Post
Heres the thought. Money is this incessive anoying middle man. If you want anything done you have to go through him. In all accounts all he is doing is holding us back. If you want to study something you need to go to him first. Want to move to another place on this planet he is the one that tells you you can or cant. Its like its soul purpose is to inhibit us. Its our own little reason of life. Because without money you cant survive (in general). And most crimes comitted on this planet are about money. So wats the alternative? For me its like a enclosed community. Something working on a supply on demand principle. You join the community and get to work in wat you love. Then everything everyone makes or does is for the benefit of the community. It would all be guided through some form of goverment otherwise not everyone would get wat they need. Basicley everything is free aslong as you help create and maintain it. Even todays luxaries could be inclueded. This would have to be
Hizzey Hizzey 22-25, M 11 Answers Nov 24, 2012 in Politics

Your Response

Cancel

Some people live without money. They live in very remote areas and their lives a tenuous but they live without money.<br />
<br />
Um there are no solutions other than the retun of Jesus and a changed humanity. <br />
<br />
People have tried some of the things you mentioned and it always ends with some dictator ruling over the people with the backing of a pack of brutal secret police. <br />
<br />
Idealistic ventures always end like that because ldealisim denys the reality that in any group of people, there are always crafty scumbags who will manipulate and corrupt any theoretical community that is established.

Best Answer

no we can't and the enclosed community sounds good at first but then it grows exponentialy and there is way to many people for the system to work properly and management becomes a hassle and it falls apart ie society today

Best Answer

I was talking about a global implementation. Otherwise we would have to sack a lot of our modern luxaries.
The more people you have the more you can produce and design. Though having said that people would have to deal with this maturely and not get taken by greed.

Best Answer

the produce and design might not be sufficient for all and trade or the barter system will not work if every one has the same things and greed sadly will always remain

Best Answer

Go to forest and hunt- u need a money only if you stuck in civilisation ;)

Best Answer

Point is there is to many people on this planet to do that.
Im talking about maintaining a modern civilisation.

Best Answer

hm. well, what would you do with ppl who like to do nothing?

Best Answer

Everyone likes to do something. Lying on your back doesnt feel good. Instead of working for personal gain (money) youd work for the rest of the community in watever field you like. And get schooled and thought wat you need for it. Everyone would have the chance to do a job he finds meaningful. Its a realy idealistic view ill give you that. And i dont think mankind will leave its dependance on money that easely

Best Answer

True. But how will you make sure not all of us stuck in for exmpl art?

Best Answer

Because not everyone is into art. Not every person would want to do the same. With schooling now people are allready learning towards wat they want to do. Without beying forced into learning (in most cases), sometimes sadly you just cant do wat you want and will have to find the next best thing.

Best Answer

true but lazy ppl who want to avoid doing anything will go for art. I know that for a fact because I am artist and I know many ppl in my organization who r there just to do - nothing. So let's say you can't control that. But it was a nice try :)And if you tell them- ok, you're not a artist go for a "next best thing" u will get society same as it is today :)

Best Answer

Except without money holding back anything.
Spaceflight would simply be a choice to go for. Supply lines that have to be build will just be build. All you have to do would be manage your resources and man power. There simply would be one less thing to worry about. :)

Best Answer

it was like that before we knew- money got it's full importance just recently - so we sould go back to beggining- and tell me is anyone into jobs like cleaning public places,toilets, taking care of mentaly ill ppl, serving drinks .. who would do that?

Best Answer
5 More Responses

What you are describing is a "Commune." Trendy and useful for small cooperative groups but not feasible on the large scale. Hence the fall of Communism...

Best Answer

Didnt communism fall because of lack of money?
Point is you cant do it as a small group. At this time it wouldnt work unless its globally implemented (or you absolutlely minimize life to its bear essentials). Since the obvious problems trading with another community who does work with money gives.

Best Answer

I'm having trouble finding it, but there's a documentary on Youtube somewhere I saw about an experimental commune in Britain, run by homeless people and disillusioned youngsters and hippies. It's basically a communal shantytown where everybody has to pitch in to take care of each other. It works because everybody wants to be there and wants to make it work. But It wouldn't work for everybody. They take a lot of donated food and aren't very productive people. It's possible, but very impractical and economically inefficient.

Best Answer

no. live is all about good and evil

Best Answer

Money is a tool to facilitate the exchange of commodies. I believe it is necessary because different products have different value, and exchanging equal value for equal value is difficult and may saddle you with an excessive amount of something. Of course, that only holds for a capitalistic enclave, and what you're suggesting is a socialist enclave.<br />
<br />
The problem I have with a socialist enclave is somebody is bound to slack off and not do their share of the work. Should they still be able to access the same value of commodities as those who do pull their weight?

Best Answer

The last part is the same thing im stuck on. But by all accounts something like this cant be implemented by one person and will have to be analyzed scrutinized and optimized by many.

Best Answer

Correct. In order to pull it off, I believe you have to have an actual "popular vote" instead of a group of elected representatives, else the representatives themselves would be guilty of slacking off.

Best Answer

For me,no.I will die because of lacking food.Only money can buy food.

Best Answer

Related Questions