Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 53 Posts

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
It's claimed that money was invented, because it's difficult for people to carry logs and sheep to trade at the same market, so people exchanged something of value that was easier to carry. However, with the computer age, people can exchange things electronically, so someone with 100 sheep can trade that for logs quite easily. This places a value on produce, instead of cost. In this system, companies will provide their employees with housing, food, insurance, retirement benefits, and their choice of clothing, instead of money, and employees choose which companies to work for based on the quality of life the company provides. This thus places an emphasis on how companies treat their employees, instead of how companies can generate ever greater profits. Instead of people focusing on what the individual can do to generate value, people will focus more on what can be produced to live a quality life. People will pay more attention to the environment and each other, instead of what they can buy.

What do you guys think? Thank you for reading and please share your opinions or thoughts.
 

Registered
INFJ - 4w5 (497) - so/sx
Joined
406 Posts
It's claimed that money was invented, because it's difficult for people to carry logs and sheep to trade at the same market, so people exchanged something of value that was easier to carry. However, with the computer age, people can exchange things electronically, so someone with 100 sheep can trade that for logs quite easily. This places a value on produce, instead of cost. In this system, companies will provide their employees with housing, food, insurance, retirement benefits, and their choice of clothing, instead of money, and employees choose which companies to work for based on the quality of life the company provides. This thus places an emphasis on how companies treat their employees, instead of how companies can generate ever greater profits. Instead of people focusing on what the individual can do to generate value, people will focus more on what can be produced to live a quality life. People will pay more attention to the environment and each other, instead of what they can buy.

What do you guys think? Thank you for reading and please share your opinions or thoughts.
It sounds like a wonderful future. I just feel like the systems we have now is less of a branch of human nature and is more the trunk.

Humans, no matter where you go on earth always seem to find a way to put value on something around them and use it for their benefit, even if that in question is humans themselves. I think the system you propose will have corruption like all other human-centric systems. I don't know how I feel about the phrase; "absolute power corrupts absolutely" I would personally add a more human focused quote; "Humans have a need to thrive and resources are seen as finite". Even if they are percieved as infinite, humans always need to be worrying about something. Then it'll come down to status in this society.

I have a feeling that in your system, companies themselves will become sources of currency as being a part of a certain company would lead to prestige amongst the workers. Unless enforced by the government, I feel as if the workers will be put under the heal by former workers who become the aptly named bourgeoisie, with their stockpiles of the previously mentioned 'prestige'.

It may be too judgemental of me but I want a system that accounts for the fact that humans have this selfish nature guiding their every move even if they aren't personally concious of it. I just don't know what system we have or is being developed by someone that can counter act and even use this nature to everyone's and everything's benefit.

I just hope all humans can come together one day and focus our combined efforts into something we all would find meaningful. Space exploration sounds like a good idea so I'll throw that idea in there. 馃榿
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
It sounds like a wonderful future. I just feel like the systems we have now is less of a branch of human nature and is more the trunk.

Humans, no matter where you go on earth always seem to find a way to put value on something around them and use it for their benefit, even if that in question is humans themselves. I think the system you propose will have corruption like all other human-centric systems. I don't know how I feel about the phrase; "absolute power corrupts absolutely" I would personally add a more human focused quote; "Humans have a need to thrive and resources are seen as finite". Even if they are percieved as infinite, humans always need to be worrying about something. Then it'll come down to status in this society.

I have a feeling that in your system, companies themselves will become sources of currency as being a part of a certain company would lead to prestige amongst the workers. Unless enforced by the government, I feel as if the workers will be put under the heal by former workers who become the aptly named bourgeoisie, with their stockpiles of the previously mentioned 'prestige'.

It may be too judgemental of me but I want a system that accounts for the fact that humans have this selfish nature guiding their every move even if they aren't personally concious of it. I just don't know what system we have or is being developed by someone that can counter act and even use this nature to everyone's and everything's benefit.

I just hope all humans can come together one day and focus our combined efforts into something we all would find meaningful. Space exploration sounds like a good idea so I'll throw that idea in there. 馃榿
Many of the current systems are carried over from the past, like how urbanization is a relatively new development, and the currency system, while making life simpler for people in the past to exchange goods and conduct trade, also created complications as they shifted human focus. Establishing a trade-based system is a step in the right direction. It entails figuring out the center of human motivation. The trade-based system will emphasize produce instead of cost, which is aptly suited for the digital age, with industrialization and automations, so people can focus more on living a quality life instead of what to buy.

