MINO (money is no object)
posted by 13 Muluc | January 20, 2010
- Login or register to post comments
- Print this page
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Propeller
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
IcerocketThis blog is a sequel to an earlier one I wrote, entitled "The Economy Must Die". That blog exposed the false mythology of the monetary economy. This one will suggest a possible alternative. As I see it, the biggest flaw of a currency based economy is the presence of coercion. Currency use cannot survive without coercion. Any system that institutionalises coercion can never lead to universal prosperity, peace or equality. If we want these things, we need a new economic model.
I've named this economic style MINO (money is no object). It is a gift economy. I'll first outline the system in brief, then switch to Q&A format to fill in the details. Finally, I'll present some benefits of a MINO economy.
SUMMARY:
1. All currencies are abolished.
2. All work is 100% voluntary.
3. An interactive, world wide web based platform is created to allow people to connect with each other and locate opportunities for voluntary service. The platform would be designed so that you could suggest group projects and solicit help in making them happen. It would include a search feature capable of sorting requests by priority (how essential they are), popularity (as determined by a built-in voting system), region, and type of service (ie. infrastructure, innovation, education, hospitality, agriculture, etc.) Once you had decided which requests to respond to, you could schedule yourself into any vacancy.
4. Ownership is determined by use. For example, if you are living in a dwelling, it's yours. If you abandon it, it isn't.
Q&A:
Question- What would prevent some people from taking advantage by refusing to contribute?
Answer- First of all, this question is based on the assumption that there would be a labour shortage. In fact, adopting the MINO system would represent the largest lay-off in the history of the world. A short list of occupations that would disappear completely would include: banking and credit, stock market trading, billing, sales, insurance, cashiers, real estate, and taxation. MINO would also massively reduce the need for:
1. Health care. The number 1 cause of illness is stress. Other major factors are poor food quality and poverty. The MINO system would eventually eliminate these causes.
2. Policing. Most crime is undertaken solely for profit, ie. theft, fraud, extortion, prostitution, human trafficking, and environmental destruction. The purpose of police should be restricted to preventing coercive abuse of the vulnerable.
3. Advertising. Most of the energy presently devoted to advertising is aimed at manufacturing want for the sake of profit. MINO would reduce advertising to the promotion of group projects.
4. Manufacturing. Manufacturing for profit leads to poor quality goods, wasteful, destructive use of resources, and planned obsolescence. Also, many of the items are neither needed nor truly wanted.
5. War. Regardless of the reasons officially given, wars are almost always fought for profit.
This list is incomplete but substantial. There would be no labour shortage. There would be many things we'd want to change if money were no object, so we'd be busier in the beginning than later on. It's impossible to say what the average service contribution would be, but I would guess about five hours per week or less, and falling over time.
Question- What would motivate people to volunteer for the least pleasant jobs in the absence of money?
Answer- Gratitude would replace financial incentive. In the absence of money, generosity would become the main source of social status. Consider the person who picks up your garbage. Have you ever felt grateful to him/her for his/her service? You probably never have because he/she is receiving a pay cheque. What if he/she was doing it voluntarily? In that case, I expect you would feel very differently. The jobs that are least intrinsically fulfilling would carry the most honour in a MINO economy. I've mostly worked in the hospitality area (cooking, serving, bar tending). The main drawback of that type of work, aside from sore feet and exhaustion due to overwork, is disrespect and mistreatment from customers. If the people I was serving knew that my service was a gift, I doubt that would happen. If I were doing it for 10 hours per week or less, and voluntarily, it wouldn't even feel like work. It would be fun, like hosting a party. This is work I would definitely volunteer for. I'd also make a point of occasionally scheduling myself for one of the grottier jobs because I think it's only fair that I should.
Question- What about scarcity? If demand exceeds supply, and the difference can't be remedied, who gets access?
Answer- This should be determined by each community and case-by-case. For necessities, it would probably be best to ration and/or ask for help from other regions. For non-essentials, raffling might be preferable. In either case, it would be an improvement over the current system where the same people (those with the most money) always have priority access.
I'm sure there are plenty of other questions about MINO. If you think of any, please use the comments area and I, or whoever else wants to, can try to answer.
Benefits of a MINO economy:
1. Quality:
If money is no object, there is no reason to produce poor quality goods and services.
2. Sustainability:
Improvements in quality will reduce waste. Sustainability and quality are intimately connected and profit is the enemy of both. Take food for example. Small, organic farms produce better quality food and can more easily be made fully sustainable. A great number of people dream of such a pastoral lifestyle. The only barrier they now face is financial.
3. Education: This will be one of the main growth areas in a MINO economy. Everyone will have a lot more free time, and the opportunity to share and acquire knowledge and training will be available to all.
4. Social harmony and connection: The MINO system replaces competition with cooperation. MINO also inspires gratitude towards others. When all work is voluntary, it isn't taken for granted, and appreciation is intrinsically fulfilling.
5. Improved health and longevity: When people lead fulfilling lives, free of anxiety, and with strong positive connections to their communities, they are happier and more relaxed. This has huge physical and mental health benefits. Throw in better food and a healthier environment, and throw out the profit motive in medicine, and see what happens.
6. Research and innovation: Imagine if quality, sustainability and social benefit, instead of profit, determined which research and technology received support. Things like free, clean energy and consciousness technologies would advance very quickly. Weapons development would receive little or no public enthusiasm, and so would decline. In the absence of the profit motive, knowledge would be shared instead hoarded.
7. An end to animal cruelty: The only reason to mistreat animals is because it's cheaper that caring for them with compassion.
Why should we not adopt such a system as MINO? All it would demand of us is maturity and trust in one another. If you need coercion in order to function in a socially responsible manner, you have no right to call yourself an adult. Surely being a mature adult means you don't need to be told what to do. If we adopted a MINO economy, or something like it, we could build a civilisation worthy of the name. The timing for this could not be better. In many countries, the average age of the population is rising. This is a problem in a monetary economy, but an advantage in a MINO system, since education and skills training will be some of the biggest growth areas. The monetary economy is likely to catastrophically collapse in the near future. If we start preparing to transition now, we could avoid a great deal of suffering. Every crisis is also an opportunity. We have only to rise to it. What if money were no object? Just imagine.....
