Prime Minister Dotcom?

[scumdog]

Cops will have less work to do as financially related crime won't exist... which means more hours riding motorcycles, or scoping out the next car, or fushun etc... It'll be like high noon at the donut shop.

As long as the rapes, murders and domestic violence also drops off....

[bogan]

You get I dunno

When you say things like this

My assumption is that people would contribute to the well being of their country. I can't guarantee that.

You can't try and build a coherent argument all while ignoring the most basic of flaws. End of fucking story.

[Scuba_Steve]

As long as the rapes, murders and domestic violence also drops off....

well you guys only bother with 1 of those 3 anyways, you gotta do something to justify your job don't cha?

[mashman]

As long as the rapes, murders and domestic violence also drops off....

That would be a miracle, albeit a welcome one.

When you say things like this

You can't try and build a coherent argument all while ignoring the most basic of flaws. End of fucking story.

Given your last effort, ya know, your so called evidence in regards to employment and technology, you probably wouldn't know a coherent argument if it came up and bit yer erse... at least I'm being honest about the potential for NOW to fail. But, "IF people agree to carry on exactly the way they currently are i.e. working habits, spending habits, contribution and they fulfill that "promise", then NOW will work. That's a fact.". I do not have control over the population in order to give that guarantee... funnily enough though, neither does the govt. Speaking of which, where are those 170,000 jobs that they promised?

[Ocean1]

Speaking of which, where are those 170,000 jobs that they promised?

Exactly where they've always been, waiting for someone to work hard enough to earn them.

As for "NOW", if' it works for all it'll work for a few. So dump your cash do it or stfu.

[scumdog]

well you guys only bother with 1 of those 3 anyways, you gotta do something to justify your job don't cha?

Expecting a bit much aincha???

[mashman]

Exactly where they've always been, waiting for someone to work hard enough to earn them.

As for "NOW", if' it works for all it'll work for a few. So dump your cash do it or stfu.

You mean nowhere near where anyone lives... I'm going for, the 170,000 jobs that the govt promised to create were just an election bribe for the mindless morons that voted for them. Having said that, there's still time to fudge the figures and to use the same line again for the sheeple to follow... or indeed for them to apologise and say they'll give it top priority this time around.

That is a possibility. Why would I put my family at that disadvantage under the current system? that's just silly. And no, I shan't STFU... so f u u fin fer.

[Ocean1]

You mean nowhere near where anyone lives... I'm going for, the 170,000 jobs that the govt promised to create were just an election bribe for the mindless morons that voted for them. Having said that, there's still time to fudge the figures and to use the same line again for the sheeple to follow... or indeed for them to apologise and say they'll give it top priority this time around.

And based on your usual performance you're going for that based on the fact that you really really want it to be true.

Rather than accept that there's jobs for anyone that wants to put them out so far as to get off their arses and get them.

That is a possibility. Why would I put my family at that disadvantage under the current system?

For the same reason your puerile fairy story would put every hard working family at a disadvantage. You're a fucking idiot.

[mashman]

And based on your usual performance you're going for that based on the fact that you really really want it to be true.

Rather than accept that there's jobs for anyone that wants to put them out so far as to get off their arses and get them.

For the same reason your puerile fairy story would put every hard working family at a disadvantage. You're a fucking idiot.

OMG I'm guessing. So are you. Deal with it.

I accept there are jobs out there... unfortunately for you even Bennett stated that there aren't enough jobs for people, let alone well paying ones.

To use one of the arguments that is consistently thrown against NOW: why the fuck should anyone lower themselves to taking a job that does not value their effort (let alone allow them to pay the bills free and clear of subsidy) in the way that they believe their effort should be rewarded? That would put hard working family's at a disadvantage. You're a fuckin idiot and with statements like the above, you're a contender for top spot.

[TheDemonLord]

H'okay - Retort Time And this is going to be a long one

Things die. Some things die out when their environment is "removed". C'est la vie.

