andyh wrote:
I do not want the present system to continue as it is and you know how I think a major issue with it can be dealt with. Yet you write as if I am a supporter of the status quo, which is a lie. Who is to say your system will not mean we need chips in our arms, especially since you envisage us all working for one big company.

SilvaRizla wrote:
I believe this has been answered by both of us, albeit indirectly.
If you bother to read the thread again, do start by watching the video again because you've either made false assumptions about it or have ignored its content.
At no point in the video does it say we should stop working now & everything will be ok. It's a philosophical look at why work is often to the detriment of life itself, and suggests we should be finding ways to work towards alleviating/minimalising it altogether.
I perhaps should have added at the beginning of the thread that this video was on TVPs (not TPV! ) page to give a clearer indication of its intent.

mikey mikey wrote:
Many works of art, discoveries and inventions were made by people who either had wealth, so the time to work on such, or they became very wealthy from their art etc. In any case, necessity is the mother of invention, not hobbies.

The rest of your post is made of straw.

You mean like the straw that says that I advocate slavery?

Barnfish wrote:
If all of us put our money into building societies then they could just go 100% digital and charge everything via visa cards.
Job done, 100% digital.

What do you do now? See what I mean? The money in this bank or that bank is quite futile as of its own.
Pulling it all out as cash and hiding it under the mattress or whatever is no good either as they'd just have an amnesty period to hand over the no longer legal tender in exchange for 'genuine' universally accepted legal tender electronic credits.

And it doesn't matter what currency its denoted in either..pounds, euro, once its digital its all the same to the bankers. Total world domination. Its in the bag.

Barnfish wrote:

I know andy well enough to be able to state that he has a vision of us all working as part of the human race and the universe that provides for us.
Your post is either a misunderstanding of his vision or a deliberate misrepresentation. Either way it's...

@andy - I have kept reading and whilst I utterly accept that it was in reference to the whole dif thing and I know you to not be 'that guy' it really did read like that - even to someone who is well aware of the history - in light of the explanation though am more than happy for my post to be removed as you have already addressed the issue


No one should ever work...

Under the current system work for many does not pay leaving billions of people in poverty and the resources kept firmly controlled by a select few for the benefit of a select few. So under the current system my answer is fuck work!!

Money

As a token of exchange I actually think money is a great idea - it does not have to be a coin it could be literally anything - but a standardised means of exchange that people have confidence in certainly saves a lot of hassle.

What I do take issue with is who controls the means of exchange and who sets the value for what. We appear to have a very skewed idea of what is 'valuable' and what is not so 'valuable' I am also not a fan of betting on future events as a means of creating wealth when the 'game' is rigged.

Mondragon model

Mondragon has most certainly attempted to do things differently and move in the right direction - it is not without its criticisms though and appears to not be living up to its objectives if any of the critiques of it are to be believed. Of interest in relation to this thread is that it would appear that as it got larger and branched out that it has lost some of its core values.unhealthyworkblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01...tion-criticisms.html (one example of a critique of mondragon many more available via google)

I do however like the core values of mondragon where decisions are worker led and there are no shareholders to suck the profits away from the workers.

Greed

One thing that many idealistic people (of which I am one) appear to dismiss is peoples greed and our inability to see past surface differences - which is a huge stumbling block to achieving equality. The big question is whether or not we can make change to the system before we achieve a sense of non financial related equality or whether we have to wait for such a shift in perceptions before we can change the system.

Administering any new system

On a small scale administering any sort of system is easier than on a large or international scale - a small group of 20 people could happily co exist bartering and sharing without too many big issues if all are committed to that lifestyle change - as groups grow bigger and the needs of individuals become more diverse there will need to be some sort of administration involved.

Supply and demand

One of the things that people never seem to address when talking about possible changes is supply and demand. If everyone wants to be a poet and no one wants to clean out the cesspit then those who are willing to clean out a cesspit become more valuable. So the question becomes do you rely on people to do the right thing and share the responsibility and work required to do the 'shitty' jobs, do you remunerate those willing to do such jobs with a greater share in reflection of the fact that there are so few willing or do you force everyone to share the load?

Conclusion

My idea of the perfect system requires a complete shift in people before it would be able to actually work. The seven deadly sins as it were would need to be removed from the collective psyche or any new endeavor would be doomed to fail on any large scale.

Bankers "work" because they get a salary.

You're not a slave, because you either work and get a "salary" or suffer and slowly die.

[/fruitloop]

andyh wrote: Sorry to put me pedant hat on again but, tender is a verb. A 'legal tender' is an offering to another party for goods or services that is accepted by the other party.
It is not a bit of paper or a byte of data.

Of itself, legal tender is not a 'bad' thing. It's just that it's an unnecessary obstruction to true 'free' trade and more importantly, freedom. It also requires the threat of a 'higher' force. A judiciary. A government.
Yeah ok. It is a bad thing

No thor, I think your post should stay, helps for clarification.
Sometimes you can be too sly, lol. Well for text anyway, ofc its easier to detect the humour if you see someone face to face and know them well etc.

And I also agree that Mondragon is not a perfect model and I've stated as much earlier. Specifically in reference to that some of the 'employees' are not direct shareholders because they chose speed over principles to aid expansion in some crucial areas, particularly abroad (they have some supermarkets for instance that are not in Mondragon but owned by the corporation) so you are quite correct to state that.

I'm also impressed you have looked into it that much so.. :hat tip icon needed here:

dubmeup wrote:
Well whatever you care to call it tbh, they'll have an amnesty period and say it can't be used anymore and that'll be the end of it.
The BoE mint will stop the press and gradually they'll be taken out of circulation over a given period, just like replacing old banknotes I suppose.

thoreau wrote:
Tbf to you there thor, you raise a good point. Anyone who was unaware of the contextual use, would clearly assume they were witnessing anti-semitism.
This to me links in with things like jargon, assumed cognizance by the writer, on the part of the reader.

That is a dangerous way to post on the internet i feel. I feel it best to post as if the new reader was completely unaware. I know folk will likely say, I don't post for guests or anyone else. But we do still have a responsibility for the words we use online. They do affect others.

andyh wrote:
I suppose that's one way of using technology to take away the need for jobs.

Space Bandit wrote:
Well they're already sacking loads of bank clerks and regional offices all over the place....ofc the excuse is to save money...while they INCREASE the bonuses...
Barclays sack 12000 people ffs...
www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/02/uk...421111531817602.html

Can someone explain again how this is giving people jobs?

andyh wrote: I fully agree that's how it will be attempted. There are precedents in even recent history of such shifts.
My point is though that so long as people keep confidence in the bits of paper, they could lawfully still use them. They wouldn't even be minting them. Just passing them around. There would have to be statute to criminalize possession of those bits of paper to effectively kill off the 'resistance'. Which will ofc happen. As will the drones that take out the chaff.

I think we can all agree, selling your labor for an income is the fairest way to operate, we do it in the west, Mondragon employees do it, communist China does it, I'd rather work in the UK or USA and have access to easy credit than live in Red China or Basque Spain.

dubmeup wrote:
How far we have come since DIF!

simulacra wrote:

mikey mikey wrote:
Should people be paid for their work? If the answer is no, you advocate slavery. So should people be paid?

See what I mean?

Straw.