Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 there is no consideration for the employee which I think is a shame.that's just in bullshit yankee corporate shite though. what about cute little old grannies working in their family bakeries? if the businesses are small and local, the staff-customer relationship will be pretty cordial and the staff will actually care about their business. my god, just read the wiki about Zeitgeist the Movie. what an epic crock of conspiracy-junkie horsecrap. How are you getting on erecting another "straw man" remark? Do you want any help? lol i know the stuff in this thread isn't from that film. but it's probably worthwhile to consider the fact that the same people who came up with the whole zeitgeist futuristic utopia thing also believe in secret world domination cabals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 man most of the problems that zeitgeist wants to fix can be overcome by simply not living in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 i don't know if you agree with this but i think most people have a need to feel empowered. that is the real incentive, not money. to feel safe, to feel that they have something special going on about them, to feel they have some advantage, to feel that they stand out; they have some urge to separate themselves from everyone else. money is just one of the means to those things. Are you mainly referring to competition among humans? Let me know if I haven't understood.. But on the subject of competition, is it not better to have a team of people working together to achieve a goal, or is it much better for people in the group to go off and do their own work without comparing results with anyone else for competitive, ego related reasons? More minds are better than one when working on a project. So, with competition, I believe that we are taught in this system by many social institutions on how to become a "better person" than everyone else -- when really everyone is the same on a symbiotic basis. Competition is taught very early on in school. As an example, imagine when you handed in your homework to the teacher, you were graded a D whilst your friend gained an A grade.. this automatically creates jealousy and competition from a very early age and in my opinion this is not the right approach when educating a group of children. Another example where competition is learned is when you have a scenario where a brother has not tidied up his toys before dinner time. His sister tidied all her toys up, and so you hear the Mother shout at her son, asking him "Why can't you be more like your sister"? -- this creates bad associative memory in the course of the child's life.. so again competition is picked up in the environment. When there were cave men, the reason why they all competed was because of scarce resources.. it was the environment which triggered their competitive behavior, not an inherent gene which creates someone to automatically become aggressive towards one another. So, in an RBE school environment, there would no longer be graded work necessarily.. necessities are provided in abundance so there is no need for stratification and competition over resources. The need for someone to become a leader is not relevant because decisions are arrived at collectively rather than one leader deciding on everything via opinions.. Opinions are meaningless, they are just words with no basis. The scientific menthod would allow for a better decision making system as you would find it difficult to argue fact, results or well researched findings.. so on this basis, social stratification and the need for leaders becomes irrelevant. so if you take money away, those needs are still there. the crimes you mention, wouldn't exist in the way that they do today, but people will still cheat and harm their way into empowerment. your goal, i think, seems to be to ultimately promote harmony among people, i think? but you're approaching this from the outside in. i think the answer would more likely come from the inside -> outward. change how people think about themselves and others and the rest will fall into place. some well-constructed, contagious, peaceful philosophy seems the most sensible route, rather than a massive technological reaction to a flawed monetary system. As emphasized earlier, I feel that it is social change that is needed before technological change. Technological unemployment is merely a result of a flawed monetary system. I feel education towards a new set of human values and understandings of the world are more important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 would our supposed total dependency on these future uber-robots mean that no living human possesses the practical skills needed to cook, or build furniture, etc? if so, what happens when our system of omnipotent machines eventually collapses? no one will be able to survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 I understand what you mean ezkerraldean but at the end of it all, that granny working in the bakery smiling at you when you buy your ice bun has a very limited frame of reference. All she knows is how to be a baker. She hasn't been given any other life opportunities due to her conditioning. If the bakery she works in can become more efficient via machine automation, why let the hold back of this efficiency be based on a staff-customer relationship? Can you really imagine having call centre staff by the year 2100, realistically? I mean it's very clear to me that efficiency shouldn't be held back in the name of customer/employee relationships.. I watch the employees of Asda on TV adverts in the UK and I genuinely feel sorry for them as that is the only lifestyle they know -- promoting a big supermarket chain on telly (unless they are actors), they're in a little bubble built by the system they live in. my god, just read the wiki about Zeitgeist the Movie. what an epic crock of conspiracy-junkie horsecrap. How are you getting on erecting another "straw man" remark? Do you want any help? lol i know the stuff in this thread isn't from that film. but it's probably worthwhile to consider the fact that the same people who came up with the whole zeitgeist futuristic utopia thing also believe in secret world domination cabals. Again, why the use of utopia to try and discredit what I am saying? I've already said that utopia can not be attained.. Everything is emergent, everything improves and becomes more efficient. There is no such thing as a perfect world or utopia. I only advocate a better system to the one we currently have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I understand what you mean ezkerraldean but at the end of it all, that granny working in the bakery smiling at you when you buy your ice bun has a very limited frame of reference. All she knows is how to be a