This child will make you think.

[Scooter Bob]

Funny how people avoid the girl's emotional, and true words, and stick their heads back in their politicized sand. A child has more heart and intelligence than most all of you. You have young kids who would not "hear" this girls heart and soul, while at the same time you parent her by tuning out altogether???

YouTube - Speech by a school girl in UN conference on environment

 

[SheerLuckHolmes]

I am surprised and shocked by the cynicism on this thread. I see this as the nurture vs nature argument. Regardless if it is human nature or if we are taught to be 'me first' screw everyone else, we are intellegent reasoning people. "If" we, as a whole, decided to become compassionate and treat everyone else with respect, it would change. It just takes the courage to do so. And it doesn't have to be on a grand scale, indeed it probably would never happen on a grand scale. It needs to be each individual giving respect and appreciation to each individual they come into contact with on a daily basis.

Say good morning to the people you see, instead of hanging your head and being afraid they might want to have a conversation. Pick up each piece of trash you walk by, instead of thinking the wind should take care of it. buy someone else' coffee when you get one for yourself.

The girl in this video is right, if each adult started to act like they tell their kids to be, the world could change overnight. Do not be afraid that you will look like a 'do gooder'. Do not be afraid that you will not be taken seriously.

I have lost more than one job because I would not put what is best for the company above what is best for the customer. And I am proud of that. The company will be fine, in fact, it would do better to treat their customers as neighbors and family, instead of wallets.

Thomas Paine, during the American Revolution said we must hang together or we will separately. In today's world we are watching each other hang separately.

 

[sgupta]

Funny how people avoid the girl's emotional, and true words, and stick their heads back in their politicized sand. A child has more heart and intelligence than most all of you. You have young kids who would not "hear" this girls heart and soul, while at the same time you parent her by tuning out altogether???

YouTube - Speech by a school girl in UN conference on environment

Oh I heard her. What she said is absolutely true. But if the system proposed isn't evaluated to see if it actually has a chance of working, it doesn't really matter, does it? It's not a lack of seeing the problem; it's finding realistic and plausible solutions.

 

[sgupta]

I am surprised and shocked by the cynicism on this thread. I see this as the nurture vs nature argument. Regardless if it is human nature or if we are taught to be 'me first' screw everyone else, we are intellegent reasoning people. "If" we, as a whole, decided to become compassionate and treat everyone else with respect, it would change. It just takes the courage to do so. And it doesn't have to be on a grand scale, indeed it probably would never happen on a grand scale. It needs to be each individual giving respect and appreciation to each individual they come into contact with on a daily basis.

Say good morning to the people you see, instead of hanging your head and being afraid they might want to have a conversation. Pick up each piece of trash you walk by, instead of thinking the wind should take care of it. buy someone else' coffee when you get one for yourself.

The girl in this video is right, if each adult started to act like they tell their kids to be, the world could change overnight. Do not be afraid that you will look like a 'do gooder'. Do not be afraid that you will not be taken seriously.

I have lost more than one job because I would not put what is best for the company above what is best for the customer. And I am proud of that. The company will be fine, in fact, it would do better to treat their customers as neighbors and family, instead of wallets.

Thomas Paine, during the American Revolution said we must hang together or we will separately. In today's world we are watching each other hang separately.

You're absolutely right in that if everyone always tried to do the right thing, the world would change overnight. And every person who decides to act in that manner will make the world a better place. BUT, regardless of that (and yes, I'm somewhat cynical - no denying that), I just don't think every person everywhere will ever choose to do the right thing - I just think it goes too far against the grain of what humanity is. For as many people who do the right thing, there will always be some who won't, and there will always be people who take advantage of the ones who do.

Beyond that, yes, in general we're intelligent and reasonable people (some, anyways), but we're also emotional, instinctive, and sometimes impulsive creatures, each with varying degrees of all these components in the mix. And with most people, reason rarely wins out all the time.

Even if you did get rid of money and monetary greed, you're still going to have things like prejudice (whether racial, based on sexual orientation, religious, etc.), jealousy (if not over posessions then over relationships, etc.), addictions and compulsions, religious differences, etc. Sure education will help alleviate these things, but stamping them out completely?