That a pretty incompatible system if 99.9% of it has to be destroyed so that 0.1% can exist

The simple mental process of removing a financial system puts up benefits that the financial system can't. Anything that can happen under a financial system can happen under NOW. It's more than an opinion. Sure they may be similar, but they're not the same as all of the systems you have put forwards have run using a financial system. Apples and Oranges.

They were more than Similar - Regardless of whether it is the State, NOW or some other Entity, when the idea of a single entity supplying resources to the things that were needed - the system failed and resulted in a collapse of the country.

The reason for the Collapse was people - and in all I have read on NOW there is not a single thing that talks about how it deals with People better than the current Financial system

It might. I believe, given what I know, that it will. You don't make the entire population willing, you ask them and you only need 51% of them to agree to implement it. There are plenty of "like minded" people/groups that I have seen, don't know them personally, who tout a Resource Based Economy... and there is absolutely no reason that they, exclusively, need to form society. The idea is that it can work anywhere, NZ would have a head start given the Pacific/Maori (whatever group) i.e. the land isn't ours. Ugh. North Korea still uses a financial system. If you vote, you already grovel to a leader. But it isn't Utopia either. It's just a better way, or if you would prefer, it looks like a better way.

I don't Vote remember... I am saving the longer retort for below

What government? In theory yes, we could all drive Ferrari's.

If you want a car, cars sitting on the forecourt will be free. Kinda pointless having cars sitting there doing nothing if someone wants a car innit. NOW will be "different" from the perspective that the country can currently afford to buy the range of cars from overseas that it usually does i.e. the import money is there to buy different cars. Once upon a time, before I understood that we already have the services and import money in place, I did think that we'd need to select from such a list and import through a central agency. Given that the current system of getting cars will only change should the people decide that it should change, then all things should remain the same. Not everyone will want gas guzzling monsters for their travel purposes. Some may prefer a small car. I'll have a small car quite happily, but I have simple tastes and of few needs.

Your assumption isn't necessarily what the reality would be.

Good, Good - now this is a chance to bust out some maths to show how truly Deluded this is and how if you think in Theory under a NOW type system we could all drive Ferraris you clearly do not understand the ramifications of what would happen under a NOW system and thus do not understand why it will fail miserably.

So - you have asserted that the Centralised Bank under the NOW system will still use Money to trade with the rest of the world. Thus any Imported goods/services will need to be paid for while the rest of the world uses the current Financial System.

Enter NZ's GDP:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-...per-capita-ppp

Per Capita in a Year (last year) is equal to $25,689.46

But Hell - I will Triple it because if NOW works the way you say it will, everyone will be super happy and super efficient at their work, and I won't even account for the Lost GDP from the Financial Sector - this gives us a total of $77,068.38 per person, per year

Cost of a new Ferrari $300,000USD - which means in NZD terms: $364,018.00

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_FF)

But thats okay - not everyone in NZD can drive so using some stats from here:

http://m.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_st...-children.aspx and extrapolating them out - approximately 1/4 of NZ is under 15 (the driving age) so lets increase our tripled GDP value to account for this $102,757.84 and then lets assume that everyone only needs one Car (cause this is NZ and everyone has 2 cars) so we will multiply that by 2

which gives us: $205,515.68 - we only around half of the way to a cost of a New Ferrari for everyone in the country (assuming of course that Ferrari could meet the demand) which means that no, NOW will never be able to supply new Ferraris to everyone.

Now you will note that I deliberately skewed all those numbers in NOW's favour and it still came up woefully short - but thats okay lets assume that everyone wants just a nice midrange sedan car for their car average cost new - around $40,000 to $50,000 which is much less than our GDP - thus the NOW central bank/government/Thing will have to place limits on the amount of stuff someone can import from overseas in a year otherwise it will bankrupt the system it will also have to set upper limits on the value of items you can import so someone can't just go and import a brand new Learjet (retailing at a cool $50 Mil USD) and take more than their fair share.

Thus the only way that NOW could work would be by removing full consumer choice, setting time limits and as I stated earlier having a list of approved items that you can get - it might not say anything in NOWs Dogma about this - but it is the only way it will work.