baker. She hasn't been given any other life opportunities due to her conditioning. If the bakery she works in can become more efficient via machine automation, why let the hold back of this efficiency be based on a staff-customer relationship? Can you really imagine having call centre staff by the year 2100, realistically? I mean it's very clear to me that efficiency shouldn't be held back in the name of customer/employee relationships.. I watch the employees of Asda on TV adverts in the UK and I genuinely feel sorry for them as that is the only lifestyle they know -- promoting a big supermarket chain on telly (unless they are actors), they're in a little bubble built by the system they live in.oh my fucking god! if people want to be bakers, fucking let them! and why must everything be uber-super-efficient? what's wrong with small independent butchers, bakers and candlestick makers? they, as well as a barter-economy town market, still hold the cards in my old hometown, and the inhabitants aren't miserable and starving. Again, why the use of utopia to try and discredit what I am saying? I've already said that utopia can not be attained.. Everything is emergent, everything improves and becomes more efficient. There is no such thing as a perfect world or utopia. I only advocate a better system to the one we currently have now. i wasn't using the word utopia to discredit you at all. i was using the fact that the people who came up with the whole future vision thing are also crackpot conspiracy nuts to discredit you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneaksta303 Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 I'm HELLA bored now. It's gotten to the point of juvenile one ups-man-ship shit here. I mean, if you are having fun guys, carry on, but I'm catching vibes from all the way over here that suggests a slight nastiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoodie Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 "People are conditioned to think that it is best to deal with a human being in a customer transaction." "It's the environment which someone grows up in that contributes to the behaviors of that human being." "She hasn't been given any other life opportunities due to her conditioning." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest taxman Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 i think what would really settle this is a test. maybe start by growing food using a hydroponic process that is automated all the way from the farm to the distributor and making it freely available to a particular population and watching the results. if getting it started is possible, will any of the population volunteer to maintain the machines without the promise of compensation even though their basic needs for survival are now met? how long will the group who set the system up remain in power to oversee the process before people within the system take over the responsibility of running shit themselves, or will the government need to remain in place indefinitely? on the subject of progress, how will people go about getting materials to build new technology? without someone overseeing the mining/refining of metals and the production of plastic, paper, lumber, and whatever else, how will the general population get their hands on such things? will there be someone there to limit the amount of materials a person is allowed to take for themselves to use in their personal projects? what if the resources are in short supply and everyone wants to use them, and on top of that everyone thinks they should get them for free? i'm putting in an order for gold to use in some electronics i'm working on. never mind my gold plated bathtub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 how about we work out how to achieve something comparatively small and yet still seemingly impossible and get parents to teach their kids to be respectable, decent human beings before we try and remove the monetary system and live on a resource based society. you say that its a naive view to think that humanity is not inherently half full of greedy, selfish people, when clearly a quick glance back at the entirety of recorded human history proves that really it is not. maybe theres a small chance of your non-monetary system working when every single one of the 6 billion people on this earth has nothing but a will for harmony and sharing with everyone else, but i dont see why you cant see that the task of getting everyone on this planet to get along is completely and utterly futile and insanely difficult. it will, in other words, never, ever happen. id put your time into more constructive ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosmachine Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 oh my fucking god! if people want to be bakers, fucking let them! and why must everything be uber-super-efficient? what's wrong with small independent butchers, bakers and candlestick makers? they, as well as a barter-economy town market, still hold the cards in my old hometown, and the inhabitants aren't miserable and starving. That's fine if people would still want to become bakers in an RBE, however, if there is an automated bakery near by in a money system, do you think the bakery ran by the old lady is going to suffer in some way? Why has efficiency become the enemy.. you wouldn't be supporting local bakeries being run by people if you were only brought up in a system surrounded by automated bakeries -- you would probably think it was an absurd idea consuming an old ladies time, making bread for you when it can all be made a lot easier for everyone in the process of technology. It relates to your outlook as well as mine and whether you choose to take a step back out of this system and take an objective view on something or remain influenced in your opinions regarding what you are most familiar with.. which is the monetary system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 i think what would really settle this is a test. maybe start by growing food using a hydroponic process that is automated all the way from the farm to the distributor and making it freely available to a particular population and watching the results. if getting it started is possible, will any of the population volunteer to maintain the machines without the promise of compensation even though their basic needs for survival are now met? how long will the group who set the system up remain in power to oversee the process before people within the system take over the responsibility of running shit themselves, or will the government need to remain in place indefinitely? Firstly, are people still working in jobs? Do people still contribute to a monetary economy? Or are you saying the people are in a closed off area as an experiment? You have to remember that in doing this sort of