While a company will naturally reward more for workers who have worked there for a long time, people are naturally tuned to help each other, so your worry that veteran workers will bully younger workers is relatively ill-grounded, because not only does it damage the reputation of the company and prevent other workers from joining (or quality workers from staying with the company for long), it also means the leaders in the company are picked based more on relationships, rather than their efforts to improve the working environment or company value.
 

Registered
Joined
5,305 Posts
Pay is dependent on how upskilled you want your talent to be. Benefits depend on supply-demand of talented personnel.

I've seen it myself in a variety of industries- if your employees need to be upskilled (spend extra years at uni, etc.) a company wants to offer financial compensation (which will be in accordance with industry standards).. Whereas if a company is looking for individual talent they'll offer more benefits.

That's the reason why successful tech firms often have buildings that look like playgrounds and offer benefits vouchers, etc. talent as a programmer is precious, so you're looking to do anything you can to draw in specific individuals. As opposed to let's say if you're a doctor you'll be financially well rewarded- but they're paying for your qualification not your individual talent.
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
Pay is dependent on how upskilled you want your talent to be. Benefits depend on supply-demand of talented personnel.

I've seen it myself in a variety of industries- if your employees need to be upskilled (spend extra years at uni, etc.) a company wants to offer financial compensation (which will be in accordance with industry standards).. Whereas if a company is looking for individual talent they'll offer more benefits.

That's the reason why successful tech firms often have buildings that look like playgrounds and offer benefits vouchers, etc. talent as a programmer is precious, so you're looking to do anything you can to draw in specific individuals. As opposed to let's say if you're a doctor you'll be financially well rewarded- but they're paying for your qualification not your individual talent.
In a trade-based system, a company might attract workers with life-long benefits, like life-time employment, wide insurance coverage, child-care, free food, retirement benefits, childhood education and scholarships, as well as job and internship opportunities for children and close relatives.
 

Registered
Joined
2,461 Posts
I can't see this system working in a big society like the one we're currently living in.
I see it the same way I see democracy and communism: they may work well in a Society with a few thousands inhabitants, but when you have over 10.000, they become bullshit good on paper but worse in reality.

Let's assume your system becomes reality.
What does that mean? That everyone gives away the freedom and power over his capital? That they have to depend on their company/employer that much? Any expense?
That's like giving freedom for security. Bad idea.

What if I want to buy a 238.62$ vibrator? I have to negotiate it with my employer?
What if I want to go for an international holiday? I have to negotiate with my employer where he is willing to let me go?

Your system may work (just like democracy or communism) when we talk about a minimal lifestyle, survivalist-kinda.
But when someone wants more than that, it fails to work anymore.

What if I want to spend 10.000$ on a picture?
What if I want to create something? Do I have to convince the employer to fund my start-up?
What if I want to invest in a dildo factory?

Imagine working as a porn actress, how do you choose your employer?

Life isn't about just surviving. It may be (for a lot of people, actually), but there will always be people that can and WANT more.
I want 3 lions on leash to walk with in my garden in the morning. How do I negotiate that with the employer?

Also, I'm an employer. My employees produces something (either delivering services or products), how do I receive payment for that? If money, what do I do with them? I'll be a part of some super exclusive group that has access to "luxury" goodies and services?

How do you pay for a kidney on black market or for a blowjob?

What you say there sounds like idealism for the poor.

I don't agree with all of the things you mentioned as being "additional things" to the salary (money) because what if I shut down the company next year? I can't/don't want to give free food anymore to my employees.

That's not goin' to work...ever!

Also your knowledge about monetary system is close to zero. You fail to understand why money appeared. I suggest you to study more, you seem to lack basic economy knowledge.
 

Registered
INFJ - 4w5 (497) - so/sx
Joined
406 Posts
Many of the current systems are carried over from the past, like how urbanization is a relatively new development, and the currency system, while making life simpler for people in the past to exchange goods and conduct trade, also created complications as they shifted human focus. Establishing a trade-based system is a step in the right direction. It entails figuring out the center of human motivation. The trade-based system will emphasize produce instead of cost, which is aptly suited for the digital age, with industrialization and automations, so people can focus more on living a quality life instead of what to buy.