Comments
Brilliant, 13. I've been
— Jan 20, 2010
Brilliant, 13. I've been waiting for this for a while.
Have you ever read 'The Dispossessed' by Ursula K. LeGuin? She gives a very convincing portrayal of what such a society as you describe would look like, contrasting it with a society similar to the one we live in now (and have, for most of history.) Suffice to say that there is no such thing as utopia (although in the end it's pretty clear that the anarchist society, though imperfect, is preferrable.)
I'm also not sure we'll ever entirely do away with money. Interest-based central banking fiat currencies, absolutely, those are on the way out. But some sort of fungible means of exchange is very difficult to do without, as they make it possible to engage in trade with people that you don't personally know.
Personally I'm a fan of demurrage systems, as these tend to act against the accumulation of wealth, as well as removing the necessity of growth at all costs while encouraging investment in tangible, high quality, long-duration infrastructure (the cathedrals of Europe were largely constructed by communities utilizing demurrage currencies, for instance: the townsfolk figured it would be a good investment, put their surplus into it for centuries, and ... they were right, weren't they? Cathedrals are tourism goldmines to this day). Ideally the creation of currency would be tied to the production of actual goods, such as food, or infrastructure such as bridges. The idea would be to roughly index the rate of value loss to the natural decay or degradation of the material that backs it up.
In practice, the easiest way to do this would be, I think, to have small amounts of new currency created with every transaction. Said currency would then decline at a certain predetermined rate, while creating more currency in proportion to how quickly it circulates. This would have the advantages of a) removing control of the currency from both central banks and governments, or indeed any authority as well as b) ensuring the money supply would find a natural equilibrium with the actual size of the economy, without forcing the economy to grow faster than is ecologically or socially desirable.
Heh. Just occurred to me that you've probably already read all these arguments and more from Charles Eisenstein. So I'll yield the floor, BUT if you have rebuttals to these arguments please, have at 'er ;)
ps I riffed off the original post in this series in a poem ("One way or another, oh my sisters and brothers, this hungry god economy must feed") and when I read the verse at a radical poetry slam a month or so back that line got a great reaction from the crowd. Thought you might appreciate the power your imagery had :)
The Revolution is Within
Thanks, Psychegram
— Jan 20, 2010
I'm not familiar with that book. It sounds interesting.
We don't need currency if we're not engaging in trade. People request and offer gifts in MINO. No one keeps score. The interactive web resource allows for exchange between regions and people who don't know each other.
I can certainly see the benefit of a demerrage currency over what we have now. However, it lacks one of the greatest advantages of MINO, namely the separation of human and monetary value. We don't value one another properly when we allow ourselves and each other to be bought and sold. As long as there is currency, social and environmental abuses will attend it. Demerrage currency also sounds like it would need a large investment of energy and resources to maintain. An advantage of MINO is that it frees up all the energy used to manage money.
I don't think MINO would be anarchy, so much as absolute democracy, at least in terms of large scale group projects. It would be anarchy in the sense that no one could use force on anyone else (except to prevent it be used) and nobody would own you.
Thanks for telling about the poetry jam. It is appreciated.
Existing gift economies
— Jan 20, 2010
I'm curious whether you've lived in gift economies, and what your experience was.
Interesting article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
Hi Chris.
— Jan 20, 2010
Yes, I have. So have you. We call them famillies. In my family, we value one another equally, rather than according to profitability. We don't need to pay each other for our respective contributions. Resources are shared respectfully and no one keeps score.
Sorry, I couldn't resist. I've never lived in a gift economy of larger scale than that, but I'm sure I could. Have you? Thanks for the links. Very interesting.
Giving "gifts" just isn't going to work
— Jan 20, 2010
The problem with a "gift" economy is that you have to depend on others to give you what you need. What happens if you say something the group or community doesn't like? Do you starve? I think you do. The Amish, who practice more of a sharing economy, shun those in their community who are too vocal or noncompliant. Shunned members of the Amish community have to leave, or they starve. This would seem to be the ultimate form of fascism.
The demurrage money system that was used in the Middle Ages to build the cathedrals would work.
Hi Lygeia.
— Jan 20, 2010
Your criticism applies much more to a money-based system than to MINO. If you have to be employed to access the necessities of life, you are not free. People who don't act as society demands are refused employment. Thousands of people are starving right now because of monetary economics. The Amish are also not widely representative since they are an extreme religious cult. Also, if you really don't get along with other people , in the MINO economy you can leave, since no one owns the Earth. Right now you can't. There is no reason MINO could not include a provision to guarantee everyone the right to things such as food, shelter, and clean air and water.
Scale and philosophy are
— Jan 20, 2010
Scale and philosophy are both key to this problem, which is certainly a valid concern. Amish society is very, very 'small', both in terms of size and of the outlook of the individual members (I don't imagine many of them give much if any thought to the world outside their community ... not that many do but them, even less than others.) On the other hand a MINO society, if implemented across diverse communities (globally?), would have much more potential for free movement ... ideally, of course. Thus if the community you were in didn't suit, just pick up and move somewhere else.
Philosophically, the Amish are, as 13 says, an extreme religious cult. Personal freedom is not valued in their society, hence the shunning and the social tyranny. However, if notions of free speech, free thought, and free action are enshrined at the center of the society as explicitly defined unifying principles, it would be much more difficult for communities to discipline their more, ah, eccentric members.
The Revolution is Within
Thanks Psychegram
— Jan 21, 2010
You said,"Scale and philosophy are both key to this problem". Yes, definitely. The greater the scale, the better it can work. Very esoteric research and development are highly unlikely to be possible with a small population pool. But with a pool of 6 billion, you should be able to gather enough interested parties, provided you had a way of connecting with them. The internet can do just that.
As to philosophy, our institutions (like the monetary economy) are a product of our philosophy but they also give rise to it. It's a feed-back loop. The philosophy implied by the use of money does not serve us. It assumes that we can't trust each other. It assumes that we are incapable of acting responsibly unless forced to do so. It values human beings in monetary, and therefore finite and comparative, terms. Money also validates the idea of profit. Profit, in economic terms, means taking more than you give. It is shameful and immoral, but the philosophy of money disguises that fact.
Muluc: Good reply! I've been
— Jan 20, 2010
Muluc:
Good reply!