experiment right now, it is bound to fail as the values people have learned within that group you have chosen to conduct the social experiment with have only ever learned and adopted the values taught to them when living in a monetary system.. So what I am saying is that a whole new system needs to be put in place so that a new set of values can be adopted in the environment children grow up in. If we woke up tomorrow and all of a sudden we had a resource based economy, things would be very disorganized. People would be so confused and almost become hostile to others due to the sudden trauma of it all.. so a transition phase is essential. I'm not saying this will happen over night, it may not even happen in our life time however being part of a grassroots movement which works on activism, getting these ideas out now would increase the probability of this happening in future. on the subject of progress, how will people go about getting materials to build new technology? without someone overseeing the mining/refining of metals and the production of plastic, paper, lumber, and whatever else, how will the general population get their hands on such things? will there be someone there to limit the amount of materials a person is allowed to take for themselves to use in their personal projects? what if the resources are in short supply and everyone wants to use them, and on top of that everyone thinks they should get them for free? Good questions. Firstly, an overall survey of all the planet's resources needs to be carried out, to make sure the population is in accordance to the carrying capacity of the Earth. If it isn't, people will be educated in terms of how take on board the consequences of an overpopulated planet. Secondly, computer systems will measure via algorithms how many materials and/or resources are required to meet the demand for a certain amount of goods -- let's take our item in demand as a cotton shirt. Hydroponics can be used to allow the cotton plants to germinate and grow as efficiently as possible in a controlled and scientifically tested environment. We need to ensure, especially with plant life and vegetation that a dynamic equilibrium is being maintained so that the flow of output is in exact measurement to the cotton plants being grown and creating yields of cotton to create a shirt.. A basic process of resewing the seeds /then/ computers monitoring the amount of water and nutrients needing to be pumped to the plant life /then/ machinery will take the cotton grown by the plants and transport (via convert belt) it to a near by facility where the manufacturing of shirts begin.. Now, we've all seen that during the industrial revolution, the textile industry became automated in certain ways and as a result, the process becomes more efficient when producing clothing and textile materials. Please note that from all the general details I have described (and this is a very basic overview), the computers have been programmed to make accurate decisions. The computers are not deciding or commanding humans in anyway, they are merely assigned to problem solving tasks and making sure the manufacturing process of the cotton shirts are done as best as possible. Also note that is no human involvement besides the creation of the technology in the first place. So, once the automated machinery have produced a shirt from raw materials grown within the hydroponic farm, there will be a worldwide computer database where users may select from a variety of different colored shirts, sizes, designs etc.. when the user selects the option of a red shirt, medium in length, the computer database which the person used will give constant feedback to them. The computers measure the average demands for a certain item of clothing, and at the same time the computer will know how many more cotton plants need to be grown to meet the demand. Again, no human intervention in terms of the creation of the red shirt. So once the user has entered the request for the red shirt (via internet connection from his/her own home computer/mobile phone), the person will pick it up from a distribution centre near to his/her home -- or he can wait for the delivery of the shirt to his/her house. Soon, a computer can drive a vehicle to an exact location by using GPS navigation alone -- so the delivery of the shirt can be done by a GPS driven vehicle carried out by a computer system with no human driver. I believe I heard Mercedes have already invented this technology. I tried searching on google but could not find anything, if I find the article I will post it for people who are interested. Here is a better intro to an RBE -- some people prefer watching videos: Please watch these if you would like to learn more http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mntyNKimiM4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjcTJBbwXZM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEwDZMRzsEA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9mJg4Ukc20 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtzGyCwZuQQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share Posted October 2, 2009 how about we work out how to achieve something comparatively small and yet still seemingly impossible and get parents to teach their kids to be respectable, decent human beings before we try and remove the monetary system and live on a resource based society. You can't teach respect in a monetary system. The moment you teach a kid how to be respectable to others, they will only grow up and learn how to adopt certain abhorrent behaviors within a monetary system. However I do take the view point strongly that the first thing is to educate. you say that its a naive view to think that humanity is not inherently half full of greedy, selfish people, when clearly a quick glance back at the entirety of recorded human history proves that really it is not. Our well known human history has been involved in a money system -- so I'd argue it's the environment which has caused the greedy, selfish behaviors people had learned. Wars are usually as a result of lack of resources, or the greed for wanting to take more resources for your own country or nation. This is not an inherently born "War gene", the idea of scarcity triggers the need for someone to become greedy. The brain reacts to the environment, scarcity triggers behaviors. On the other hand, an abundance of resources can prevent the need for greed. maybe theres a small chance of your non-monetary system working when every single one of the 6 billion people on this earth has nothing but a will for harmony and sharing with everyone else, but i dont see why you cant see that the task of getting everyone on this planet to get along is completely and utterly futile and insanely difficult. It will be difficult, just like most movements have difficulty battling