I do agree that finding the right system could make things much better than they are, but I also think a utopia where there's no more greed or poverty is a myth. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

 

[ladyraj]

I am surprised and shocked by the cynicism on this thread. I see this as the nurture vs nature argument. Regardless if it is human nature or if we are taught to be 'me first' screw everyone else, we are intellegent reasoning people. "If" we, as a whole, decided to become compassionate and treat everyone else with respect, it would change. It just takes the courage to do so. And it doesn't have to be on a grand scale, indeed it probably would never happen on a grand scale. It needs to be each individual giving respect and appreciation to each individual they come into contact with on a daily basis.

Say good morning to the people you see, instead of hanging your head and being afraid they might want to have a conversation. Pick up each piece of trash you walk by, instead of thinking the wind should take care of it. Buy someone else' coffee when you get one for yourself.

The girl in this video is right, if each adult started to act like they tell their kids to be, the world could change overnight. Do not be afraid that you will look like a 'do gooder'. Do not be afraid that you will not be taken seriously.

I have lost more than one job because I would not put what is best for the company above what is best for the customer. And I am proud of that. The company will be fine, in fact, it would do better to treat their customers as neighbors and family, instead of wallets.

Thomas Paine, during the American Revolution said we must hang together or we will separately. In today's world we are watching each other hang separately.

It seems your assumption is the glass is half-empty versus half-full. Utopia is an aspiration and can never be attained otherwise it would have been accomplished by now. To me, the moments when humans are the greatest are when they are acting humane...I have seen more positive than negative. The inherent kindness in human beings have, at times, totally astounded me. I venture in to the world and I see potential and positive action everywhere. The beauty of humanity is that even though we are driven by base instincts, we aspire to something more spiritually. Every day we work to be the best that we can be and if we fail, and we do fail, we pick ourselves up, brush ourselves off, and continue our chosen path. We do not travel that path alone.

There is not a person I have ever encountered who would not share what they have if the need is great. Heck, even if there is just a desire or if aid would make another's day just a little better.

But that is the power of positive thinking, it can change each and every perception.

No man is an island

No man is an island entire of itself; every man
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man's death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
John Donne
1572-1631 / London / England

 

[SlimXero]

I have to agree with previous posts that this system that is being proposed in this video is very similar to communism.

Hi sgupta....after reading a lot more about it, I have found out for certain their ideas don't have 'any' similarity to communism at all, but I did think exactly the same as you at first (and we all know communism is far worse than capitalism).

Pete, I'm sorry to be so blunt, but nothing about this statement is either correct (except maybe the bit about your thinking, I cannot judge that) or helpful. First you say that none of their ideas have any similarity to communism. That simply isn't true. According to the FAQ on the Venus Project's own website (here), a resource based economy is:

To transcend these limitations, The Venus Project proposes we work toward a worldwide, resource-based economy, in which the planetary resources are held as the common heritage of all the earth's inhabitants. The current practice of rationing resources through monetary methods is irrelevant, counter-productive, and falls far short of meeting humanity’s needs.

Simply stated, a resource-based economy utilizes existing resources - rather than money - to provide an equitable method of distribution in the most humane and efficient manner. It is a system in which all goods and services are available to everyone without the use of money, credits, barter, or any other form of debt or servitude.

To better understand a resource-based economy, consider this. If all the money in the world disappeared overnight, as long as topsoil, factories, personnel and other resources were left intact, we could build anything we needed to fulfill most human needs. It is not money that people require, but rather free access to most of their needs without worrying about financial security or having to appeal to a government bureaucracy. In a resource-based economy of abundance, money will become irrelevant.

We have arrived at a time when new innovations in science and technology can easily provide abundance to all of the world’s people. It is no longer necessary to perpetuate the conscious withdrawal of efficiency by planned obsolescence, perpetuated by our old and outworn profit system. If we are genuinely concerned about the environment and our fellow human beings, if we really want to end territorial disputes, war, crime, poverty and hunger, we must consciously reconsider the social processes that led us to a world where these factors are common. Like it or not, it is our social processes – political practices, belief systems, profit-based economy, our culture-driven behavioral norms – that lead to and support hunger, war, disease and environmental damage.

The aim of this new social design is to encourage an incentive system no longer directed toward the shallow and self-centered goals of wealth, property, and power. These new incentives would encourage people toward self-fulfillment and creativity, both materially and spiritually.

By it's own definition, a resource based economy is based in root on communism <Communism (from French: commun = "common"[1]) is a family of economic and political ideas and social movements related to the establishment of an egalitarian, classless and stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general, as well as the name given to such a society.>. Everyone receives equal compensation (monetarily or otherwise), no matter how much the individual contributes.