While a company will naturally reward more for workers who have worked there for a long time, people are naturally tuned to help each other, so your worry that veteran workers will bully younger workers is relatively ill-grounded, because not only does it damage the reputation of the company and prevent other workers from joining (or quality workers from staying with the company for long), it also means the leaders in the company are picked based more on relationships, rather than their efforts to improve the working environment or company value.
How would you realistically feed 8 billion people with your system? Going back to a trade based system wouldn't be good I don't think, its inefficent, that's why money was developed. I was using the branch-trunk analogy because money is human nature. Money is a microcosm of human selfishness, which you can't remove.
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
I can't see this system working in a big society like the one we're currently living in.
I see it the same way I see democracy and communism: they may work well in a Society with a few thousands inhabitants, but when you have over 10.000, they become bullshit good on paper but worse in reality.

Let's assume your system becomes reality.
What does that mean? That everyone gives away the freedom and power over his capital? That they have to depend on their company/employer that much? Any expense?
That's like giving freedom for security. Bad idea.

What if I want to buy a 238.62$ vibrator? I have to negotiate it with my employer?
What if I want to go for an international holiday? I have to negotiate with my employer where he is willing to let me go?

Your system may work (just like democracy or communism) when we talk about a minimal lifestyle, survivalist-kinda.
But when someone wants more than that, it fails to work anymore.

What if I want to spend 10.000$ on a picture?
What if I want to create something? Do I have to convince the employer to fund my start-up?
What if I want to invest in a dildo factory?

Imagine working as a porn actress, how do you choose your employer?

Life isn't about just surviving. It may be (for a lot of people, actually), but there will always be people that can and WANT more.
I want 3 lions on leash to walk with in my garden in the morning. How do I negotiate that with the employer?

Also, I'm an employer. My employees produces something (either delivering services or products), how do I receive payment for that? If money, what do I do with them? I'll be a part of some super exclusive group that has access to "luxury" goodies and services?

How do you pay for a kidney on black market or for a blowjob?

What you say there sounds like idealism for the poor.

I don't agree with all of the things you mentioned as being "additional things" to the salary (money) because what if I shut down the company next year? I can't/don't want to give free food anymore to my employees.

That's not goin' to work...ever!

Also your knowledge about monetary system is close to zero. You fail to understand why money appeared. I suggest you to study more, you seem to lack basic economy knowledge.
In a trade-based system, you will think more about what you can produce or bring to society, rather than what you can use your money to buy. If you want to buy sex, then it's more about finding a willing partner who is willing to love you, and provide that physical love, rather than someone just looking to buy drugs or pay their rent.

How would you realistically feed 8 billion people with your system? Going back to a trade based system wouldn't be good I don't think, its inefficent, that's why money was developed. I was using the branch-trunk analogy because money is human nature. Money is a microcosm of human selfishness, which you can't remove.
In such a system, there will be many companies offering life-long employment (and retirement benefits) if you work for them. So this way, being fed is guaranteed.

If someone wants to buy lions and walk them around, then that can be traded for as well, like for a service the person can do, or for something of equal value the person has, like an antique. Certain companies can also provide credits to use on Amazon, for example, so you can purchase them, if available.

Remove the profit motive and then what is the motive?
The motive will be what you can do for society, instead of what can be bought with money, with the focus on providing a better quality life for everyone
 

Registered
Joined
51 Posts
In this system, companies will provide their employees with housing, food, insurance, retirement benefits, and their choice of clothing,
That's a terrifying idea. People's freedom is taken away in a scenario like that, and they are treated like children with the companies the parents. Much of what you propose was already tried in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics -- USSR -- and failed miserably, as predicted. Genocide, concentration camps, psychological manipulation, racism, over 100,000,000 people murdered/killed in the 20th century alone, etc. The elite had the best, the lower classes the worst, including bread lines and starvation. It's the same in all Communist-oriented Socialist countries, right to present-day Venezuela. (Communism is just a heightened form of the Socialism of Hitler's National Socialist German Worker's Party -- Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or Nazi for short.)

instead of money, and employees choose which companies to work for based on the quality of life the company provides. This thus places an emphasis on how companies treat their employees,
You're not taking into consideration human nature, which is very complicated. People make work choices for all kinds of reasons. Changing what is exchanged for their labour is not going to change human nature.