I've been involved in attempts at community, in open houses, where there was an element of a gift economy, and in temporary communities (i.e. festivals) where people came together more intensely but only for a week or two.
At times they work and are wonderful, and at other times people feel used and angry at others that they feel are not pulling their weight. A lot like families, actually.
I'd love to see a deeper study of where they work and when they don't. I don't see it replacing the existing economy, but we can make it a bigger part. I believe that a big part of it is that when we create abundance (plant a fruit tree, throw seed bombs) we make it so much easier for the gift economy in our lives to grow.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
Yep, that's precisely one of
— Jan 21, 2010
Yep, that's precisely one of the issues 'The Dispossessed' brings to the fore. In the novel the main character is a theoretical physicist, a brilliant and somewhat caustic loner who feels driven to pursue interests so esoteric that only a handful of humans in the entire galaxy can understand them. Of course the anarchist society in which he grows up expects him to pull his weight, vis a vis growing food and such ... not that he can be forced to do anything against his will (the use of force being a completely alien concept in his society), but there is a deep-seated disapproval of anyone who doesn't seem to be pitching in, so when the work assignment board (which he sees developing into a sort of aristocracy) decides he should go to a remote village and grow potatoes instead of continuing to pursue his inexplicable studies, well....
It is only after going to another planet (one which is essentially an exaggerated/idealized version of our own) that he is finally able to get the time and resources he requires to translate his life's work from theory to practice, culminating in the creation of an instantaneous communications device (the ansible) that leads (in later novels) to the creation of the Ecumen, a sort of interstellar community focused around the sharing of knowledge and culture between the diverse human worlds.
Of course the resources and time he requires to complete his Mission in life are only (or at any rate, much more easily) available in a stratified society that offers freedom from manual labor to some in exchange for the economic enslavement of many. Had he stayed on his home planet, the ansible - and the Ecumen - would never have come to be, simply because he never would have been given the support necessary to do what only he understood could be done.
LeGuin's point - I think - being that there are no easy answers, no solutions to the eternal human problems that work for everyone ... that even those solutions explicitly designed to work for everyone will leave some unfulfilled. All human societies are composed of humans after all, which are just jumped up primates.
I guess what I'm saying here is, it's important not to be too idealistic when laying the philosophical groundwork for a new society. Too much idealism can make our conviction brittle, and easily shattered when it runs into the realities of human nature. I've never tried commune living myself but have talked to enough who have, most of whom have told me the same old story ... starry-eyed idealism, followed by disillusionment, followed by disintegration of the commune. That's a lesson we have to learn from.
The Revolution is Within
Thanks for fleshing out the
— Jan 21, 2010
Thanks for fleshing out the story, Psychegram. That really changes things. It seems totally bizzarre that a theoretical physisist would even exist in a society of such low technology that everybody is occupied in agriculture. How would they have invented space travel? We don't live in a such a society, money or no money. If everyone on our planet were occupied in agriculture, we'd have far too much food. When I suggested we make all work voluntary, I meant truly voluntary. I didn't mean the kind of "voluntary" we have now, where you can quit your job, but if you do, you get to be homeless and hungry. A work assignment board is antithetical to the concept of MINO. If people really want to contribute nothing to their society, why should anyone care? I wouldn't. I don't like receiving gifts from people who resent giving them. I honestly think that sort of thing would only be a problem while we were recovering from the money hangover. Within a generation or two, it would look just as fucked up to the majority as it does to me now. We are all born to this world with unique potentials, some tangible, some less so. I think everyone should have the freedom to realise theirs fully. I just have this horrible feeling that there is some potential genius inventor being worked to death in a third world sweatshop and we'll all be the poorer for it. Actually, it's not just possible, but probable. The stratified society does offer freedom to some in exchange for the enslavement of the many. We just don't need to make that trade at our level of technology. I think we're wasting our potential by clinging to archaic and inappropriate social forms when we have the means to move beyond those limits.
It seems extremely unlikely that any truly advanced ET civilisation would still use money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the transcendance of money were a precondition of open contact.
Well, to flesh the story out
— Jan 21, 2010
Well, to flesh the story out more, the anarchist society was originally from the more Earth-like world, until a revolution split its hierarchical society down the middle. Rather than face further bloodshed the revolutionaries (in the minority, of course) agreed to abandon their homeworld and settle its Mars-like moon, which had an extremely marginal environment (hence the overwhelming focus on agriculture.)
"It seems extremely unlikely
— Jan 21, 2010
"It seems extremely unlikely that any truly advanced ET civilisation would still use money. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the transcendance of money were a precondition of open contact."
You may have something there.....
The Revolution is Within
Hi again
— Jan 20, 2010
It could take a while for the psychological wounds of the current system to fully heal. If one has been unappreciated it can become hard to appreciate others, and instead find reasons to resent them. We've had way too much practice keeping score. I think we could get past it though, if enough of us resolved to act like grown-ups no matter what. That's the heart of it really. If we can't accept responsibility for ourselves, we will be used and controlled and it is our own fault.
This is why this thing has
— Jan 21, 2010
This is why this thing has to grow organically. The only people who can participate in such a society are those who have grown up enough to be able to do so. As it stands that rules out probably 99% of the population.
It's all good, though. It only take a few percent to start a revolution ... and just under 10% to change everything.
The Revolution is Within
Some comments (more like a rambling essay)
— Jan 20, 2010
1. Abolishing currency:
If it is fiat currency, then yes. But I believe in the people's right to trade with each other, and there's no way to abolish currency voluntarily. However can have a voluntary boycott on certain kinds of currencies. There are also ways to abolish government monopolies on the creation of money. I even believe that a gold and silver standard is far superior to what we have now. Basically people have a natural right to use whatever they want as a currency and a main responsibility of our government is to facilitate free coinage (to ease the process).