The problems with a resource based society are one and the same as the problems with communism: the human mind. We simply cannot, as a whole, operate for the good of everyone. The reasons for that are greed, laziness, and anger at those issues. Allow me to explain:

Let's say we live in a resource based system, where everyone get's what they need to survive, and everything else is contributed to the common good, a community pool if you will. Because everyone in this system is treated equally, many people will realize that they can do nothing and continue to receive an equal share of the group efforts. Accordingly, someone must be in charge of this system. While you may be able to find a few people pure enough of heart and intentions to run this system the way it was intended, eventually someone WILL come to power who will hoard the excess. That's always been the problem with socialist based systems, the laborers scrape by with the bare minimums of human survival whilst the leaders thrive on the extra, because there is no system of checks and balances. Similar to the old idiom "Who will watch the watchers?", the leader is there to keep the system functioning and making sure everyone is getting their fair share and no more/no less, but who will ensure that the leader is doing his job correctly and not just being a corrupt figurehead? And then, beyond all that, there are those who the system is riding on; those who will work their hands to the bone, take their fair share, and becoming angry at the those who do not contribute and those who take unfairly, and eventually rebellion occurs. "The people should not fear their government, the government should fear it's people."

As for my other point about YOUR original statement, I really hate reading tricky word play like that. "Everything you say is wrong, but I used to think exactly the same thing and this is how I've been convinced I was wrong. Allow me to convince you as well." To me, that's just back alley word play disguised as being polite and nice and sensitive, when really it just dodges what is said and again attacks the original poster's beliefs using deceptive vocabulary and really just rewording what has already been stated, but adhering it to the reply so it seems like it you're actually being considerate, but in actuality you've dismissed whatever they've said. IMO, shows a massive lack of respect.

 

[surbitonPete]

You're absolutely right in that if everyone always tried to do the right thing, the world would change overnight. And every person who decides to act in that manner will make the world a better place. BUT, regardless of that (and yes, I'm somewhat cynical - no denying that), I just don't think every person everywhere will ever choose to do the right thing - I just think it goes too far against the grain of what humanity is. For as many people who do the right thing, there will always be some who won't, and there will always be people who take advantage of the ones who do.

Beyond that, yes, in general we're intelligent and reasonable people (some, anyways), but we're also emotional, instinctive, and sometimes impulsive creatures, each with varying degrees of all these components in the mix. And with most people, reason rarely wins out all the time.

Even if you did get rid of money and monetary greed, you're still going to have things like prejudice (whether racial, based on sexual orientation, religious, etc.), jealousy (if not over posessions then over relationships, etc.), addictions and compulsions, religious differences, etc. Sure education will help alleviate these things, but stamping them out completely?

I do agree that finding the right system could make things much better than they are, but I also think a utopia where there's no more greed or poverty is a myth. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

They do say that what they are proposing will not be utopia...it will never be perfect ....just a lot better than what we have now and that's the bit I think might be true. It is the only idea I have seen that does seem to have the potential for a much better world but I guess it's not really worth me getting too involved because I am 57 and whatever happens I am not going to see it. I simply have to make the best of things as they are now.

 

[surbitonPete]

I have to agree with previous posts that this system that is being proposed in this video is very similar to communism.



Pete, I'm sorry to be so blunt, but nothing about this statement is either correct (except maybe the bit about your thinking, I cannot judge that) or helpful. First you say that none of their ideas have any similarity to communism. That simply isn't true. According to the FAQ on the Venus Project's own website (here), a resource based economy is:



By it's own definition, a resource based economy is based in root on communism <Communism (from French: commun = "common"[1]) is a family of economic and political ideas and social movements related to the establishment of an egalitarian, classless and stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general, as well as the name given to such a society.>. Everyone receives equal compensation (monetarily or otherwise), no matter how much the individual contributes.