, instead of how companies can generate ever greater profits.
This is typical Marxist propaganda: making 'profits' a bad thing. In truth, a company can have a profit, yet still be millions of dollars in debt. Profits are what pay for things like wages; updated equipment; repairing broken equipment; being able to purchase a greater quantity of supplies at lower unit costs and/or better quality supplies, which in turn keeps the end price down for the consumer and provides them with a product of better quality which will last longer, costing them less money in the long run; donations to charity and community sponsorships such as local sports teams; etc.

Instead of people focusing on what the individual can do to generate value, people will focus more on what can be produced to live a quality life. People will pay more attention to the environment and each other, instead of what they can buy.
Again, shallow thinking is being employed here, human nature is being ignored. As is historical and current reality. You haven't thought past the surface of this, or it's impossibility would be evident to you.

I'm not speaking from theory. My people suffered a great deal, some still are, some were murdered.

 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
That's a terrifying idea. People's freedom is taken away in a scenario like that, and they are treated like children with the companies the parents. Much of what you propose was already tried in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics -- USSR -- and failed miserably, as predicted. Genocide, concentration camps, psychological manipulation, racism, over 100,000,000 people murdered/killed in the 20th century alone, etc. The elite had the best, the lower classes the worst, including bread lines and starvation. It's the same in all Communist-oriented Socialist countries, right to present-day Venezuela. (Communism is just a heightened form of the Socialism of Hitler's National Socialist German Worker's Party -- Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or Nazi for short.)



You're not taking into consideration human nature, which is very complicated. People make work choices for all kinds of reasons. Changing what is exchanged for their labour is not going to change human nature.



This is typical Marxist propaganda: making 'profits' a bad thing. In truth, a company can have a profit, yet still be millions of dollars in debt. Profits are what pay for things like wages; updated equipment; repairing broken equipment; being able to purchase a greater quantity of supplies at lower unit costs and/or better quality supplies, which in turn keeps the end price down for the consumer and provides them with a product of better quality which will last longer, costing them less money in the long run; donations to charity and community sponsorships such as local sports teams; etc.



Again, shallow thinking is being employed here, human nature is being ignored. As is historical and current reality. You haven't thought past the surface of this, or it's impossibility would be evident to you.

I'm not speaking from theory. My people suffered a great deal, some still are, some were murdered.

Communist governments also employed a monetary system, except the monetary system is run by the government, instead of independent, private banks. While they had a system where people are employed for life, the motivation was fulfilling a quota system, where people at the top directed how much is to be produced (managers looking for promotions often cheated by overstating the amount produced). In the trade system, the motivation is to attract employees with benefits, including life-long employment, so the focus is on employees, instead of leaders looking for promotions by fulfilling quotas.
 

Registered
INFJ - 4w5 (497) - so/sx
Joined
406 Posts
In a trade-based system, you will think more about what you can produce or bring to society, rather than what you can use your money to buy. If you want to buy sex, then it's more about finding a willing partner who is willing to love you, and provide that physical love, rather than someone just looking to buy drugs or pay their rent.



In such a system, there will be many companies offering life-long employment (and retirement benefits) if you work for them. So this way, being fed is guaranteed.

If someone wants to buy lions and walk them around, then that can be traded for as well, like for a service the person can do, or for something of equal value the person has, like an antique. Certain companies can also provide credits to use on Amazon, for example, so you can purchase them, if available.



The motive will be what you can do for society, instead of what can be bought with money, with the focus on providing a better quality life for everyone
Well if it realistically leads to a better world without killing people in the process of change then you have my full support.
 

Registered
Joined
51 Posts
Communist governments also employed a monetary system, except the monetary system is run by the government, instead of independent, private banks. While they had a system where people are employed for life, the motivation was fulfilling a quota system, where people at the top directed how much is to be produced (managers looking for promotions often cheated by overstating the amount produced). In the trade system, the motivation is to attract employees with benefits, including life-long employment, so the focus is on employees, instead of leaders looking for promotions by fulfilling quotas.
I understood your scenario, which is why I put qualifiers in my reply.

There are so many points one could tease out, resulting in several pages, so I鈥檒l limit myself to the following.