Thus with the help of some Maths - your system and your argument (it will work with full choice and Ferrari's for everyone) has a big enough hole in it that I could drive a Universe through it,

QED

PS - Why would people NOT choose Gas Guzzlers if you didn't have to Pay for Gas?

Oxana Oleksandrivna Malaya. Raised by dogs, acts like a dog, but is a human being and her doctors said " that it is unlikely that she will ever be properly rehabilitated into "normal" society". Human nature is a myth.

Not all Mothers protect their young (Oxana Oleksandrivna Malaya for one).
Not everyone will fight or run given the same set of circumstances (another option is to take a beating, another is to try reason, another is to increase your numbers).
Not everyone is greedy (Ubuntu).

Consider them refuted. Yes we share traits, but they are not our nature because we react to the situation i.e. implement a behaviour that may not be consistent. NOW doesn't deal with human nature, what will be will be, people will do what they will etc... and neither of us knows for sure what will happen. If human nature was real, we could predict what was going to happen. As it isn't, because you can't say for sure, how do you know what will happen without a time machine? Kinda makes a mockery of the 2 choices you gave me.

Dogs have Hierachial structures (Packs with the Alpha at the top)
Dogs (without training) are Aggressive and Territorial to each other
Dogs are possesive and Greedy

So actually Oxana kinda proves my point - these Basic traits are evolutionary in Origin, are shared by ALL social animals - and Humans (as Social Animals) share them - why else was Oxana able to be raised by Dogs? Because her Human Nature fits rather snuggly with Dog Nature (this is also why we were able to Domesticate dogs - because we are both Social Animals)

Now you will also note in my original post I said "more than 50% or no better than Chance" which you conveniently ignored - for Every Facet of Human Nature, I can find an Exception - but the reality is that the exceptions make up a tiny percentage of the population - if Mothering Instinct wasn't part of Human Nature - we would see up to and over of 50% of mothers abandoning/killing/ignoring their Children - even in NZ with the Terrible Child Abuse record - we are still not anywhere near that percentage.

Since it is shared by such a high percentage of ALL peoples from all areas of the Globe - it can be considered a common trait and thus can be called Human Nature. To use an Analogy - your argument is the same as if you were trying to convince me that Arms aren't standard on humans because some Babies are born without Limbs.

We can predict in some situations with a high degree of Accuracy what will happen - a really good example of this is Serial Killer Profiling.

I can predict what will happen to some degree by looking at the past, looking at similar situations and by making a few logical Deductions. Your argument can be boiled down to "you don't know what will happen until you try it" so then a Challenge then - go look down the barrel of a Loaded firearm and Pull the trigger - After all, you can't know without trying it right?

The system hasn't been designed, yet because of the direction it will take you're already calling the architects blind? bwaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa.

So then, stop arguing, Design the System in Full and come back to me when you have a fully thought out and Designed system (which I will then subject to critical analyses)

Anyone who can learn the skills required can become anything they like. That's plenty of people. Kudos for the Lawyer jibe, made me chorttle... but serious minus points for assuming that plenty is an exaggeration.

Bull. Fucking. Shit.

If that was the Case - things like the SAS selection course wouldn't have the extremely high drop out rate - Not anyone can learn the skills to become anything they like.

Plenty is a relative term in this case - if becoming a Lawyer was easy, there would be lots of Lawyers and the demand for lawyers would dictate that they wouldn't be paid so highly. Flipping Burgers is easy - any numbskull can do it, thus they aren't paid highly and there is Never a 'Burger Flipper' shortage. but in many High paying jobs there is a massive Shortage - my own field of IT for example does not have enough people to fill all the roles - thus I get paid a shit load by my company to make sure I don't move else where.

So why aren't more people becoming lawyers or seeking out all of these vacant positions (of which there are 25 on trademe)? Perhaps they don't care about money and would rather try to do something that they enjoy? Similar for any high paid job. Perhaps the money doesn't mean anything and is just a way of getting by. Now you'll blame people for not trying eh... which begs the question: who will do the other jobs if 2 million law jobs became available and we all went and studied to be lawyers because we only gave a shit about the money? You're being silly.