The problems with a resource based society are one and the same as the problems with communism: the human mind. We simply cannot, as a whole, operate for the good of everyone. The reasons for that are greed, laziness, and anger at those issues. Allow me to explain:

Let's say we live in a resource based system, where everyone get's what they need to survive, and everything else is contributed to the common good, a community pool if you will. Because everyone in this system is treated equally, many people will realize that they can do nothing and continue to receive an equal share of the group efforts. Accordingly, someone must be in charge of this system. While you may be able to find a few people pure enough of heart and intentions to run this system the way it was intended, eventually someone WILL come to power who will hoard the excess. That's always been the problem with socialist based systems, the laborers scrape by with the bare minimums of human survival whilst the leaders thrive on the extra, because there is no system of checks and balances. Similar to the old idiom "Who will watch the watchers?", the leader is there to keep the system functioning and making sure everyone is getting their fair share and no more/no less, but who will ensure that the leader is doing his job correctly and not just being a corrupt figurehead? And then, beyond all that, there are those who the system is riding on; those who will work their hands to the bone, take their fair share, and becoming angry at the those who do not contribute and those who take unfairly, and eventually rebellion occurs. "The people should not fear their government, the government should fear it's people."

As for my other point about YOUR original statement, I really hate reading tricky word play like that. "Everything you say is wrong, but I used to think exactly the same thing and this is how I've been convinced I was wrong. Allow me to convince you as well." To me, that's just back alley word play disguised as being polite and nice and sensitive, when really it just dodges what is said and again attacks the original poster's beliefs using deceptive vocabulary and really just rewording what has already been stated, but adhering it to the reply so it seems like it you're actually being considerate, but in actuality you've dismissed whatever they've said. IMO, shows a massive lack of respect.

Actually you are quite wrong...I wasn't being tricky with the way I use words and I am fairly sure I didn't 'attack' anyone else's beliefs. It seems to me you are the only one being 'tricky' and smart with words and using your own cleverness to 'attack' me!!

And as far as the communism goes I can agree there is some 'similarity' to the 'idea' of communism but other than that I really don't know what you want me to say, I am not a spokesman for the zeitgeist movement or anything, I am just very interested in it and I feel satisfied that it can't possibly work out anything like communism does in practise.

I do share in sgupta's pessimism but at the same time I think that things are so bad with the system that we have now, it's worth supporting this completely new idea. I just can't see how anything 'can' ever get any better if we stick with the monetary system but obviously you don't agree. You are still young so you are the one it affects not me. Unfortunately I will not be alive to see anything change even if it happened and if you are happy with the world you have now then it's your future and your choice. You certainly aren't going to be affecting 'my' future with your beliefs.

In a way you make me feel good that you are still supporting (and must think you can fix) the system and the world that old people like me are leaving you with. That little girls speech had really hit home but you make me feel less guilty about it.

I can assure you I have no desire to 'beat' you or anyone else in some kind of intellectual word game when it comes to something so important. It really is your world, your future and up to you to decide what is the best course to follow. Whatever happens I have absolutely no chance of seeing anything getting better, so I am not supporting their idea because it could in any way benefit me.

Oh and sorry, when it comes to your example and disagreements about how it could work you would really need to go and ask on their forum or else take the time to listen to the radio blogs for your answer, they do have what I think are very good, 'believable' answers to everything but I am simply not good enough at answering you myself ......and don't think I haven't thought of the same argument's that you are making.

As I say there is nothing in it for me so you have to make your own decision's even if that's to totally disagree with their ideas, at least you have thought about them and are aware that there is another possibility to the system we have now.

 

[SlimXero]

I'm sorry, but I have to stick to my guns on this one: it's communism, plain and simple. And any system that ignores the efforts of the few to cater to the needs of the many will fail. It's simply human nature.

Imagine for a moment that you work at Burger King. Now say you've been working here a long time, and you bust your hump to make a living. Now say they hire a new kid off the street with a family to support who makes exactly what you make, and he's lazy, hard to work with, and refuses to learn. But they keep him on the payroll simply because the manager feels sympathetic to his plight. He continues to suck at his job and makes the same amount you do, getting raises when you do, getting as many hours as you do, and receiving the exact same treatment and consideration for promotions as you do. It's going to frustrate and anger you. While you may agree that the kid needs a job and don't want him fired, you will want some treatment to indicate the difference in the level of work. If management shows no signs that you and he work any different then one another, it will drive you mad.

That's kinda sorta the problem with communism/resource based economies. Because everyone gets equal share, no matter the amount of work contributed or ability, those who work harder will always despise those who refuse to work or work lazily, collecting the same benefits they do. They feel that the system rides on their backs, and other are moochers. Every human being feels the desire for positive reinforcement; to be told when they are appreciated and when they are doing well. If you have a job that you have neutral feelings about and the only thing you ever hear from management is "here's your paycheck Pete.", you will become discouraged. however, if you are consistently told that you are an asset to the company, that your hard work is appreciated, and you receive raises and other incentives based on your work, you will be more motivated to do a good job and will most likely find yourself happy in your work, regardless of what you do for a living.

