent enough employees to meet the demand. And it's simply not a matter of increasing the cost because of the rarity of televisions.

And this is without even saying anything about television programs. What if the Cameramen just didn't feel like working, and instead went to go grab some beers? I guess there's no news tonight...

So either entertainment would be eliminated, or entertainment would be incredibly rare.

>>>And again, please tell me what exactly you’re basing this assertion on?

The kind of arguments that I and others have presented on this forum.

Lets say someone developed a new kind of television. Either they keep the technology to themselves, and be the envy of the city, or they give it away, and tons of jobs- which people have to be willing to fill for the joy they get from working- would be made.

>>>You’re conflating the necessity to outgrow the monetary system for the sake of humanit’s survival,

Why are you incapable of calling a duck a duck? Do you, or do you not, see the elimination of money as a necessity for your society to work?

If you do think that we need to get rid of money, then why are you wasting my time claiming that you don't?

>>>. You’re trying to split hairs now because you may not wish to concede on the point that a monetary system is anti-economic.

Wha? Are you kidding me? I'm trying to UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR POSITION IS- not trying to "hide the truth about money"

Jesus....and you're saying I'm putting words in your mouth...

Please, if you are capable, EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION- DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT WISH TO ELIMINATE MONEY?

>>>. However not to a human society.

When did you hold the patent of what is or is not a "human society"? All societies- democratic, theocratic, communist, capitalist, dictator- and everything inbetween- is a "human society"

>>>Human beings thrive better through co-operation, collaboration and sharing.

I disagree. Literally all human achievements are done when competing with one another.

>>>Oh dear. So do you honestly think that we can claim the title “civilised”?

Why not? You seem to claim the title to define what a "human society" is and is not

>>> You think that even if there are aliens out there looking at us they ae seeing a mature, truly evolved and compassionate species

I don't care what aliens think about us. Why should I?

>>>Where’s the science to back that up?

Beg your pardon? Are you actually suggesting competition is not natural? I'd be willing to bet it's the only thing that connects all life- competition for resources.

>>>Such as?

North American Civilization, the Great Wall of China, Space Travel, to name a few- I'd go on, but SHIIIIIT is this a long post already...

>>> Was Tesla?

Actually yes, Telsa's competition with Newton is well documented

>>>He was destroyed by this competitive gaming mentality that you uplhold so much and it is because of him that you are even exchanging with me right now.

I'm not saying everyone wins when they compete. That'd be stupid.

>>>Do you wanna get me started on the “human nature” fallacy?

No, I'm saying something more profound- not that its human nature- I'm saying it is NATURE. All lifeforms compete.

>>> Do you tin you would live for much longer if your lungs decided to engage in open competition and even warfare with your liver?

You are seriously making that argument?

>>>Plenty, if you can be bothered to listen and also verify what I’m telling you through your own research.

Lmao....right...I have to spend my time proving your statements right....I'll get right on that....



Aight, this is taking too long, so i'll come back to this later....
 Jiperly
Joined: 8/30/2006
Msg: 77
The Zeitgeist Movement
Posted: 7/20/2012 1:49:00 PM
Aight, I hope to finish addressing what was said in the prior post, but I feel like I should explain why I keep calling your stance the "Venus Project"....although it should've been pretty clear since it was prominently in the second Zeitgeist...


The Venus Project is featured prominently in the documentary film Zeitgeist: Addendum, in relation to global problems explained in the film...Following the movie, an organization called the Zeitgeist Movement was established to promote the aims of the Venus Project. In 2011, an additional film, Zeitgeist: Moving Forward, was also released. At that time Zeitgeist was a promoter-advocate of the Venus Project

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Venus_Project

The Venus Project was the "solution" suggested to the problems the second Zeitgeist film presented. And, again, since you refused to give me an alternative to call the city-state/country or whatever you're suggesting, I took the name that is in the movie you are referencing- the Venus Project. They basically are the same movement- good luck finding the differences because I can't tell them...

>>>Plenty, if you can be bothered to listen and also verify what I’m telling you through your own research.

And there's plenty of information backing my claims up- if you do YOUR own research.