Because being a Lawyer is difficult - it takes time, Sacrifice, Patience, Intelligence, Dubious Morals, Very high Academic Marks.

Actually I am not being silly - what would happen in a Free Market economy is that the Wage of those 2 million lost jobs would increase as an incentive for people to work them - Basic Economics of Supply and Demand - if there is an excess in Demand and a shortage in Supply - the Price goes up.

I fail to see how I said NOW was pointless, moreoover I said that there was still the possibility of bad people doing morally questionable things. The rest is all in your head. What NOW does do is stop virtually, pun intended for those who grasp the concept, all financial crime (ya know, muggings, theft for drugs/gain/tv's etc...). Hardly pointless and as people are after the money. This will not stop people being cunts, but it will remove a mechanism for triggering that behaviour. Money is the problem.

Even if you remove a Single Mechanism for triggering a Behavior - it will still get triggered by other Mechanisms, proving that it is not the Trigger that is the Problem, the underlying behavior is the problem. Money is not the problem and since NOW doesn't fix People being Cunts, it is pointless in the manner in which you describe - why go through all these changes if the problems will keep occuring? Its not a better solution unless it addresses the current problems and as you rightfully pointed out - People will still be Cunts under NOW.

Find your own source. I say some, you say most. Didn't say they were perfect, but by your own admission you have said that they are "evolving" given their contact with the west. Isn't head shrinking and human sacrifice human nature?

That isn't how a Debate works - you asserted something is X, then the burden of Proof falls to you to prove it. Can't provide a source? then "That which is submitted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence"

Head Shrinking and Human Sacrifice are manifestations of underlying Human Nature - every culture at one point or another has engaged in Human Sacrifice - normally to appease God(s) or to ensure the prosperity of the Tribe/Village - the notion that if you want something good to happen, you have to sacrifice something of Value is a pretty universal concept (value could mean money, could mean time, or 100 years ago in the Amazon in a time of Famine could be your first born)

@evidence.

I see now that I am arguing with a Zealot with Faith - The standard of proof which you require to contradict your claims is Infinite, yet the standard of Proof you require to support your claims is infinitesimal. I see in your words the same as I see from a Religious Fanatic, no theory or proof or Evidence will ever be good enough when it comes to disproving because:

It might. I believe, given what I know, that it will.

And heed this - blind Faith to ANY system is a one way path down to oblivion, I am sure you will want proof of this, so I will ask you - look at history and the Horrors committed in the name of Faith and ask yourself if this is not proof enough, what will be?

a few Final question then - How does international Travel work in the NOW System as when you go overseas - you still need money. Does the NOW OmniBank provide you with all the Cash you require at the Border? and how does International Tourism work (one of NZ's Key industries)

If I was a tourist and found I could pick up a car in NZ without paying for it - I would pickup several, ship them overseas and sell them at an immense profit.

How would our consumer culture change under NOW? if there is no Financial incentive to repair or rebuild - people will just replace (because that is easier). If I can just go to a dealer and pickup a car for free - why would I bother taking my car to a Panel Beater after it got a Scratch? there is no financial incentive or disadvantage not to, and if I can get a new car there and then instead of having to wait for the panel beater - why would I inconvenience myself?

Finally - what safeguard(s) is there to stop the NOW OmniCorporation from turning Malevolent? In a true free Market Economy the Safeguard is that people will move their business to a competitor - yet that can't happen under NOW - so what Safeguard is there? that the Heads of this organization will somehow remain good? Remember - All power Corrupts, and if you think the heads of this organization will turn into anything other than the heads of the current system which you decree as being so wrong - well, let's just say I hope to be around then to laugh and say 'I told you so"

[oldrider]

So I guess your not keen on NOW then?

[BoristheBiter]

This thread is sorta like retards vs drongos...



I love it, it's kinda like a modern Christians Vs lions...without the blood or pain to the lions!

I wondered why is was becoming so boring.

[Ocean1]

OMG I'm guessing. So are you. Deal with it.

I made no guesses whatsoever, you're the one who reckons there aren't any more jobs. All I did was point out that you didn't have a clue and you were pulling shit out of your arse to suit your own agenda. Again.

