My first poll for the NZ public

[TheDemonLord]

What about the Chinese , the Vikings the Egyptians, the Persians
Where would u like to start?
The Chinese trading silver for the Egyptian gold ? Which required slaves and guards supplied by war
The Persians resistance against the Greek fiat money?
And these are examples of successful civilizations?
Meanwhile in mud huts in the Amazon jungle the natives keep trundling on in a bottom up Communistic tradition.....

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

Well, depends on your definition for success - but if it makes you happy:

We still use Greek Formulas (Pythagoras...)
We still use Persian numbers
We still use countless things that were first invented in China (Pasta, Gun Powder etc. etc.)
We still use Norse day names (Thor's Day)

What do we use from some no-name Amazon Jungle native today?

[Brian d marge]

Well, depends on your definition for success - but if it makes you happy:

We still use Greek Formulas (Pythagoras...)
We still use Persian numbers
We still use countless things that were first invented in China (Pasta, Gun Powder etc. etc.)
We still use Norse day names (Thor's Day)

What do we use from some no-name Amazon Jungle native today?

That's what happens when u follow a path
One could argue if it's the right path?
The knowledge , we have is different, is it any better , ? Horses for courses.
I would argue the ancients were a hell of a lot smarter than us now , and we have been desperately trying to recover that lost knowledge.
Those monks in Scotland weren't there , for a meditative holiday



Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

[TheDemonLord]

That's what happens when u follow a path
One could argue if it's the right path?
The knowledge , we have is different, is it any better , ? Horses for courses.
I would argue the ancients were a hell of a lot smarter than us now , and we have been desperately trying to recover that lost knowledge.
Those monks in Scotland weren't there , for a meditative holiday

Right path or Wrong path - Success is passing on aspects of your culture to the next generation - The ones I listed did, the ones you listed didn't - yet your original claims was that there were successful ancient Cultures that were Communist in nature.

Which brings me back to my original point: Communism isn't a recipe for Success.

Is it any better? Well, I'd take Internet and Motorbikes over Mud huts and starvation any day...

However in regards to Lost Knowledge - you may wish to listen to some more of Jordan Peterson's lectures - he has a lot to say about Ancient Mythology and how it relates to our being.

[Brian d marge]

Right path or Wrong path - Success is passing on aspects of your culture to the next generation - The ones I listed did, the ones you listed didn't - yet your original claims was that there were successful ancient Cultures that were Communist in nature.

Which brings me back to my original point: Communism isn't a recipe for Success.

Is it any better? Well, I'd take Internet and Motorbikes over Mud huts and starvation any day...

However in regards to Lost Knowledge - you may wish to listen to some more of Jordan Peterson's lectures - he has a lot to say about Ancient Mythology and how it relates to our being.

I will listen to Jordans lectures , I'm interested
But the passing down , off knowledge , I suspect the abbos have been doing quite a reasonable job of that.
I submit , that the knowledge our civilization has been hording the good stuff and passing down the garbage, so that a few can relive the golden age.
So, my original statement still stands. ( By now I'm guessing , u have figured out what communism actually is , and not the hijacked crap written by a sponsored Mason )



Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk

[mashman]

Ubuntu advocate has a chat with a CBO:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another conversation with a capitalist business owner (CBO)

CBO: If it wasn't for capitalism and the money system, you would not have that car you drive, cell phone, computer...

me: So capitalism and money made/make everything?

CBO: YES!

me: Do you have a dollar bill on you?

CBO: Yes.

me: Please place it on the table, i want to show you something about it.

CBO: Ok (places dollar on table).

me: Hello money. Please get off the table and go build me a car, cell phone, computer...

CBO looks at me strangely

me: can you please ask/tell your dollar to get off the table and go build you a car, cell phone, computer...

CBO: It can't.

me: Why not?

CBO: People need to make those things.

me: But you told me if it was not for capitalism and the money system, we would not have cars, cell phones, computers...

CBO: Yes because people would not make those things if they did not get paid.

me: So people would not work if they did not receive something that is created/printed/typed out of thin air?

CBO: Yes.

me: What would they do without money/capitalism?

CBO: Nothing.

me: They would not grow food? They would not make clothing? They would not make housing/shelter?

CBO: No

me: How would they live?

CBO: (Looking puzzled)

me: So people would be born, do nothing, and die in a few days and humanity would have never existed?

CBO: (Looking more puzzled)

me: What came first money or people?

CBO: (Looking even more puzzled) Umm i guess people.

me: If people were here first how did they survive without money?

CBO: Yeah but people would not work and make the nice things we have today without money.

me: Why not?

CBO: No answer

me: They work now in EVERY company on the planet don't they?

CBO: Yeah but they are making money to do it

me: Do they do it for the money just so they can look at the money, or for what the money "buys/pays for" them?

CBO: For what the money buys/pays for them

me: And what kind of things would that be?

CBO: Well they use it to buy/pay for their mortgage/rent, property taxes, property insurance, property maintenance, utilities, transportation expenses, kids education, vacations, clothes, internet, cell phones, food to name a few things

me: In a no money world ALL of those would be FREE. So contributing/working just 3 hours a week in a no money/Contributionism world gives people MORE than they receive working 40-100+ hours a week in a money world.