symptoms of this system. Why not give it a try though? If everyone had your negative view point, no one in the world would get anywhere! it will, in other words, never, ever happen. id put your time into more constructive ideas. I'm sure many others were telling Martin Luther King that -- if everyone thought that way in your statement, then nothing will happen as I said above. It has to take someone to do something, if everyone were filled with apathy, we would honestly get no where. So it has to take a grassroots movement to begin with. The Zeitgeist Movement is the activist arm of the Venus Project. The Venus Project is a research facility in Venus, Florida where Jacque Fresco, industrial engineer and social scientist has developed the overall basis of an RBE using different ideas taught to him as he was growing up. I'll just say that parts of the media are really taking to these ideas very well. Jacque Fresco was on UK television last night at 20.00 GMT for a 2 hour long interview on cable TV about a resource based economy. He is lecturing at a University this weekend in London, and he lectured in Copenhagen to 1000 people last weekend. Peter Joseph, creator of the Zeitgeist documentaries is currently planning on speaking to Chavez's people about these ideas. Peter has also applied to be part of the TED Talk conferences and his application has been accepted. Zeitgeist Addendum has had over 50+ million views on the internet. There are global chapters of the movement in almost every country of the world. The New York Times had written a positive article on one of Peter Joseph's lectures presented in New York at the beginning of this year. Zeitgeist Addendum documentary currently has a repeated air time slot on a week to week basis on a UK cable television channel. I can carry on with the examples of positive media coverage on these ideas.. we are in no way a small group of people. With the information I know, I can't go on living life when these ideas make sense. If a person or group come a long with a better idea, I'll support that notion -- but until that happens, I can't seem to find any other useful direction for the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hautlle Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 Topeka, KS! Top city 4 life. Represent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegecow Posted October 2, 2009 Share Posted October 2, 2009 if robots replace so many jobs that 70% or whatever of people become unemployed then thats obviously just as much of a problem for industry and government as is is for the common folk and thats when it will have to be solved. When it becomes a problem. Crying resource economy before theres even a significant problem at hand is utterly pointless. There are so many problems we have to deal with right fucking now to even get to that point at all, its like planning next summer's harvest when you're not even sure you have enough food to make it through the winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I'm HELLA bored now. It's gotten to the point of juvenile one ups-man-ship shit here. I mean, if you are having fun guys, carry on, but I'm catching vibes from all the way over here that suggests a slight nastiness. lol i was just drunk and bored. i think he meant it all though lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ezkerraldean Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Wars are usually as a result of lack of resources, or the greed for wanting to take more resources for your own country or nation. that's often said, but i very much doubt anyone would actually be able to back that up. can't really see how resources played a part in the start of WWI, spanish civil war, chinese civil war, korea, vietnam etc. (obviously resources play a strategic role after the outbreak of war)i'd put xenophobia before resources in most common causes of war. maybe even WWII, since the axis' desire for land was only taken seriously because those countries' neighbouring populations were already considered inferior. This is not an inherently born "War gene", the idea of scarcity triggers the need for someone to become greedy. The brain reacts to the environment, scarcity triggers behaviors. On the other hand, an abundance of resources can prevent the need for greed.what is it that chavs have? they're not brought up in a scarce environment, and yet they get kicks out of nicking people's phones and smacking them over the head with fourpacks of carling. It will be difficult, just like most movements have difficulty battling symptoms of this system. Why not give it a try though? If everyone had your negative view point, no one in the world would get anywhere!how would it be initially implemented? why would people voluntarily give up their money when the Zeitgeist enforcement troops come knocking? (how ycould you realistically establish it without enforcement?) after all, if ZeitGeistRepublik fails to take off and they've already destroyed all their money, they'll likely starve to death. i think it extremely naive that people would just expect the whole world to embrace this new idea. what of people in other parts of the world? white man turns up, talking a language you don't understand and claiming to have created an amazing new form of government, and they tell you that in order to let them implement it, you have to do everything they tell you. you have to work without wages and give up all your money. they say you'll be provided with all the goods you'll ever need free of charge, once the whole system is up and running. why would you trust them? why can't they give you all these free goods now?why do these guys have to turn up and change everything, when things might have been just fine before? why would you not fight these bastards off? it would be horrendously hard to seperate it from notions of xenophobia. when the bolshies rode into poland in 1920, they expected the poles to rise up in their support. but no, they beat them out of the country. but why? after all, was their ideology not altruistic and beneficial to all? on paper, yes. but the poles were all just "FECKIN' RUSSKIES GIT OUT!" i can imagine the campaign to implement zeitgeist being much like the russian revolution. Peter Joseph, creator of the Zeitgeist documentaries is currently planning on speaking to Chavez's people about these ideas. ooh! that will be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneaksta303 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I'm HELLA bored now. It's gotten to the point of juvenile one ups-man-ship shit here. I mean, if you are having fun guys, carry on, but I'm catching vibes from all the way over here that suggests a slight nastiness. lol i was just drunk and bored. i think he meant it all though lol that's a lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.