I accept there are jobs out there... unfortunately for you even Bennett stated that there aren't enough jobs for people, let alone well paying ones.

I have a job. Nothing unfortunate about it, I earned it and I continue to earn what it pays. If there's people unemployed it's because there's an artificial lower limit in how much jobs can pay. Arsehole minimum wage controls and there'd be plenty of jobs for those who's work isn't worth paying much for.

To use one of the arguments that is consistently thrown against NOW: why the fuck should anyone lower themselves to taking a job that does not value their effort (let alone allow them to pay the bills free and clear of subsidy) in the way that they believe their effort should be rewarded? That would put hard working family's at a disadvantage. You're a fuckin idiot and with statements like the above, you're a contender for top spot.

Because it's not the job that defines the value of the person doing the work, it's the person paying for it: the market. Which defines the root of your problem, you see everyone's work effort as being identical in value, which is not only factually but ethically wrong. The fact that so many believe that their effort should be rewarded at so much more than anyone else is prepared to pay for is the real cause of unemployment, not the evel corporations and banks conspiring against them.

So, given that in your fevered imaginings hard working well trained and clever people don't benefit any more than lazy, uneducated and stupid people, and that you not only expect such a system to "work" but insist that it's a perfectly fair and reasonable one then I'd say it's tolerably obvious that your level of idiocy trumps pretty much anything you might like to compare it with.

[oldrider]

There is nothing wrong with our current monetary system in itself and all faults can or could be addressed and sorted if the forces that cause them were disenfranchised!

It is claimed by many that the same forces are at work in many aspects of every day life around the world militarily politically and otherwise!

An understanding of the origins and objectives of these mysterious forces may be gained here: http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-83-page-...ntrols-USA.pdf

Most observers can judge for themselves the authenticy/accuracy of the document because they have been witness to the events and the outcomes in their life times.

It's a long compelling read but "half" of it is reference material supporting the conclussion that the writers have come to.

It may well even add light to some questions readers may have had about the events themselves at the time.

[mashman]

That a pretty incompatible system if 99.9% of it has to be destroyed so that 0.1% can exist

If it's a natural progression it's a natural progression. Is it possible that over the claimed 4.7 billion years that in comparison to today that 99.9% of species are extinct?

They were more than Similar - Regardless of whether it is the State, NOW or some other Entity, when the idea of a single entity supplying resources to the things that were needed - the system failed and resulted in a collapse of the country.

The reason for the Collapse was people - and in all I have read on NOW there is not a single thing that talks about how it deals with People better than the current Financial system

Who said there was going to be a single entity supplying resources? Not the same.

People are more than capable of looking after themselves and if you provide an environment that allows them to focus on cooperation, you WILL see a positive shift in behaviour.

I don't Vote remember... I am saving the longer retort for below

Then you'd be in the same position as me and a large chunk of the population, we have to make do with whoever ends up governing... or come up with something else that would be worth voting for.

Good, Good - now this is a chance to bust out some maths to show how truly Deluded this is and how if you think in Theory under a NOW type system we could all drive Ferraris you clearly do not understand the ramifications of what would happen under a NOW system and thus do not understand why it will fail miserably.

So - you have asserted that the Centralised Bank under the NOW system will still use Money to trade with the rest of the world. Thus any Imported goods/services will need to be paid for while the rest of the world uses the current Financial System.

Enter NZ's GDP:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-...per-capita-ppp

Per Capita in a Year (last year) is equal to $25,689.46

But Hell - I will Triple it because if NOW works the way you say it will, everyone will be super happy and super efficient at their work, and I won't even account for the Lost GDP from the Financial Sector - this gives us a total of $77,068.38 per person, per year

Cost of a new Ferrari $300,000USD - which means in NZD terms: $364,018.00

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_FF)

But thats okay - not everyone in NZD can drive so using some stats from here:

http://m.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_st...-children.aspx and extrapolating them out - approximately 1/4 of NZ is under 15 (the driving age) so lets increase our tripled GDP value to account for this $102,757.84 and then lets assume that everyone only needs one Car (cause this is NZ and everyone has 2 cars) so we will multiply that by 2

which gives us: $205,515.68 - we only around half of the way to a cost of a New Ferrari for everyone in the country (assuming of course that Ferrari could meet the demand) which means that no, NOW will never be able to supply new Ferraris to everyone.