That being said: I think that I agree with you, that the impersonal nature of cash and coin currency, encourages greed because it separates trading power from actual bartering, leading to such occupations where one may become rich from the mere possession of currency (which could have been stolen) whilst not actually producing or doing anything of value. This is why many cultures ban usury. If we are all bartering, it is a lot harder to be a criminal because you are tied to the objects you are bartering with. You can steal chickens for instance, but its a lot harder to hide a chicken in your shirt than a wad of bills. Not convinced? Check out this YouTube Video (its short):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72SJK9HiqO4
also a note to add: if this electronic-based economic system is facilitating voluntary gifting, then the corollary is that it also facilitates trading, and functions as a free-market currency (but with benefits). People will have an incentive to give back to people who give more, and give to people who have given to them. Nobody will want to give to somebody who just takes more and more all the time and never gives anything, unless it is a charity situation where someone obviously can't pull their own weight. And I haven't actually lived in a gift economy, but I have lived in some real semi-communal places (including my family) and my conclusion is that gifts often have a hidden price. And generous people always need to be on guard against their generosity being abused.
2. 100% voluntary: agreed. But my job is also voluntary in the sense that I can quit if I want to. The only difference is that "volunteers" work for other benefits whereas I work for cash. Certain reasons why I need cash are not voluntary, but that is another matter.
3. World Wide (and local) Information networks: There are a lot of great things that information networks can do. They can coordinate an advanced bartering system for example, and merge it with a gifting system... effectively obsoleting currency (making it way more expensive, and less convenient, to use currency than use the information system).
4. Ownership by use: this is a very accurate insight into the nature of ownership. Ownership is all about use. Especially exclusive use. But it gets very tricky. I think people have a right to the product of their labor (otherwise it's slavery), yet tangible objects are also composed of natural resources, which is the earth's gift to all of us (and she wants us to put those gifts to use). People have a right to what they create, not what they take (especially from others). So one way to deal with this is to have heavy ownership restrictions (or non-ownership benefits... for a non-coercive model) on things like land, precious minerals, and raw natural resources. For example, farms would be leased and then given back to the public domain. But ownership of other objects might work under a graduated system, perhaps one that rewards objects that can be easily recycled and repaired. The more creativity/skill/labor a person puts into creating an object, the more of a right they have to own it. And people have complete ownership of their body and their labor/service. These radical concepts of ownership can very easily be dovetailed into a working gift based economy.
All this stuff is very pie-in-the-sky.... but I still think it's important to talk converse about and exchange ideas.
But for now, we need to rev up the gift economy that we have that is already working... the internet. Do we all use linux as an operating system? Do we give back to open source systems and people who put their stuff out for free? And do we boycott those who don't? Hopefully we all have some small part to play in all of this.
Linux etc
— Jan 21, 2010
Do we all use linux as an operating system? Do we give back to open source systems and people who put their stuff out for free? And do we boycott those who don't? Hopefully we all have some small part to play in all of this.
I do! Open source is about freedom. I don't have a paying job (doing a non-profit "open source" knowledge project) so I don't contribute financially, but I do promote and blog on Linux and other open source tools.
btw, the good news is that Linux is getting really easy to install and use - Mandriva Linux is a nice one to start with, and of course everyone knows Ubuntu.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
thanks chris
— Jan 21, 2010
Yeah. I'm using Ubuntu right now in fact. And checking out your website with it too... very interesting.
Glad you like it - it's our
— Jan 22, 2010
Glad you like it - it's our passion, and I believe that a good, easy-to-navigate knowledge bank is a critical need for the world.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
Hello Rob
— Jan 21, 2010
1. Yes, anyone who understands the nature of fiat currencies knows them to be an obscene scam. You'd have to be ignorant or psychopathic to say otherwise. Almost any system is an improvement over that. I don't see anything wrong with trade as long as coercion doesn't enter into it. Actually, the line between gifting and trade is fuzzy at best. Xmas gift exchange is good example. If someone gives me a present , it is considered customary that I should reciprocate in kind. Was that a trade or an exchange of gifts? It could be called both. It seems the main difference is that one (trade) is contractual and attempts to match value for value, assuming that both parties are honest. The other is much more flexible. For example, suppose the person who gave me the present is very wealthy and I am not. In that case, it would not be expected by custom that our respective gifts be of equal intrinsic value. Also, if I were unable or not inclined to recipricate, while it may or may not harm my relationship with the other person, the police wouldn't show up and charge me with fraud. Gifting isn't legislated. On the other hand, custom is often stronger than law. I think there's a place for both types of exchange. It depends on the circumstances. Bartering does make dishonesty and abuse harder to accomplish. It just becomes unwieldy on the scale of a city with a population in the millions to keep track of who owes who what. And I don't think it matters when you consider that our level of technology can provide everyone with a very high standard of living if we'd just stop hoarding and wasting what we have.
2. You said, "Certain reasons why I need cash are not voluntary, but that is another matter." If I'm correct in assuming that your involuntary reasons include things like food and shelter, then I don't think it is another matter. If you have to choose between a Mcjob and death, that stretches the meaning of voluntary too far. It's like the government saying that having a social insurance number is voluntary but then not allowing you to be legitimately employed without one. As I said to Psychegram, "When I suggested we make all work voluntary, I meant truly voluntary. I didn't mean the kind of "voluntary" we have now, where you can quit your job, but if you do, you get to be homeless and hungry."
3. BINGO! Our information networks make this, not just possible, but economically intelligent.
4. I'm guessing that longstanding custom and common sense can handle ownership issues. If it needs legislating, it's usually because there is a scam taking place.
One could argue that these ideas are pie-in-the-sky, but an even stronger arguement could be made that our present economy is already obsolete and will soon lead to disaster if it isn't changed. What was civilisation supposed to do for us anyway? I seem to recall that it was meant to raise us above survival concerns so we could move on to bigger and better things. It appears to have broken down by the side of that road, unless that stated goal was a lie from the start. Good point about the information economy. It's moving closer to the MINO model by the day. It is now almost totally free and voluntary, and that fact is only making it better and richer. No one seems to care who gives and who takes, and no one feels compelled to keep score.
Whew, that was long (but fun). Thank you.
...
— Jan 21, 2010
If someone gives me a present , it is considered customary that I should reciprocate in kind. Was that a trade or an exchange of gifts? It could be called both.
I call it both. Isn't everything oneness? Trade (especially barter) is just a ritualized form of gift giving. Money (especially coinage and things like wampum) is a ritualized form of trading.
Christmas gift giving, and a gift economy in general, is much more flexible. Our task is to make it trustworthy and dependable for making a living. Lawrence Lessig talks about how the Market economy (corporatism dominating) is separated from other economies like the family economy... into distinct spheres (i would argue against making such distinctions but its useful tool). And these spheres are qualitatively different... and the market economy is taking over more and more, such as cooking and childcare.