Your scenario is just communism in disguise, and an evolved form of it. Marxists knew their methods to conquer the West needed to be different than in other parts of the world. Just because what you propose isn鈥檛 exactly the same in every detail as was in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or in other countries, doesn鈥檛 make it any less communistic. Their ultimate goal, however disguised with shallow, flowery ideologies, is total power and control over the people. It鈥檚 a narcissistic, psychopathic, evil ideology. Unfortunately, it lures far too many otherwise good, yet na茂ve and shallow-thinking people in with its veneer of compassion and (false) equality.

There are very dangerous psychological implications to this, both for those being treated like children, and those who would then have an enormous amount of power and control over them. There is also the issue of taking away people鈥檚 freedom. This must be taken very seriously.

Without money, how are people going to purchase medicine, travel, vacations, presents, etc.? And what about pets and their needs? There is no possibility it could work. And in the present system, people are able to choose where they want to live. If an area / neighbours are a bad influence on their children, for instance, it鈥檚 not that hard to move.

Marxism has lying, cheating, and manipulation in its very DNA. Their quotas were arbitrary, and there were severe consequences to you and / or your family, friends, colleagues if you didn鈥檛 meet them. Fudging numbers was often done at the behest of the government as a way to deceive and manipulate the people, other nations, their own allies, and ultimately (subconsciously) themselves.

You鈥檙e creating a false dichotomy of benefit to employees vs quotas. The reality is that to meet businesses needs of being able to pay for necessary things such as as rent, payroll, electricity, machinery, office supplies, tools, component parts, repairs, marketing and advertising, licensing and other legal requirements, their contribution to any employee benefits they provide, a business needs to attain a certain level of income. A quota is the threshold amount to be able to do this. (This is different from the Communist quota system.)

Also, attracting employees with benefits is already being done to various degrees depending on the industry. Human nature being what is is, benefits are not the only factor people focus on when deciding where they鈥檇 like to work, and not necessarily even the most important one. The hierarchy of importance varies from person to person, family to family, and will change as their lives change.

And this doesn鈥檛 even begin to address that the Communist goals for taking over the West included surreptitiously infiltrating and gaining influential positions in big business and other areas of society[1], which has already been achieved.

I鈥檇 recommend learning about Communist / Marxist methods of manipulation as well.[2]

[1] Skousen, W. Cleon. Chapter 12: The Future Task, 鈥淐urrent Communist Goals,鈥 in The Naked Communist. Izzard Ink Publishing, 2014. (N.B.: Regarding the book as a whole, although the information taken from various government agencies around the world is corroborated by other sources -- the author worked in law enforcement, including in the FBI, his son in the CIA -- much of the interpretation on religion is heavily biased by the author鈥檚 own beliefs, and not necessarily an accurate portrayal of events or motivations.)

[2] There are many resources, but what currently comes to mind is Bella Dodd鈥檚 testimonies at the various hearings of the United States Senate Committees.
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
I understood your scenario, which is why I put qualifiers in my reply.

There are so many points one could tease out, resulting in several pages, so I鈥檒l limit myself to the following.

Your scenario is just communism in disguise, and an evolved form of it. Marxists knew their methods to conquer the West needed to be different than in other parts of the world. Just because what you propose isn鈥檛 exactly the same in every detail as was in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics or in other countries, doesn鈥檛 make it any less communistic. Their ultimate goal, however disguised with shallow, flowery ideologies, is total power and control over the people. It鈥檚 a narcissistic, psychopathic, evil ideology. Unfortunately, it lures far too many otherwise good, yet na茂ve and shallow-thinking people in with its veneer of compassion and (false) equality.

There are very dangerous psychological implications to this, both for those being treated like children, and those who would then have an enormous amount of power and control over them. There is also the issue of taking away people鈥檚 freedom. This must be taken very seriously.

Without money, how are people going to purchase medicine, travel, vacations, presents, etc.? And what about pets and their needs? There is no possibility it could work. And in the present system, people are able to choose where they want to live. If an area / neighbours are a bad influence on their children, for instance, it鈥檚 not that hard to move.

Marxism has lying, cheating, and manipulation in its very DNA. Their quotas were arbitrary, and there were severe consequences to you and / or your family, friends, colleagues if you didn鈥檛 meet them. Fudging numbers was often done at the behest of the government as a way to deceive and manipulate the people, other nations, their own allies, and ultimately (subconsciously) themselves.