Now you will note that I deliberately skewed all those numbers in NOW's favour and it still came up woefully short - but thats okay lets assume that everyone wants just a nice midrange sedan car for their car average cost new - around $40,000 to $50,000 which is much less than our GDP - thus the NOW central bank/government/Thing will have to place limits on the amount of stuff someone can import from overseas in a year otherwise it will bankrupt the system it will also have to set upper limits on the value of items you can import so someone can't just go and import a brand new Learjet (retailing at a cool $50 Mil USD) and take more than their fair share.

Thus the only way that NOW could work would be by removing full consumer choice, setting time limits and as I stated earlier having a list of approved items that you can get - it might not say anything in NOWs Dogma about this - but it is the only way it will work.

Thus with the help of some Maths - your system and your argument (it will work with full choice and Ferrari's for everyone) has a big enough hole in it that I could drive a Universe through it,

QED

PS - Why would people NOT choose Gas Guzzlers if you didn't have to Pay for Gas?

Who said anything about new Ferrari's? One thing you fail to take into account is that some people may well be happy with the 5k - 10k car that gets them from A to B. How many cars are already in the country? How many people who need cars don't have them? I ask from the perspective that not everyone drives into or out of town. They may only go to the station etc...

So you have problems exercising personal responsibility for the good of your fellow country men. In theory it IS possible to get everyone a car. It may not be the best car in the world, but it's a car, get over it. It's even possible, in theory, to for all of us to drive Ferrari's, but a you highlight, we may only end up getting 10 or 20 into the country each year because other country's will be buying them... and from what I know of Ferrari ownership, you get invited to buy new one's. But yeah, if you can;t be personally responsible for the good of your fellow country men, maybe you'll find your Ferrari on fire some day. Not through envy, but revenge for you being an inconsiderate wanker.

If there aren't a list of specific providers currently, then NOW won't need them easier because the mechanisms and the products are already in place to bring in the variants. Who knows, maybe having a preferred supplier for certain items NZ may get a better deal for a better product.

The GDP must remain a close to the current GDP as possible to avoid financial shocks around the world.

So NO, removing customer choice has nothing to do with NOW.

QED? that's gold man, pure gold.

PS - It's called personal responsibility.

Dogs have Hierachial structures (Packs with the Alpha at the top)
Dogs (without training) are Aggressive and Territorial to each other
Dogs are possesive and Greedy

So actually Oxana kinda proves my point - these Basic traits are evolutionary in Origin, are shared by ALL social animals - and Humans (as Social Animals) share them - why else was Oxana able to be raised by Dogs? Because her Human Nature fits rather snuggly with Dog Nature (this is also why we were able to Domesticate dogs - because we are both Social Animals)

Now you will also note in my original post I said "more than 50% or no better than Chance" which you conveniently ignored - for Every Facet of Human Nature, I can find an Exception - but the reality is that the exceptions make up a tiny percentage of the population - if Mothering Instinct wasn't part of Human Nature - we would see up to and over of 50% of mothers abandoning/killing/ignoring their Children - even in NZ with the Terrible Child Abuse record - we are still not anywhere near that percentage.

Since it is shared by such a high percentage of ALL peoples from all areas of the Globe - it can be considered a common trait and thus can be called Human Nature. To use an Analogy - your argument is the same as if you were trying to convince me that Arms aren't standard on humans because some Babies are born without Limbs.

We can predict in some situations with a high degree of Accuracy what will happen - a really good example of this is Serial Killer Profiling.

I can predict what will happen to some degree by looking at the past, looking at similar situations and by making a few logical Deductions. Your argument can be boiled down to "you don't know what will happen until you try it" so then a Challenge then - go look down the barrel of a Loaded firearm and Pull the trigger - After all, you can't know without trying it right?