So what a gift economy needs to do, is not only reverse that trend but also knit those spheres together... it can accomplish the magic of what money does and more. Money lets you trade even if the other person doesn't have what you want. Gifting lets you trade even if the other person doesn't have what you want and has no money! You might receive something in exchange but it comes from someone who has nothing to do with the person you gave the gift to.
This lets us maximize efficiency... for example right now since our exchanges are 'two-way', the process of exchanging costs money (you can estimate about 50% of the cost) because the two parties are separated by distance and time. Therefore gas is expended, food rots, etc. With a proper gift economy, the cost of exchange itself is drastically reduced. Its the same idea as if you are living in a small tribe and you are a good hunter and kill a large animal... are you going to share or keep the meat to yourself? If you keep it to yourself most of it will rot. If you share it there is no way the other members can repay you, but statistical chances are you will be repaid one way or the other. Because everyone knows what you did. The digital economy takes this metaphor to the extreme. Creating a digital work or knowledge and not sharing it is like killing a big woolly mammoth, eating a piece of it, and then letting the whole thing rot.
What does that information network need to do? It needs to ensure first of all that people are compensated, and profit from hard work, creativity, problem solving and excellence (this being people's primary objection to the system). It needs to translate value, or how much use an object or service is (If an object or service turns out to have no value... guess what... you can't be ripped off!). It also needs to solve the process of overconsumption/overproduction (when do people know to stop giving/taking? What stops them?). Above all, it needs to ensure that people profit from giving, (the demurrage currency does this to some extent) and have some negative feedback in place to prevent abuse.
2. Food and shelter take work to produce and I do not consider it my basic right to have those things provided. I can do it by myself thank you very much. However, I can argue that I should have the basic human right to be able to work for those things outside of the current economic system. I was mostly referring to taxation though.
4. To expand on what I was talking about, I think that if there were more restrictions on ownership it could also increase the strength of the gift economy. It is the same principle as demurrage currency. Imagine if there was a tax (or to that effect) on making things out of plastic and such, that are difficult to recycle, repair or break down into component parts? In other words you own the object, but not the material it was made from. There is also less reason to hold on to an object that you don't essentially own but are only using... it makes a lot more sense to make a gift to someone else and have it register in the system (ultimately bringing more gifts to you) than to hoard it. And BTW, all of this can be done effectively, simply and without the use of force if we had the proper tools and a little culture change, change in consciousness, or leap of faith.
The result, if we were to use this system, would be that everyone would become drastically richer (in a quality of life way... in a having what you want and need way) because usage would be maximized and hoarding would be minimized. And it would be less damaging to the environment on top of that.
Cheers.
Rob Meade
Thanks Rob
— Jan 22, 2010
Yes, exactly. It is instructive to consider what would happen if the gift economy of the family were changed to a monetary one. Everything would quickly bog down and become riddiculously inefficient. Our children would begin their adult lives with a mountain of debt owed to their parents. The most financially productive members probably couldn't justify remaining in the group and the least so might have to be cast out in order to balance the books. Sounds idiotic and wrong, I know, but we accept exactly this for our wider society.
"Yes, anyone who understands
— Jan 22, 2010
"Yes, anyone who understands the nature of fiat currencies knows them to be an obscene scam. You'd have to be ignorant or psychopathic to say otherwise."
So, you're saying that I'm ignorant or psychopathic.
The main thing is that for all their flaws, they work when it comes to facilitating the age-old human impulses to trade and engage in commerce. I've never seen or heard of a true all-voluntary system that "works" in my judgement.
I'm more interested in fixing a working but very imperfect system, rather than starting a new one. That's been often tried, often with ugly results.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
...
— Jan 22, 2010
Fiat, meaning that this is not just a currency, but one that's backed up by force and fraud. The government prints a piece of paper, then makes a law forcing you to pay your debts with it. Without 'legal tender' laws, our currency would be toilet paper.
It's a stable, gold and silver coinage (and perhaps paper that it backed 100%) that traditionally has worked for facilitating 'age-old impulses'. Historically, whenever a government has inflated the money supply it turns into an unmitigated disaster (as in Ancient Rome). What we have now is just concentrating power in a few hands, taxing us secretly (using the worst tax imaginable), and destabalizing our economic system.
Ignorant or psychopathic are harsh words, but if you are not aware of this you need to get up to speed.
I like the way you put it, that people have tried to replace the system with disastrous results. I could argue that our present economic system is one such disaster, the disaster of an experiment with debt-based fiat currency.
Cheers,
Meade
Seriously?
— Jan 22, 2010
Chris, I'm sorry if you feel offended but I stand by what I said. These images show the cost of our current system:
I do consider anyone who thinks this is a reasonable price to pay, a psychopath or morally insane. These things are not a result of isolated abuses within a system that's basically OK. This is what the system does, inevitably, always. It is designed to concentrate wealth and power in very few hands and produce scarcity and debt for the majority. It also has built-in biases that ensure that the cleverest psychopaths always rise to the top.
You said, "I'm more interested in fixing a working but very imperfect system, rather than starting a new one. That's been often tried, often with ugly results." When was it tried? If you're refering to communism, that was still a coercive, currency-based system.
If you want to know why I called it a scam, check this out: Money as debt. This documentary: The Money Masters, gives a detailed account of the machinations of the people who created and maintain our monetary system. Zeitgeist Addendum is another wonderful analysis. If you haven't seen it, I'd recommend it most highly.
"Chris, I'm sorry if you
— Jan 22, 2010
"Chris, I'm sorry if you feel offended but I stand by what I said."
Less offended than saddened at such dismissive remarks. Being sure that we're right and the other side is wrong is a sure way to stop learning.
"These images show the cost of our current system:"
And what system has been shown to not have these problems or similar ones?
Note that these are all from countries with poorly functioning financial systems - not that it's simple cause and effect, but wealthy countries with strong financial systems and social systems (think of western European countries) have much less poverty and are more resilient against disaster. Their real problems are at the opposite end of the scale - over-consumption.
"If you want to know why I called it a scam, check this out: Money as debt."
I've listened to and watched such presentations over the years, on these and related ideas, and debated them with friends... Hearing one-sided presentations didn't appeal to me so much, and what I've seen and learnt since makes me question the "alternative" economics theories.