Well? Why aren't you spending time researching and proving me right? Hop to it Adam. If you can shrug and claim it's my job to prove your claims true, then clearly it's YOUR job to prove MY claims true.

Either that, or your belief that it's my job to back up your claims is utter bullshit....

>>>ANY system based around a medium of exchange will generate and incentivise greedy behaviours by its own inherant logic

And any system that rewards and supports people for doing nothing of value will become self-destructive, as people find out that they don't HAVE to work, and can spend all day sleeping in, watching tv, and having sex without any risk of consequence.

>>>Ifyou have more of that exchange mechanism than me you can demand more than me.

Nonsense. Unless violence, coercion, or theft is involved- as it often is with government programs- then people trade for mutual trade and mutual benefit. When I go to a restaurant, do I pay more than the food is actually worth? Absolutely- but I value the experience, the skill of the employees, and the comfortable environment. No one is "demanding more"- it is an exchange, based on mutual respect and mutual need.

There is no need for Altruism- in Altruism, one person is always the lesser- one person is always pity-ed , weak, and treated as incapable of doing what the other is doing. I have far too much respect for my fellow man, and so should you- people should treat each other on equal grounds- but that doesn't mean that everything should be worthless.

>>> Monopolistic tendencies.

LMAO.

You do realized that your own solution is a monopoly, right? The governing body- society- monopolizes all resources. You cannot do anything without getting permission from everyone first- if you think you have a good idea, and want it mass produced, you need to convince everyone else- otherwise, you cannot do it.

How is that anything less than a monopoly? How could you honestly suggest that the best way to prevent monopolies is to make only one, massive monopoly?

>>>“What, besides serious legislation will stop that kind of system, which we used to have in the past by the way, from simply evolving back into the same kind of system we have right now?”

The fact that Gold and Silver are finite. You can't keep pumping out gold coins if there is no more gold- unlike current money, which can be mass produced on a moments whim- which is the problem with current money- inflation due to too much money being processed.

There you go- there's your answer. You can tell people your 3 year old question has been answered. Though I doubt you will.

>>> however it has outlived that use.

So then don't use it, Jeez....

>>> Its called “Robots will steal your job. But that’s ok”. I would suggest you read it when you can.

Lol you won't read my links- why would I bother reading books you suggest?

>>>Which in the UK dictates that by the time you have emerged with that qualification there is both no guarantee that the job actually exists, let alone there be an open vacancy waitning for you,

So? What do you want me to do about it? I could spend 4 years at college learning how to become a bikini inspector- but someone's gotta have to need me before I can get a job....

Claiming no one should HAVE to have a job as a solution is kinda missing the point...

>>>Coz as I have said already, its not money that we need. Its access to what that money would have bought.

So you want money- or more accurately, a higher standard of living- for accomplishing nothing?

>>> This used to be a “valued” form of family entertainment. And completely morally accepted. Would we still consider it moral now? Of course not. Things change. As do we.

You bring up an interesting point, though- in the Venus Society, a dissenting cannot be tolerated. You just said it there in black and white- we were talking about people philosophical beliefs, and you brought up that you don't think things that are acceptable now will be acceptable in the future- clearly implying that people having their own philosophical beliefs are one of those things that would be no longer acceptable.

>>>I have already read articles of such and I don’t agree with the in the slightest.

...

Excuse me?

So your information- the books you read, the videos you watch, the "research" you do, is essential, and you don't shut up if you think that I somehow don't pull my part of the debate and do the "research".....

....but the single article I suggest you read, you shrug your shoulders and say you've "read articles of such", and that you can just guess what they say?

**** this. I spent all this time debating with you, and you cannot even bother stepping out of your pompous and hubristic comfort zone to read what was written?

That I should bend over and read this book, and that article, and re-watch 3 Zeitgiest movies, otherwise I'm ignorant of how the world "really" works.....but you won't treat me with the same kind of respect you expect of others?



I'm done here. You're being disrespectful. If you were truly interested in an exchange of ideas, you'd have read the ****ing article.

You don't want to exchange ideas. You want to preach.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >