My first poll for the NZ public

[willytheekid]

...Im just secretly hoping this thread breaks out into a full on knife fight!!



...Fight!, fight!, fight!!

[husaberg]

[Jin]

stuff

In other words a system that relies on volunteerism is fantasy. People wont even pay their taxes voluntarily. Communism is essentially organised around the threat of force because ultimately the elites running things have to order people what to do. Problem with RBE is not many will volunteer to clean the toilets. So to get to the so called utopia of communism in the interim they order people around. Thats the corruption and use of force by the state against individuals. And why communism and RBE is not compatible with individual freedom.

Even our current system is based on the threat of force. Welfare system of redistribution is force because i have no say in what i choose to share. Its taken from me. Taxes, roads etc.

If these RBE guys really cared about freedom then they should forget about the allocation and distribution of wealth/resources and aim for the abolition of all types of force similar to anarcho libertarian philisophy. Remove the state and all threats and use of force and let people do what they want to the extent it doesnt impinge on other peoples freedom. If want to use money let them. If they want to barter let them. Everyone decides for themselves what they want to do.

I identify with minarchist because you do need a state for certain things like a police force to protect my freedom from others. Even Mises the godfather of austrian economics said govt was the best system of all.

[Brian d marge]

Sorry but you are the dumb fuck not me. Anyone who can grasp the concept of a supply and demand graph and understand the basis of the price system would not make a retarded claim that resources are not scarce and that is just a budget constraint.

The other issue with your fantasy is that if you remove money from the equation then as you say resources can be delivered anywhere. The problem is that of you remove money then someone has to decide where resources are allocated. Who does that? You walk right into a politburo and central planning elites and a communist nightmare. That is real corruption. At least with money resources are allocated according to what people want. Each dollar is a vote people can decide what they want and how badly they need / want it.

Remove that ability to vote and the common man becomes a beggar to the elites at the top who decide who gets what.

Grow up please. This kind of rbe idiocy is communism in disguise and for idolistic children who don't know any better.

I know what a supply demand graph is and the difference between money and currency , AND where it all came from ....

understand that.... MONEY is a perceived measure of energy. Stored or otherwise.

Percieved

So to use the later one cow argument, ASSUMES , A, there is only one cow and that B, everyone will want and get a steak is erroneous .... As quite simply , I can see there isn't enough to go around , so I either give you my steak or we decide to grow another cow ...

No money changing hands there ... , but IF you use money and place a scarcity on that steak , then the unit of perceived energy increases relative to perceived scarcity ...and the one with the most gets the steak .....( welcome to the venetian aka Babylonian banking fraud.......even Tiberius realized that ! ) ,

in either system Someone ain't eating a steak .........


and we haven't even touched on adding interest on money ......now add this to your fraud and the fraud goes stratospheric !


Stephen

[TheDemonLord]

So to use the later one cow argument, ASSUMES , A, there is only one cow and that B, everyone will want and get a steak is erroneous .... As quite simply , I can see there isn't enough to go around , so I either give you my steak or we decide to grow another cow ...

I use a Cow because there is a moral component for killing another Cow without making full use of the first one. Which boils down to one of the problems I have read in the RBE literature provided by Mashman et al - it assumes that one can always get more of a resource and that there is no loss of opportunity - And I'm interested in what these RBE experts will say in response to these questions.

No money changing hands there ... , but IF you use money and place a scarcity on that steak , then the unit of perceived energy increases relative to perceived scarcity ...and the one with the most gets the steak .....( welcome to the venetian aka Babylonian banking fraud.......even Tiberius realized that ! ) ,

in either system Someone ain't eating a steak .........

Well, Money didn't generate the Scarcity of Steak, that's just it, Almost every resource is Finite in some manner and is therefore scarce BEFORE the introduction of Money (this is where my position of Money isn't the problem comes from).

As you say - either way someone misses out - In a Monetary system, everyone has agency to earn and then based on those earnings, acquire goods and services to their taste(s) and the value of said earnings. If you want something you can't afford, you have the agency to either educate or take risk to earn more to acquire said things. This happens constantly until some form of balance is acheived (even if said balance is unfair)

In an RBE, Neither Mashman or any of the reading material has ever answered this point - how are scarce resource is allocated in a way that is not arbitrary and does not impact on personal choice.

and we haven't even touched on adding interest on money ......now add this to your fraud and the fraud goes stratospheric !


Stephen

Well, Interest provides an incentive to lend money and an incentive to pay it back quickly, and a little bit of inflation does everyone good.

[Jin]

I know what a supply demand graph is and the difference between money and currency , AND where it all came from ....

understand that.... MONEY is a perceived measure of energy. Stored or otherwise.

Percieved

So to use the later one cow argument, ASSUMES , A, there is only one cow and that B, everyone will want and get a steak is erroneous .... As quite simply , I can see there isn't enough to go around , so I either give you my steak or we decide to grow another cow ...

No money changing hands there ... , but IF you use money and place a scarcity on that steak , then the unit of perceived energy increases relative to perceived scarcity ...and the one with the most gets the steak .....( welcome to the venetian aka Babylonian banking fraud.......even Tiberius realized that ! ) ,

in either system Someone ain't eating a steak .........


and we haven't even touched on adding interest on money ......now add this to your fraud and the fraud goes stratospheric !


Stephen

Money is a medium of exchange. Saying its energy doesnt make sense maybe its how you try to fool gullible people into thinking you know what you are talking about. Why do people grow forests? Because you seem to imply money reduces the incentive to produce and conserve resources which is stupid. It is the opposite. Is a bottle of milk perceived energy? Because I can swap money for milk. What about a whore? She takes money.

And more importantly in this wonderful utopian paradise of yours, who exactly is it that decides where and how resources are allocated?

[mashman]

I'm not sure that you have the objectivity to adequately ask the questions on my behalf - It's like an Atheist asking a Devout Christian to ask another Devout Christian on proof if God Exists and then expecting something other than the 2 Christians to go in unison 'But of COURSE he exists, Bwaaaahahahaha'....



That is not an answer the question - I'll refine the example so you can properly ask it:

For a given cow - there are 100 Steaks cut from the Carcass, 50 Rump, 30 Sirloin and 20 Eye Fillet (yum). there are 120 people who want Steak. Of those 120, 40 want Eye Fillets. In the current system, the price would rise to a point where only 20 people could afford Eye Fillets (unfair, but effective) - How does an RBE deal with this issue without killing an additional Cow (this point is key)



Simple - There are things that make my life easier (Power, Water, Internet, Waste Collection) that are done by other people, people who are currently compensated for their work by me. Now imagine if the entire Waste Management sector decided that they would rather spend their time with their family, instead of dealing with smelly crap - my quality of life goes down.



So, the people that currently are able to afford Ferraris - will still be able to have Ferraris?



I disagree, Money is a Symptom, Humans are the problem. Money does however make it easier to track corruption.



And what happens when there are more people consuming and not enough people producing?




That should be a hint - they all failed before they could even get to the Communist Utopia, even with the threat of Violence to keep the unbelievers in line...

I thought you'd be that useless... but hey.

[Akzle]

In other words a system that relies on volunteerism is fantasy. People wont even pay their taxes voluntarily. Communism is essentially organised around the threat of force because ultimately the elites running things have to order people what to do. Problem with RBE is not many will volunteer to clean the toilets. So to get to the so called utopia of communism in the interim they order people around. Thats the corruption and use of force by the state against individuals. And why communism and RBE is not compatible with individual freedom.

Even our current system is based on the threat of force. Welfare system of redistribution is force because i have no say in what i choose to share. Its taken from me. Taxes, roads etc.

If these RBE guys really cared about freedom then they should forget about the allocation and distribution of wealth/resources and aim for the abolition of all types of force similar to anarcho libertarian philisophy. Remove the state and all threats and use of force and let people do what they want to the extent it doesnt impinge on other peoples freedom. If want to use money let them. If they want to barter let them. Everyone decides for themselves what they want to do.

I identify with minarchist because you do need a state for certain things like a police force to protect my freedom from others. Even Mises the godfather of austrian economics said govt was the best system of all.

are you on crack?
srsly. you swing between almost making sense, and being reeeeally fucking retarded.

[Brian d marge]

I use a Cow because there is a moral component for killing another Cow without making full use of the first one. Which boils down to one of the problems I have read in the RBE literature provided by Mashman et al - it assumes that one can always get more of a resource and that there is no loss of opportunity - And I'm interested in what these RBE experts will say in response to these questions.



Well, Money didn't generate the Scarcity of Steak, that's just it, Almost every resource is Finite in some manner and is therefore scarce BEFORE the introduction of Money (this is where my position of Money isn't the problem comes from).

As you say - either way someone misses out - In a Monetary system, everyone has agency to earn and then based on those earnings, acquire goods and services to their taste(s) and the value of said earnings. If you want something you can't afford, you have the agency to either educate or take risk to earn more to acquire said things. This happens constantly until some form of balance is acheived (even if said balance is unfair)

In an RBE, Neither Mashman or any of the reading material has ever answered this point - how are scarce resource is allocated in a way that is not arbitrary and does not impact on personal choice.



Well, Interest provides an incentive to lend money and an incentive to pay it back quickly, and a little bit of inflation does everyone good.

Its only scarce , if a perceived value is placed upon it and how can a balance be unbalanced? ...quote ; (even if said balance is unfair)

Sea water is finite , but I'm unaware of any value....or scarcity..