Just showing that human nature isn't inate and that it is learned behaviour. Once upon a time men bludgeoned children that aren't there own. They don't any more. Their behaviour has changed. It can't change if it's human nature... coz if human nature changes, then you're shifting the goal posts to suit the new behaviour. Human nature is learned behaviour, nothing more, nothing less... this is evidence by people thinking differently and acting differently to the same situation depending on how they feel at the time.

I'm not saying that behaviour can't be predicted... but you are predicting behaviour, not human nature.

So then, stop arguing, Design the System in Full and come back to me when you have a fully thought out and Designed system (which I will then subject to critical analyses)

Once I can afford to pay people for their time, the system will get designed.

Bull. Fucking. Shit.

If that was the Case - things like the SAS selection course wouldn't have the extremely high drop out rate - Not anyone can learn the skills to become anything they like.

Plenty is a relative term in this case - if becoming a Lawyer was easy, there would be lots of Lawyers and the demand for lawyers would dictate that they wouldn't be paid so highly. Flipping Burgers is easy - any numbskull can do it, thus they aren't paid highly and there is Never a 'Burger Flipper' shortage. but in many High paying jobs there is a massive Shortage - my own field of IT for example does not have enough people to fill all the roles - thus I get paid a shit load by my company to make sure I don't move else where.

The skills can be learned, not being the demonstratable best does not mean you do not have the skills. You demonstrate this point adequately, by claiming that if being a lawyer was easy, we'd all be laywers. According to your logic, everyone would want to be a lawyer because it's easy. Why aren't we all grass cutters then? Oh this one again... lawyers are more important than burger slippers this time. Ugh... is a lawyer more important than a bin man or a cleaner or a nurse or a teacher or a farmer etc... they must be, coz they get paid more.

Because being a Lawyer is difficult - it takes time, Sacrifice, Patience, Intelligence, Dubious Morals, Very high Academic Marks.

Actually I am not being silly - what would happen in a Free Market economy is that the Wage of those 2 million lost jobs would increase as an incentive for people to work them - Basic Economics of Supply and Demand - if there is an excess in Demand and a shortage in Supply - the Price goes up.

No it doesn't. It takes knowledge of the law and some skill to apply it. Period!

Is that before or after we've all died out coz lawyers get paid well? what about the Doctors and Nurses that have become Lawyers instead? Or the sewerage worker or bin men? supply and demand does not drive the choices of the majority of people... just those who want money. Those actions take money away from people who work just as long hours and just as hard.

Even if you remove a Single Mechanism for triggering a Behavior - it will still get triggered by other Mechanisms, proving that it is not the Trigger that is the Problem, the underlying behavior is the problem. Money is not the problem and since NOW doesn't fix People being Cunts, it is pointless in the manner in which you describe - why go through all these changes if the problems will keep occuring? Its not a better solution unless it addresses the current problems and as you rightfully pointed out - People will still be Cunts under NOW.

In which case... as the majority of people aren't cunts and will always remain non-cunty, then NOW won't have any issues with people not doing what they are currently doing. I seem to remember something about prisoners helping out during the Chch earthquake. Usually you have to be a cunt to end up in jail. OH FUCK NO... you're wrong again in your perception of the drivers of human behaviour. Our immediate environment drives our behaviour. It is not inate in our action, it is not human nature. The funny thing is, when I say that people will still be cunts under NOW, it'll be those who decide that they don't want to do anything because others are getting stuff for free, not necessarily the current crop of cunts.

That isn't how a Debate works - you asserted something is X, then the burden of Proof falls to you to prove it. Can't provide a source? then "That which is submitted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence"

Head Shrinking and Human Sacrifice are manifestations of underlying Human Nature - every culture at one point or another has engaged in Human Sacrifice - normally to appease God(s) or to ensure the prosperity of the Tribe/Village - the notion that if you want something good to happen, you have to sacrifice something of Value is a pretty universal concept (value could mean money, could mean time, or 100 years ago in the Amazon in a time of Famine could be your first born)

You're asserting all over the place without evidence, yet I choose to move the debate forwards by discussing your assertion... given that there is the possibility that your assertion holds water. You go ahead and get bogged down in semantics, but I won't be apologising for not doing so. Do your own search... it ain't that I can't, it's that I won't.