You鈥檙e creating a false dichotomy of benefit to employees vs quotas. The reality is that to meet businesses needs of being able to pay for necessary things such as as rent, payroll, electricity, machinery, office supplies, tools, component parts, repairs, marketing and advertising, licensing and other legal requirements, their contribution to any employee benefits they provide, a business needs to attain a certain level of income. A quota is the threshold amount to be able to do this. (This is different from the Communist quota system.)

Also, attracting employees with benefits is already being done to various degrees depending on the industry. Human nature being what is is, benefits are not the only factor people focus on when deciding where they鈥檇 like to work, and not necessarily even the most important one. The hierarchy of importance varies from person to person, family to family, and will change as their lives change.

And this doesn鈥檛 even begin to address that the Communist goals for taking over the West included surreptitiously infiltrating and gaining influential positions in big business and other areas of society[1], which has already been achieved.

I鈥檇 recommend learning about Communist / Marxist methods of manipulation as well.[2]

[1] Skousen, W. Cleon. Chapter 12: The Future Task, 鈥淐urrent Communist Goals,鈥 in The Naked Communist. Izzard Ink Publishing, 2014. (N.B.: Regarding the book as a whole, although the information taken from various government agencies around the world is corroborated by other sources -- the author worked in law enforcement, including in the FBI, his son in the CIA -- much of the interpretation on religion is heavily biased by the author鈥檚 own beliefs, and not necessarily an accurate portrayal of events or motivations.)

[2] There are many resources, but what currently comes to mind is Bella Dodd鈥檚 testimonies at the various hearings of the United States Senate Committees.
Your examples of using Communist societies are all based on a monetary-system, just that the government controls it. Much of their problems is caused by this monetary system. In a Trade-based system, much will be done by exchanging goods and services directly; this system is much similar to societies in 500AD, when the monetary system isn't that well established, and people shared things with each other, without much of the excessive waste, and thinking about what to buy with money.
 

Registered
Joined
51 Posts
Your examples of using Communist societies are all based on a monetary-system, just that the government controls it. Much of their problems is caused by this monetary system. In a Trade-based system, much will be done by exchanging goods and services directly; this system is much similar to societies in 500AD, when the monetary system isn't that well established, and people shared things with each other, without much of the excessive waste, and thinking about what to buy with money.
What you're not understanding is that the problem was and is with the ideology, as I've already stated. Changing a detail here or there doesn't change the overall ideology, or the impossibility of it working, or the evilness of it.

What you have presented is not a system where people are sharing things with one another. You can only share what you own, what is yours to choose to share. What you are presenting is ownership of people's labour by the businesses they work for. Business which have been infiltrated by Marxist ideology to a large extent! (Think of big social media silencing those who don't share their political views for instance. Do you not think something similar will happen when it comes to who gets the best housing, neighbourhood, etc. if these businesses are given that power!) Again, human nature won't change just because you have a pretty idea in your head, no matter how good your intentions!

You are also ignoring the fact that it treats adult human beings like children! and takes away their freedom! You're ignoring human nature! You don't seem to accept the seriousness of the implication of all this, which is quite disturbing.

You talk about excessive waste. How are you currently living your life to have the integrity of your views? Have you given up your freedom? Do you 'share' all your excess money with the less fortunate for instance, and live a very minimalist life? Or are you still reliant on your parents to support you?

Anyone wanting to make the world a better place has to start with themselves. Cultivate a character that values truth, seeking it and walking in it when found regardless of the financial, social, etc. consequences; consciously ridding themselves of biases as much as possible; cultivating justice and tempering it with mercy; cultivating humility; etc. That is a lifelong journey, but it is what has been repeatedly proven to beneficially change societies.
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
What you're not understanding is that the problem was and is with the ideology, as I've already stated. Changing a detail here or there doesn't change the overall ideology, or the impossibility of it working, or the evilness of it.

What you have presented is not a system where people are sharing things with one another. You can only share what you own, what is yours to choose to share. What you are presenting is ownership of people's labour by the businesses they work for. Business which have been infiltrated by Marxist ideology to a large extent! (Think of big social media silencing those who don't share their political views for instance. Do you not think something similar will happen when it comes to who gets the best housing, neighbourhood, etc. if these businesses are given that power!) Again, human nature won't change just because you have a pretty idea in your head, no matter how good your intentions!

You are also ignoring the fact that it treats adult human beings like children! and takes away their freedom! You're ignoring human nature! You don't seem to accept the seriousness of the implication of all this, which is quite disturbing.