As for interest , the greatest fraud upon mankind ..... I have 10 marbles , all the marbles on the planet ,,,,I lend them to you at 10% interest ..... you must give me 11 marbles back ....

WHERE did that 11th marble come from???? did you suddenly create something from nothing ???

Ok say I , You cannot find 1 marble ..then you owe me ! 1 marble of your energy , after all you agreed to the debt .....

So from now on , you will be always striving to pay back that 11th marble ....because there is only 10 original marbles ...

Now , I have an inflation rate of 1 marble , each of my previous 10 marble are now devalued by 1/10 , i.e their purchasing power is 1 marble divided between and subtracted from my original 10 marbles ....( they ain't worth as much as before ) ...that imaginary marble , is exerting a lot of power ,,,,,,, perceived power

Try using a debt free system , or not paying a debt back ...... the fraudsters get well bent , Edward the 3rd to the peruchi family , One mad German , The melchivicks and two American presidents ....and they all had one thing in common.... a terminal headache

Stephen

[mashman]

Sorry but you are the dumb fuck not me. Anyone who can grasp the concept of a supply and demand graph and understand the basis of the price system would not make a retarded claim that resources are not scarce and that is just a budget constraint.

The other issue with your fantasy is that if you remove money from the equation then as you say resources can be delivered anywhere. The problem is that of you remove money then someone has to decide where resources are allocated. Who does that? You walk right into a politburo and central planning elites and a communist nightmare. That is real corruption. At least with money resources are allocated according to what people want. Each dollar is a vote people can decide what they want and how badly they need / want it.

Remove that ability to vote and the common man becomes a beggar to the elites at the top who decide who gets what.

Grow up please. This kind of rbe idiocy is communism in disguise and for idolistic children who don't know any better.

Comes under logistics fucknugget. And I think I've proven that the logistics are in place but the money isn't. Your denial of such logic, reason and common sense shows just how fuckin dumb you really are. Just another rote learned moron.

According to what people want? The poll shows what people want. So, WTF are you talking about in regards to what people want?

Elites will stay Elite no matter what because they control the money supply and set the policy of distribution you fuckin moron.

Communism in disguise? Yet another scared old blind white muthafucka that's sorely out of touch with what people want... let alone what they'd be prepared to do in order to live RBE... let alone how economics actually work. You're an embarrassment. You have my pity.

[Akzle]

I use a Cow because there is a moral component for killing another Cow without making full use of the first one. Which boils down to one of the problems I have read in the RBE literature provided by Mashman et al - it assumes that one can always get more of a resource and that there is no loss of opportunity - And I'm interested in what these RBE experts will say in response to these questions.



Well, Money didn't generate the Scarcity of Steak, that's just it, Almost every resource is Finite in some manner and is therefore scarce BEFORE the introduction of Money (this is where my position of Money isn't the problem comes from).

As you say - either way someone misses out - In a Monetary system, everyone has agency to earn and then based on those earnings, acquire goods and services to their taste(s) and the value of said earnings. If you want something you can't afford, you have the agency to either educate or take risk to earn more to acquire said things. This happens constantly until some form of balance is acheived (even if said balance is unfair)

In an RBE, Neither Mashman or any of the reading material has ever answered this point - how are scarce resource is allocated in a way that is not arbitrary and does not impact on personal choice.



Well, Interest provides an incentive to lend money and an incentive to pay it back quickly, and a little bit of inflation does everyone good.

[jonbuoy]

Comes under logistics fucknugget. And I think I've proven that the logistics are in place but the money isn't. Your denial of such logic, reason and common sense shows just how fuckin dumb you really are. Just another rote learned moron.

According to what people want? The poll shows what people want. So, WTF are you talking about in regards to what people want?

Elites will stay Elite no matter what because they control the money supply and set the policy of distribution you fuckin moron.

Communism in disguise? Yet another scared old blind white muthafucka that's sorely out of touch with what people want... let alone what they'd be prepared to do in order to live RBE... let alone how economics actually work. You're an embarrassment. You have my pity.

It makes you look silly when people try to discuss your system in a reasonable manner and your response is to spit out petty insults.

[Jin]

All I'm seeing is gibberish and denials.

Just answer the question. Who decides how the resources are allocated in a rbe?

[mashman]

It makes you look silly when people try to discuss your system in a reasonable manner and your response is to spit out petty insults.

No it doesn't. It makes you look silly for focusing on the delivery. Coz when I talk to people like this in real life, using sweary words etc... people aren't offended by that delivery. Could it be that you're all so precious that you think my approach is aggressive? When in reality it is anything but, in fact in reality it's you projecting attitude onto my post for me incorrectly. Silly indeed. Grow the fuck up

[mashman]

Just answer the question. Who decides how the resources are allocated in a rbe?

Figure it out for yourself ... it ain't hard. As a starter for ya ya lazy fuck, do you think any group of people should receive better resources than another?