As for the bits about "fixing the system", the system isn't broken. While the impoverished will always feel they are being cheated/ignored by the system, the system itself is checks and balances. This guy got in at the bottom and worked his way to the top with hard work and strategy: he's going to be wealthy and well off. This guy just started here, has no education, and is a cashier/shelf stocker. Of course he's collecting minimum wage. Yes, he does the most physical labor and collects the smallest paycheck, but that's because he has not yet earned his place on the corporate ladder. The world will give you nothing. You must take everything.

I understand the plight of the girl in the video. We are destroying the earth, and according to one group of scientists working in Australia, we've already passed the point of no return. No matter what we do in the foreseeable future with current technology, at some point in our future the earth will become uninhabitable by human life, if not all life (when I find the link, I'll post it in this thread. Saw it several weeks ago on slashdot. Is a very saddening article.), due to greenhouse gases, destruction of natural resources, and the pollution of air and water. And we have millions of starving people in every nation on this planet. It's an unfortunate aspect of the human species. We move to an area, reproduce until the area will no longer support the population, and then move on. We are a virus that destroys everything in it's path, leaving absolutely nothing behind for anyone. However, I hardly think that a resource based economy will fix that.

 

[surbitonPete]

I'm sorry, but I have to stick to my guns on this one: it's communism, plain and simple. And any system that ignores the efforts of the few to cater to the needs of the many will fail. It's simply human nature.

Imagine for a moment that you work at Burger King. Now say you've been working here a long time, and you bust your hump to make a living. Now say they hire a new kid off the street with a family to support who makes exactly what you make, and he's lazy, hard to work with, and refuses to learn. But they keep him on the payroll simply because the manager feels sympathetic to his plight. He continues to suck at his job and makes the same amount you do, getting raises when you do, getting as many hours as you do, and receiving the exact same treatment and consideration for promotions as you do. It's going to frustrate and anger you. While you may agree that the kid needs a job and don't want him fired, you will want some treatment to indicate the difference in the level of work. If management shows no signs that you and he work any different then one another, it will drive you mad.

That's kinda sorta the problem with communism/resource based economies. Because everyone gets equal share, no matter the amount of work contributed or ability, those who work harder will always despise those who refuse to work or work lazily, collecting the same benefits they do. They feel that the system rides on their backs, and other are moochers. Every human being feels the desire for positive reinforcement; to be told when they are appreciated and when they are doing well. If you have a job that you have neutral feelings about and the only thing you ever hear from management is "here's your paycheck Pete.", you will become discouraged. however, if you are consistently told that you are an asset to the company, that your hard work is appreciated, and you receive raises and other incentives based on your work, you will be more motivated to do a good job and will most likely find yourself happy in your work, regardless of what you do for a living.

As for the bits about "fixing the system", the system isn't broken. While the impoverished will always feel they are being cheated/ignored by the system, the system itself is checks and balances. This guy got in at the bottom and worked his way to the top with hard work and strategy: he's going to be wealthy and well off. This guy just started here, has no education, and is a cashier/shelf stocker. Of course he's collecting minimum wage. Yes, he does the most physical labor and collects the smallest paycheck, but that's because he has not yet earned his place on the corporate ladder. The world will give you nothing. You must take everything.

I understand the plight of the girl in the video. We are destroying the earth, and according to one group of scientists working in Australia, we've already passed the point of no return. No matter what we do in the foreseeable future with current technology, at some point in our future the earth will become uninhabitable by human life, if not all life (when I find the link, I'll post it in this thread. Saw it several weeks ago on slashdot. Is a very saddening article.), due to greenhouse gases, destruction of natural resources, and the pollution of air and water. And we have millions of starving people in every nation on this planet. It's an unfortunate aspect of the human species. We move to an area, reproduce until the area will no longer support the population, and then move on. We are a virus that destroys everything in it's path, leaving absolutely nothing behind for anyone. However, I hardly think that a resource based economy will fix that.

Everything you say and Your example has absolutely no relevance to the system of a resource based economy, you are obviously not attempting to try to understand it at all. You are writing your opinions without even doing any research into it.