One of the most educational things has been having a very smart friend, who points out errors in reasoning during these presentations and discussions, and explains things very clearly. And sometimes says afterwards "I only studied economics for my Higher School Certificate, yet in most of these left-wing discussions about economics, I'm the most educated person in the room on the subject. It's very sad."
All this has mainly left me with a desire to understand economics better, which I'm doing slowly (this podcast series was great).
"When was it tried?" - Yes, communism is the classic example, and has been tried in various degrees flavors. Alternative systems are often (not always) coercive by their very nature.
Of course there are ideas about alternative currencies. I've only heard brief versions from their advocates, which were enough to interest me, but I'd like to know about them in a lot more depth, from a relatively objective source .
Links... Of course, the links you've given may be unlike all the other links I've looked at in the past... but I'll have a look. Sorry, the first video turns me right off - quotes with no context, simple judgments on complex issues. Looking at the intros to the others didn't appeal any more.
To be honest, I have a huge amount of work to get back to - we'll have to agree to disagree.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
Any attempt to address the
— Jan 23, 2010
Any attempt to address the problems of the world without seriously rethinking the financial system are pretty much pointless. Control of the money supply is control of the economy is control, ultimately, of you ... fine in theory I suppose, assuming that control is ultimately in the hands of a wise philosopher-king. Unfortunately for us it is not. It is in the hands of a cabal of degenerate antibuddhas who are gleefully raping us all blind, and you are apparently too busy to notice.
I'll also go so far as to say that if you aren't willing to look at these issues your website is worthless. If something as fundamental as how usury and fiat currency are warping our economic activity into counterproductive and even dangerous ends like, just for instance, industrial warfare ... if you don't get that, well, I don't know what to say really. This is kind of a litmus test for credibility, up there with questions like "Was 9/11 an inside job?" or "Monsanto: Just Unfortunate or the Pure Embodiment of Evil?", or "Is Zionism more like Apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany?"
I might even compare it to "2 + 2 = ?" Where of course the believer in the sanctity of interest as a business practice would answer "5".
Don't get me wrong. I'm not against markets per se: I see no reason markets of various kinds based on barter, time, or other principles to coexist alongside a strong gift economy. But the sort of 'free-market' neoliberal Washington consensus capitalism with a capital 'C' is a cancer in the soul of humanity that is driving it like a tragic god-maddened Greek hero into killing its mother. Humanity and its individual refractions have become the embodiment of greed or so it seems. The truth is that so-called greed is a madness brought on by the need to repay at interest the loans without which one could not have lived. Interest is like a drug, amplifying the innate and consuming greed of a few into the behavioural pathology of many.
Those countries you dismissively refer to as possessing poorly functioning financial systems? This is a surprise, shackled as they are to odious debts incurred by puppet rulers put there by our sponsored coups and kept in place by our secret assassins? Or perhaps it is simply that they are incompetent savages who haven't made the adjustment to modernity yet? Yes, of course. It is all their fault.
But why did we do these things in the first place? Why did this vampiric global Empire need to be built?
To turn a profit.
And why did we need to turn a profit?
Because we had to repay our loans to the bank.
And why do we have to repay loans to the bank?
Because they say so. That's why. And I guess that's good enough for you.
"Those countries you
— Jan 23, 2010
"Those countries you dismissively refer to as possessing poorly functioning financial systems? This is a surprise, shackled as they are to odious debts incurred by puppet rulers put there by our sponsored coups and kept in place by our secret assassins?"
I can understand that you'd read this between the lines of what I said, but if you read what I said, I was noting a lack, not who is responsible for the lack. Poorly functioning financial systems have many causes, including odious debts, foreign subversion, and rulers serving their own and/or foreign interests, but that doesn't greatly affect the point I was making.
Demurrage currency does look interesting - I won't even attempt to comment intelligently now, but will look at it later.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
The point being made is....
— Jan 22, 2010
If you follow the nature of this blog you see an outline of the hideous effects of currency in the world today. Further to this observation, we see a brief outline of a sensible, well constructed solution.
"Yes, anyone who understands the nature of fiat currencies knows them to be an obscene scam. You'd have to be ignorant or psychopathic to say otherwise."
If you have even a brief understanding of our world money markets Chris you can see the scam being alluded to. In short governments around the world are financed by the purchase of money from private banksters at considerable interest. Most governments, like America, have laws in place to prevent such a fraud from being committed. In fact you should know this money lending activity is in breach of the Constitution of America, the document you all hold most dear. Further to this insult, your economy is in complete collapse primarily due the the inability to service debt interest.
The scam mentioned represents how people who are in the know (like 13muluc) feel when they see 85% of their income tax being dedicated to service and ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, UNJUST, debt. Paid directly into the coffers of the wealthy Illuminati banksters from the sweat of my work. If that does not make you feel like an obscene scam has been perpetrated then I suggest you speak to people who are a little more educated.
Alas there is the fallout of such travesties Chris. The average person works far more for far less, this is a reality. Money lining the pockets of the elite few could be well spent to ensure food, lodging, warmth, medical care and support to all people of the planet. I won't go into detail about the structure of this Illuminati machine and how this same debt service money is used to poison and dumb you down or make you sterile.
Oh, by the way, you suggest you have never heard of such a system that works. Well all you need to do is visit my family. We don't charge our children for food, we love each other, help each other and care for each other. We make sure everyone is treated with equality. I submit to you most famlies around the world act the same way we do. I am sure your family Chris conducts themselves in much the same manner. If we are capable of seeing reality, we then understand there are not 6.8 billion people on the planet there is only ONE. One being, one essence all brothers choosing to live free of fear with unconditional love for all.
You want to fix a system that is working. My God man how can you imagine this sysyem is working.
It is only working for the elite few Chris. They are quickly enslaving men and nations alike. I submit to you Chris the end game of what you consider a working system is a steady diet of control, fear and tyranny.
13muluc is my wife Chris, I have 6 years of post secondary education along with an honors diploma from high school. As it happens my field of study was business finance with a minor in marketing. After formal school I have had, for most years, my nose in books. Science, philosophy, theology and spirituality for the most part. I am almost 50 years of age Chris, I can tell you without conceit that I am a smart cookie. My wife Chris, is by far, the most intelligent person I know. We each have our intillectual strengths of course but I guess it is just that she reads so very much it is hard to keep up.