Why aren't we exhibiting those behaviours anymore if we cannot fight human nature?

I see now that I am arguing with a Zealot with Faith - The standard of proof which you require to contradict your claims is Infinite, yet the standard of Proof you require to support your claims is infinitesimal. I see in your words the same as I see from a Religious Fanatic, no theory or proof or Evidence will ever be good enough when it comes to disproving because:

No you're not. You simply have to convince me that I am incorrect. You haven't... yet. Oh, and I've already proven to myself on many occassions that I am willing to listen to reason and logic. Display some please.

And heed this - blind Faith to ANY system is a one way path down to oblivion, I am sure you will want proof of this, so I will ask you - look at history and the Horrors committed in the name of Faith and ask yourself if this is not proof enough, what will be?

a few Final question then - How does international Travel work in the NOW System as when you go overseas - you still need money. Does the NOW OmniBank provide you with all the Cash you require at the Border? and how does International Tourism work (one of NZ's Key industries)

If I was a tourist and found I could pick up a car in NZ without paying for it - I would pickup several, ship them overseas and sell them at an immense profit.

How would our consumer culture change under NOW? if there is no Financial incentive to repair or rebuild - people will just replace (because that is easier). If I can just go to a dealer and pickup a car for free - why would I bother taking my car to a Panel Beater after it got a Scratch? there is no financial incentive or disadvantage not to, and if I can get a new car there and then instead of having to wait for the panel beater - why would I inconvenience myself?

Finally - what safeguard(s) is there to stop the NOW OmniCorporation from turning Malevolent? In a true free Market Economy the Safeguard is that people will move their business to a competitor - yet that can't happen under NOW - so what Safeguard is there? that the Heads of this organization will somehow remain good? Remember - All power Corrupts, and if you think the heads of this organization will turn into anything other than the heads of the current system which you decree as being so wrong - well, let's just say I hope to be around then to laugh and say 'I told you so"

No need for proof in regards to your explanation of blind faith assertion. I agree. I can look at modern day and see the horrors committed in the name of the financial system. Similar to religion, it's a small number of zealots that start wars for their own gain... no WMD were found. The war with Iraq was over money and oil. If poverty isn't enough to prove that the financial system doesn't work, then nothing will convince you. If that is the case, then pick up a mirror and heed your own words.

International travel: You have to book a holiday right? You generally order money right? You generally have a credit card for emergencies right? It's up to you whether you try to take the piss or not. Doesn't mean that the person booking the holiday for you will though. International travel currently happens, I see no reason why it shouldn't continue in exactly the same way. If people start taking the piss, the systemin place will have to change. I have the money to go abroad every year. I haven't been out of the country, on holiday, in 4 years. We don't all need or want overseas travel. Again, personal responsibility. In regards to people coming here, think of NZ as an all inclusive resort.

So you're expecting lax border controls in regards to shipping and what is shipped?

Why wouldn't we repair or rebuild? If a repair or a rebuild is required, then why wouldn't we do it? If there is no penalty for dinging your rental car, why wouldn't you report the ding? If you can get a new car, then get a new car... who knows, if you call to say that your car is fooked, maybe someone will grab their fishing rod/gun/towel and sunscreen and drive it to you.

Why wouldn't you be able to change provider? If someone is screwing NZ Inc, then they'll go to jail for life if caught. After all, they will have screwed everyone in the country. We can't stop that happening in the not so free market economy. Trust is a bitch, but hopefully we'll learn that again. Neither system has a safeguard, just a stick if you get caught. Fortunately, if that happens, the local economy should suffer minimally... but that'll depend on the scale of the theft. You can only hope that people won't screw the country... exactly the same as currently happens. I'm sure there will be those who will go for the money grab. They currently do it and I agree that they will try to do it under NOW. Let's hope your behavioural profile will show them up before they get there.