World population 'is' a BIG problem. A resource based system is the only one that 'might' be able to deal with it (without anything bad having to happen)....No one seems to want to speak about it (in fact most people seem to want to 'deny' it or else ignore it) and religions don't want to change their 'go forth and multiply' teachings.... but I think deep down every single one of us can see that eventually something really bad 'must' happen if we carry on growing in numbers in exactly the way we are now.
It's a fact that a world society based on science may eventually lead us into being able to go out into space and colonise other planets, science and technology is the only thing that could do it and it is being ridiculously hindered by the monetary system. They want to use science and technology to first concentrate on solving the problems for humanity on earth and then start to look towards space.

 

[SlimXero]

Everything you say and Your example has absolutely no relevance to the system of a resource based economy, you are obviously not attempting to try to understand it at all. You are writing your opinions without even doing any research into it.

Actually, If you'd read my posts you would realize, my research was done at the Venus Project's website. They explicitly state that "a resource-based economy utilizes existing resources - rather than money - to provide an equitable method of distribution in the most humane and efficient manner. It is a system in which all goods and services are available to everyone without the use of money, credits, barter, or any other form of debt or servitude." So, who handles the "equitable distribution" of amassed human resources? Oh, hi there communism. It's pretty simple, it's stated right in the FAQ on their page that they support socialistic ideals. I'm not misunderstanding or inferring anything out of context, it's right there in plain English. I understand you are from the UK, so the languages are slightly different, but I don't see how you can miss that.

 

[surbitonPete]

Actually, If you'd read my posts you would realize, my research was done at the Venus Project's website. They explicitly state that "a resource-based economy utilizes existing resources - rather than money - to provide an equitable method of distribution in the most humane and efficient manner. It is a system in which all goods and services are available to everyone without the use of money, credits, barter, or any other form of debt or servitude." So, who handles the "equitable distribution" of amassed human resources? Oh, hi there communism. It's pretty simple, it's stated right in the FAQ on their page that they support socialistic ideals. I'm not misunderstanding or inferring anything out of context, it's right there in plain English. I understand you are from the UK, so the languages are slightly different, but I don't see how you can miss that.

As I say you are not delving into it deep enough to understand the difference and I am not a good enough spokesperson to be able to explain it to you. I understand things far better than I can ever explain them.

If you have something that you think is better I would rather you point me to that than try to argue with 'me' about why you are against their ideas. It's much more constructive to have 'better' ideas than to simply be against any new ideas. I am always open to thinking about something new and making my own decisions about which might be the best idea.

Sadly that child in the movie will grow up to find out there aren't really any alternatives with the monetary system, to be 'successful' you have to become a part of it and morality has to take second place.

 

[jigtg]

Watched it (well, I was working, so mainly listened, but got the point across).

While some of the ideas have a great deal of merit, I'm afraid I have to agree with some of the other posters - it goes too far against human nature. If we were dealing with purely rational beings like computers, I think it'd work out brilliantly. With people, I think it's highly unlikely to the nth degree (ie. practically impossible).

You forgot that that computer is going to need some data about the world to make decissions. And since humans are needed to deliver data to the computer people will attempt to manipulate the input for their own interests. So lets suppose the computer wouldn't need humans to supply information but instead would work independently collecting information by unknown means. So we got this "thing" that tells us what to do, everyone obeys without question and no-one can talk to. Now what could that be...

The hierarchy that makes the system run also makes misuse of power possible. Paradox anyone?

 

[surbitonPete]

You forgot that that computer is going to need some data about the world to make decissions. And since humans are needed to deliver data to the computer people will attempt to manipulate the input for their own interests. So lets suppose the computer wouldn't need humans to supply information but instead would work independently collecting information by unknown means. So we got this "thing" that tells us what to do, everyone obeys without question and no-one can talk to. Now what could that be...

The hierarchy that makes the system run also makes misuse of power possible. Paradox anyone?

You are thinking in terms of 'this' society .....in that society there would be absolutely nothing to gain from doing anything to harm the society.

 

[SlimXero]

As I say you are not delving into it deep enough to understand the difference and I am not a good enough spokesperson to be able to explain it to you. I understand things far better than I can ever explain them.

If you have something that you think is better I would rather you point me to that than try to argue with 'me' about why you are against their ideas. It's much more constructive to have 'better' ideas than to simply be against any new ideas. I am always open to thinking about something new and making my own decisions about which might be the best idea.

Sadly that child in the movie will grow up to find out there aren't really any alternatives with the monetary system, to be 'successful' you have to become a part of it and morality has to take second place.