I don't know what type of intillectual circles you follow, however I can assure you many miles would have to be travelled to find someone more intillegent than 13muluc.
Namaste, my brother Chris, knowledge is power.
GodIAm: "Further to this
— Jan 22, 2010
GodIAm:
"Further to this insult, your economy is in complete collapse primarily due the the inability to service debt interest."
Actually my nation's economy is going extremely well, and only dipped slightly during the recent crisis. I'm enjoying the universal health care, too. Perhaps you've made a false assumption about where I'm from?
The recent leader of our country was evil but mostly smart, as opposed to evil and foolish. The new govt handled the economic crisis pretty well. (Yes I could find many, many things to criticize, but compared to history and to other nations, the recovery has been good.)
"Well all you need to do is visit my family. "
We talked about families earlier in the thread - I can't see how this is really relevant to national-scale reform, unless you want to get into how to build national level trust (social capital) equivalent to a family's social capital.
"It is only working for the elite few Chris. They are quickly enslaving men and nations alike."
This seems to be a pattern through most economic systems, and I don't think the current system is particularly bad by historical standards. Certainly equity has worsened since the 1980s, and that's serious. There are the issues of how we grow* the pie, and how we share the pie - I'd love to know more about cases where both have been improved.
"I submit to you most famlies around the world act the same way we do."
Many do, but I know many that don't - I'm glad for you if you haven't experienced this. My own is not too bad (at least since the abusive member of the family is no longer around) but plenty of families are horror stories. I'm thinking mostly of where I've lived in poor communities, in a country without legal protections against domestic abuse - which relates to my earlier point about the creation of abundance being important in helping the gift economy to grow.
I'm not casting aspersions on anyone's intelligence - I've seen poor arguments put forward by very intelligent people, and I've known to put forward poor arguments myself. I like to correct them, and hope to continue to do so. The video links given, IMO, don't give convincing arguments.
If it's okay for others to throw out sweeping comments about others being "ignorant or psychopathic" then I think my own comments have been extremely mild.
Peace and understanding are in the whole of a person's communication, not merely in the signature.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
...
— Jan 22, 2010
Hey Chris, I think it would be more fruitful to talk about something specific you disagree with? That would take up less space and be a lot less frustrating, IMO.
As for links... lets check out Wikipedia. Since Fiat Currency is what sparked your disagreement, try looking at that first and then we can have a discussion about the wikipedia article. If you disagree with any history than I'm sure the good folks here would be happy to talk about that too.
You can also check out Wikipedia's article on Demurrage currency... especially the experiment in Wörgl, Austria during the great depression (which ended by it being shut down by the central bank monopoly). You can probably google that one too.
Demurrage is still currency, but it is intrinsically a lot closer to what 13 is suggesting, than debt-based fiat currency. This is because when money itself disappears in your hands, it becomes less of an object itself and there is more incentive for giving it away (spending) and using it to repair/upgrade equipment.
Cheers,
Meade
Thanks Rob - I appreciate
— Jan 23, 2010
Thanks Rob - I appreciate the suggestions. As I said, much work to do, but will see how I go in the next few days.
I was giving some quick responses to problems I saw in the argument (e.g. equating of family and larger communities, putting negative labels on people with different opinions) but I agree that these specific leads could be more constructive.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
I stand corrected...
— Jan 23, 2010
You are absolutely right, I assumed you were from America. However you are a person of this planet Chris and your taxes for the most part do go toward servicing your nations interest debt. Take a close look at you countries financial balance sheet over the last 60 years. I have not closely looked at the Aussie debt so I cannot comment from a perspective of fact. With that said I would suspect you will easily find a point where your government began using private banking for the supply of Australian monies. From that fateful day of monetary enslavement you will no doubt notice a sharp and unsustainable escalation of debt.
I wish for you a day where you may be more open to consideration of global conspiracy issues. Possibly you may wish to have such information provided by a fellow countryman. It so happens one of my favorite conspiracy revealers is an Aussie gentleman named Max Igan, please enjoy some of his work. If you can find a way to get through the entire video you may change your views. Best of luck Chris, and best regards.
Max Igan, The Calling Know Your World, 8 parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxjTA78LJ38&feature=PlayList&p=43793AD096...
Namaste, my brother Chris, from darkness a little light...
Open source is going to be a
— Jan 21, 2010
Open source is going to be a huge part of this, especially as desktop manufacturing technology hits its stride. People will mostly make what they need, simply downloading open source blueprints and printing them off in fabs. Designers will contribute blueprints out of the same motivations that lead to open source software, ie ego: design something cool, that lots of people want to use and modify, and the kudos will be payment enough ... especially when the designers can get almost everything they need for free, from the web.
The Revolution is Within
Making it happen
— Jan 22, 2010
In principle I'd be open to supporting other solutions, such as demerrage currency, since they would be an improvement over what we've got. They don't addess the real root of the problem, but I'm not so stubborn that I would hold out for perfection. No system is perfect anyway. But, when it comes to actually making them happen... Well, I'm pretty sure TPTB would resist, and their cooperation would be needed, barring violent revolution. MINO, on the other hand, could be set up at very little cost as a precaution against economic collapse. Then, as soon as a sufficient majority agreed to it in principle, we just declare it on-line and start to use it. The money elite would be defenceless against it, since all their power comes from their control of money. Even though they claim to own the means of production, they don't know how to shut it down. They don't know how to build it and they don't know how to maintain it. Their employees do all that, and their employees are us.
I wish I had the skills to set up the on-line resource myself. I was hoping that someone who did have those skills would get excited about it and volunteer.
Well .... I hadn't thought
— Jan 23, 2010
Well .... I hadn't thought of it in those terms to be honest. Those are some interesting strategic benefits.
I too wish I had the skills to get it up and running.
To what Chris said above, about it not being so bad in Australia: neither is it so terrible here in Canada, my friend, which is where I, 13, and godiam are from. Our Quisling leader (for prime minister though he be he is no servant of ours) may have shut down our parliament, our economy may be on the rocks but as it stands the social structure is proving resilient. Things are not so bad as they are becoming in the States and I have faith that will continue to be the case as Canadians are less poisoned and dumbed-down than the citizens of that troubled land. In Australia you have a generally healthy and alert citizenry, and the advantage of additional distance from the Beast and so weather this storm you will and well, I think.