You talk about excessive waste. How are you currently living your life to have the integrity of your views? Have you given up your freedom? Do you 'share' all your excess money with the less fortunate for instance, and live a very minimalist life? Or are you still reliant on your parents to support you?

Anyone wanting to make the world a better place has to start with themselves. Cultivate a character that values truth, seeking it and walking in it when found regardless of the financial, social, etc. consequences; consciously ridding themselves of biases as much as possible; cultivating justice and tempering it with mercy; cultivating humility; etc. That is a lifelong journey, but it is what has been repeatedly proven to beneficially change societies.
The ideology you mention is born out of the monetary-system. In a Trade-based system, people will look more at how many people a company hires, instead of how much money the company makes. People will also look at how many people a country has, and how many people work for that country's companies, instead of how much multinational companies make around the world, or how much money a country is getting from trade.
 

Registered
Joined
51 Posts
The ideology you mention is born out of the monetary-system. In a Trade-based system, people will look more at how many people a company hires, instead of how much money the company makes. People will also look at how many people a country has, and how many people work for that country's companies, instead of how much multinational companies make around the world, or how much money a country is getting from trade.
As I said earlier, I understand your position.

You don't seem interested in having an actual intelligent conversation about your idea as you have consistently ignored each of the valid points I've raised as to why it can never work. This is quite telling.

I wish you well.
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
As I said earlier, I understand your position.

You don't seem interested in having an actual intelligent conversation about your idea as you have consistently ignored each of the valid points I've raised as to why it can never work. This is quite telling.

I wish you well.
The counter-arguments you make are all from the point of view of a Monetary-system, instead of a Trade-based System. It's like arguing with a person who has lived in a desert all his life that there are rainforests, and a different way of life, or a person who has lived in the tropics that there is snow, and how people have to wear heavy clothing during winter.
 

Registered
Joined
2,461 Posts
In a trade-based system, you will think more about what you can produce or bring to society, rather than what you can use your money to buy. If you want to buy sex, then it's more about finding a willing partner who is willing to love you, and provide that physical love, rather than someone just looking to buy drugs or pay their rent.
So in the end you are not interested in changing only the method of payment between citizens.

But in fact you want to enter their personal life to tell them what are the only acceptable ways to live their lives.
Good luck with that. It will never become a reality.

People fought for their right to choose a pussy over another without being needed to develop "love" feelings.
They don't buy sex, they just buy the condoms. And the Dry Riesling they want to drink together.
And maybe they want to pay for partner Uber. Or they want to order a pizza because that girl likes pizza.

So let's say that I want to date someone.
We are walking in a park and suddenly she sees cotton candy and she wants it. In your society, how are we supposed to pay for that cotton candy?
Then later, guess what. She wants chocolate too.
Then she wants to give me a blowjob and we need to have some good quality napkins because we're doing it out in the forest.
"Hello Mr. Employer. I want to trade my work for an Uber, chocolate, a wine, napkins, condoms and uhh... she wants to be blindfolded and handcuffed too. Thanks!"

How would you deal with a situation like this in your Society?
 

Registered
INFJ, SoCom, hands-on, physical intimacy, Energy being, Project Career Temp, Wisdom Growth Temp
Joined
4,160 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
So in the end you are not interested in changing only the method of payment between citizens.

But in fact you want to enter their personal life to tell them what are the only acceptable ways to live their lives.
Good luck with that. It will never become a reality.

People fought for their right to choose a pussy over another without being needed to develop "love" feelings.
They don't buy sex, they just buy the condoms. And the Dry Riesling they want to drink together.
And maybe they want to pay for partner Uber. Or they want to order a pizza because that girl likes pizza.

So let's say that I want to date someone.
We are walking in a park and suddenly she sees cotton candy and she wants it. In your society, how are we supposed to pay for that cotton candy?
Then later, guess what. She wants chocolate too.
Then she wants to give me a blowjob and we need to have some good quality napkins because we're doing it out in the forest.
"Hello Mr. Employer. I want to trade my work for an Uber, chocolate, a wine, napkins, condoms and uhh... she wants to be blindfolded and handcuffed too. Thanks!"

How would you deal with a situation like this in your Society?
The company where the woman works can provide a certain amount of credits to be used on websites like Amazon, or elsewhere. It's a form of "IOU" (I Owe You), like money.
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top