You seem to have this idea that I oppose it simply because it's different. And as for "against 'new' ideas", it's not a new idea. It's communism. I'm not bashing it for that, I'm simply saying it can't work. And I am open to new ideas, but like I've just said, it's not a new idea. It's an old one with a spin.

As for the child in the movie, she's already grown. That was shot in 1992, and didn't she say she was 12 in the video? That puts her right @ 30. Pretty sure she's aware of how the world works now.

 

[surbitonPete]

You seem to have this idea that I oppose it simply because it's different. And as for "against 'new' ideas", it's not a new idea. It's communism. I'm not bashing it for that, I'm simply saying it can't work. And I am open to new ideas, but like I've just said, it's not a new idea. It's an old one with a spin.

As for the child in the movie, she's already grown. That was shot in 1992, and didn't she say she was 12 in the video? That puts her right @ 30. Pretty sure she's aware of how the world works now.

Well in my opinion saying it's communism is Just like comparing your head to a football and saying they are both the same thing because they are both round and about the same size.

 

[SlimXero]

Well in my opinion saying it's communism is Just like comparing your head to a football and saying they are both the same thing because they are both round and about the same size.

Then your opinion is absurd. Taking a cat and spray painting it blue doesn't make it not a cat. And I look nothing like Arnold from "Hey Arnold".

 

[surbitonPete]

You seem to have this idea that I oppose it simply because it's different. And as for "against 'new' ideas", it's not a new idea. It's communism. I'm not bashing it for that, I'm simply saying it can't work. And I am open to new ideas, but like I've just said, it's not a new idea. It's an old one with a spin.

As for the child in the movie, she's already grown. That was shot in 1992, and didn't she say she was 12 in the video? That puts her right @ 30. Pretty sure she's aware of how the world works now.

YouTube - An Open Mind

"Communism is a political system managed by a form of ideology, which does not necessarily relate to human or environmental needs. Communism uses money, banks, armies, police, prisons, charismatic personalities, social stratification, and is managed by appointed leaders and uses indoctrination. The Venus Project's aim is to surpass the need for the use of money. Police, prisons, banking, advertising, stockbrokers, military, and government would no longer be necessary when goods, services, healthcare, and education are available to all people. The Venus Project would replace politicians with a cybernated society in which all of the physical entities would as quickly as possible be managed and operated by computerized systems. The only region that the computers do not operate or manage is the surveillance of human beings. This would be completely unnecessary and considered socially offensive. A society that uses technology without human concern has no basis of survival. Communism has no blueprint or methodology to carry out their ideals and along with capitalism, fascism, and socialism will ultimately go down in history as failed social experiments. One of Communism's concerns is the condition of labor and the working class. The Venus Project's major concerns are producing products with limited labor and eventually eliminating labor and at the same time giving people all the amenities of a prosperous, high energy society. It is not our aim to produce a society that does nothing but enjoy leisure time. Instead people will be introduced to limitless opportunities to explore, create, participate, and learn."

There is even one person on their forum who manages to interpret that statement as meaning a computer will be taking away everyone's freedom and controlling everyone's lives!! You just can't escape the way people manage to put their own bizarre interpretations to anything and the worst thing is that it seems like nothing you can ever say will change their minds once they have become 'fixed' on their interpretation.

 

[jimik]

I've been investigating it a bit more, surbitonPete. I am not an economist, but was interested in the entire resource based economy. From the video included, it seems that the idea behind it is to have machines do most of the work as well as maintain order in society. I think I can understand where this is going, it is likely to occur at some point. I have often wondered exactly what is going to occur once our jobs are mostly automated.

YouTube - Resource Based Economy - The Solution for the Monetary System Collapse

I do not agree with Fresco's assessment that we already have the technology to make this possible, perhaps we will in a few decades especially if we go along with Kurzweil's technology forecasts.

It is interesting, but I think we will have to stick to the monetary system for a while longer before anything like this would be possible. Then again, as I said before I am not an economist. I find subjects like this to be fun to explore though. I apologize for my initial reaction. The film sort of put me off a bit at first.

 

[SlimXero]

The Venus Project would replace politicians with a cybernated society in which all of the physical entities would as quickly as possible be managed and operated by computerized systems.

Um, hello? Wait, I've seen this movie before and I don't care for the ending. I thought that Fresco dude looked familiar, he's the Architect!