Which is BETTER people working 40 - 100+ hours a week and barely surviving (working MORE having LESS) OR people contributing/working just 3 hours a week (as needed) and receiving EVERYTHING they need for a great life at NO financial costs (working LESS having MORE)?

CBO: But then i won't be rich and have my mansions, private jet, yacht, private island...

me: That would be a shame wouldn't it?

CBO: Yes it would!

me: So you agree we could still have nice things like transportation, cell phones, computers... by people working TOGETHER and SHARING just 3 hours a week, it's just you would no longer be rich?

CBO: No answer
----------------------------------------------------------------

Way to project ones entitlement onto everyone else. I guess it cushions the blow.

[TheDemonLord]

me: In a no money world ALL of those would be FREE. So contributing/working just 3 hours a week in a no money/Contributionism world gives people MORE than they receive working 40-100+ hours a week in a money world.

Except they aren't free.

There is still a cost associated with them.

It may not be a Monetary cost, but there is a Cost in terms of Time, Finite Resources, Skills etc.

The CBO should have countered that once we stopped being hunter gatherers, the degree of specialization means that a single person cannot learn all the skills in a lifetime. Thus the individual has to make choices: Do I become a Tent maker? a Hunter? a Wood Carver?

At which point comes the first economic problem: Since I can't learn all the skills to be entirely self-sufficient and maintain a comfortable existing to which I am accustomed, I have to get other people who have the skills I lack, to do those tasks which I cannot.

I can use Force (Slavery, threat of Violence)
I can use incentive (Barter, Payment)

Funnily enough - the CBO should have pointed this out. At which point he can then counter that Barter is an innefficient system of trade and to overcome this problem, a placeholder for something of Value that was portable, divisible, universally recognised etc. etc. was used.

Enter stage left: Money!

[Ocean1]

Enter stage left: Money!

Actually, he's got a point.

Asking anyone who doesn't believe money has that function to actually do work in exchange for money should have about the same effect as asking the money itself to do the work.

So what does that make someone who espouses that belief, but uses money for that function on an every day basis anyway?

[mashman]

So what does that make someone who espouses that belief, but uses money for that function on an every day basis anyway?

Smart enough to realise that other people's lives depend on them using money... and smart enough to realise that simply taking things, which would be according to their "philosophy" (and according to article v of the declaration of human rights), would result in them being violently thrown in jail. That may well have expanded your golf ball sized consciousness... but I doubt it, it being golf ball sized n all.

[Katman]

That may well have expanded your golf ball sized consciousness... but I doubt it, it being golf ball sized n all.

You give him far too much credit.

[Ocean1]

Smart enough to realise that other people's lives depend on them using money... and smart enough to realise that simply taking things, which would be according to their "philosophy" (and according to article v of the declaration of human rights), would result in them being violently thrown in jail. That may well have expanded your golf ball sized consciousness... but I doubt it, it being golf ball sized n all.

That's what I thought.

Hypocritical fuckwits.

[mashman]

That's what I thought.

Hypocritical fuckwits.

Foooooooour

[Brian d marge]

Except they aren't free.

There is still a cost associated with them.

I can use Force (Slavery, threat of Violence)
I can use incentive (Barter, Payment)


Enter stage left: Money!

absolutly there is a cost. The qquestion being is it a cost your happy to pay?

lets face it we have NO real experience with a completely free environment. Ubuntu , Linux , mates rate out the back of the railways workshop .

Jean Jacques Rousseau talks about this in the second chapter of his book "the social contract " , he talks about the slave hating the master if the incorrect incentive is applied

You are absolutely correct to use the word "incentive" . Now Im going to emerge from this pit I call a futon, and go down the pub; why ? cause me mate promised me free beer ,
Why he promised me free beer, because I helped him move apartments. LOTS of incentive here

lets expand on this, yesterday the community here in Japan has a "clean up your community day" you go and walk around the area picking up rubbish for a few hours once or twice a year . The incentive, I like living in a clean environment ,( they do beaches and parks , all end up with a pot luck BBQ

Expanding further, I wanted to expand my skill set , I helped design a part ( brake plate ) in the company of others more skilled than I ( i want to expand my CFD skill set and am using you tube atm )

On the other hand, I know countless of people who are at work at the moment hating their situation , because they ARE A SLAVE to bogus debt based currency

( IF you are going to use money it at least needs to be surplus based )

[TheDemonLord]

absolutly there is a cost. The qquestion being is it a cost your happy to pay?

I'm going to focus on this statement.

Once you have removed all money - Are you still happy to pay the cost? And then the next question: Is everyone else happy to pay the cost?

And perhaps more importantly - what IS that cost?

This links back to my position: Money isn't the problem, it's only a symptom.

[mashman]

( IF you are going to use money it at least needs to be surplus based )

On a finite planet... lmao.

[Brian d marge]

On a finite planet... lmao.

Is it?

Sent from my SC-01G using Tapatalk