But only if you too recognize and act on the solutions to the root problems, and the money economy is one of the biggies.
The Revolution is Within
"In Australia you have a
— Jan 23, 2010
"In Australia you have a generally healthy and alert citizenry, and the advantage of additional distance from the Beast and so weather this storm you will and well, I think."
I once had a certain pride in Australia, and believed that our national myths of egalitarianism and a "fair go" had a strong basis in fact, and that we were more skeptical and aware of the world, especially compared to Americans. But the 2001 election shattered my illusions about that. Australians are as easily deceived as others; I don't know if the physical distance helps, though at least we're well aware of a world outside of North America.
Another lesson for me has been working with fantastic people, very enlightened and working to make a difference, who happen to be Americans.
So, I don't know that we're ny more healthy and alert down here, sadly.
--
Appropedia.org - building and sharing solutions for the planet
...
— Jan 24, 2010
We are setting up an online resource right now, it's just that we need to learn how to walk before we learn how to run. I think the web in it's current form could easily evolve into a full-fledged gift economy, however, it just needs to be a supplemental economy first, the main reason being that we still operate in a traditional world where you need cash to send things in the mail, drive your car, pay your taxes, etc.
For example... the way I see people using an online resource for gifting is much like the way people use ebay, with a healthy "feedback" system in place to prevent abuse. And it's also combined with the skills people develop in places like Facebook, Evolver, and even World of Warcraft, sadly to say.
So we're really already volunteering and building up the skills we need. But in order for the system to completely turn over, we need a complete paradigm shift or for things to just collapse economically where the money supply shrinks or hyperinflates. (and in a complete emergency situation, the internet may not be functioning... but the gift economy still can).
Cheers,
Meade
Well, it's hard to defend
— Jan 23, 2010
Well, it's hard to defend generalizations however, judging from the Aussies and the Yanks that I've met there's really no comparison. Sure, Australia has plenty of its own ignorant sheeple, and the US has its share of intelligent, informed citizens. But it's all a matter of degree.
Water fluoridation is a good yardstick of this: virtually every community in the US practices this barbaric custom, and almost no one questions it (it's for your teeth!), whereas in Australia it was only recently brought in and this was done against massive protest.
Don't fool yourself, though. Australia is every bit as controlled by the Illuminati as the States is. They just haven't put as much effort into subverting and enslaving you.
The Revolution is Within
http://www.reinventingmoney.c
— Jan 23, 2010
http://www.reinventingmoney.com/documents/MoneyEbook.pdf
I like the way this guy talks. I would be interested in people's opinion about this.
I personally do not think that it serves us in this blog to speak about how to do things better on a global scale. In fact I feel it is the opposite.
I feel that what we can do is help one another to find ways of building and re-building our communities along sustainable ideas.
At the moment, in America, there are a growing number of communities who find their own way. They basically just reduce their visibility to Washington, even to their own state, and live as they see fit. There are banks who refuse to get into the Federal Reserve System, for instance. (Bank of Floyd, Floyd, VA) There are farmers who collectivize their resources and man hours and provide for their community directly, rather than leasing themselves out to Tyson or WalMart.
When we look outwardly, to what is going on around the world financially as well as socially, we can see the train wreck that is going on.
I started a business in Germany in the mid 90s. I scrabbled together a significant portion of a million dollars to do something that looked real good to everyone I asked about it. And within a few months it was clear to me it was going to fail.
I do not want to talk about why or how it failed. My point in bringing it up is that the process of it failing took over two years. Me, one guy in an office, took two years to play out the end game of debt and interest and a terminal need for growth.
What we see in the world economy now, has been visible and foreseeable for quite a few years.
There is no stopping this. We will not get a grip on the debt we have incurred and will incur. We will not be able to repay the debt that is outstanding. In the USA, I am not sure how it is in Europe or other places other than England, but in the USA and England, we the people, are the collateral for the debt our governments incur. This is the purpose for our social security number. Like the value in currencies, it is true as long as we accept that it is true. And like the value of money, if it is not true for us as individuals, we have to decide that and make our actions harmonize with what truth we do know.
For myself, I believe that all people who are conscious enough to have this discussion should be looking at ways to make their own unique community function sustainably, without recourse to any federal government. And further, that our interactions with one another online here, should be geared toward finding solutions to those local issues that need to be resolved by all.
I think that happens, sporadically anyway. I registered with evolver to find out if there is anything concrete developing in the online world along these lines. I care not for ideologies or politics or rightness or wrongness.
It seems to me that the most likely scenario we are looking at in the western world is one where we will have to do what I am suggesting because the governments are going to be fighting for their lives with everyone who owns their debt. They will come under increasing stresses to handle those national emergencies that seem to come with increasing frequency. (Like massive cold fronts followed by massive earthquake followed by massive flooding and mudslides followed by?... in addition to the wars being carried overtly or covertly)
I guess my larger point about this thread is that it is almost on point, from my perspective. It is just that to me there seems little point to argue about what kind of world system would work better. I am not interested in a world monetary system, and I don't think any of you are either when you get right down to it.
great ideas
— Jan 24, 2010
thank you for thinking through and presenting such a radical idea, and ideal. i too have voiced this thought to my circle of friends, and they all think i am crazy, that we need money to live. well i believe we do not. and you have outlined in some detail how it may work. one question i have, and it may have been addressed, i just did not read all responses, there are a lot, is how do we, you or i implement this course of action? it seems to me that we would all, like the whole world? have to agree to now stop using money and everyone will now work on a voluntary basis. do what you love and love what you do, plus assist in maintaining the services and amenities that we have all grown used to in this modern post industrial, informational society. do we you or i start small, like a community that functions without money? or an individual who tries to live without money? i'm not sure how to start this, and one more question. has anyone else suggested this is a sure path to anarchy, which i highly promote in my own life.
truetalk
Hello Truetalk
— Jan 24, 2010
Thank you for your response. I'd like to respond at length to your questions. I intend to do so in a whole new blog. I might not post it to Evolver but it will be here: Looking Glass World for sure, sometime this week, maybe tomorrow.
In Lak'ech
