andyh wrote:
It's no biggie, but I don't think there's anything about saying you need money that in any way contradicts Marx.

Well like I said, I think it depends on the context of "need". We don't "need" it to have effective socieites & stuff, but right here, right now you "need" it, I "need" it & Mike "needs" it.
If you feel you really don't "need" it, please pm me your bank account details. I promise to spend it wisely.

Mike wrote:
So do you but you just expect it for free from the state. (tax people who bother to work pay for)

It is theoretically possible to provide internet access for free, power for free, food for free etc provided that everyone participated in creating it all.
For the enjoyment of it and free choice of participation in what you actually want to do instead of what you are restricted to doing that pays enough to get by with. Theres nothing stopping putting this into motion right now other than the vested interests of those at the top who would rather things remain the way they are, which oddly enough you support as some kind of bizarre unemployed marxist who supports fractional reserve and keeping the elite the way they are and silencing any and all dissent or mention of 'conspiracy theory'.

dogsmilk wrote:
There is need and there is want and they are two totally different things.
Unfortunately somewhere along the line people forgot what they were taught at school and decided to equate two different words as having some kind of doublespeak meaning.

EDIT: www.socialstudiesforkids.com/articles/ec...s/wantsandneeds1.htm
^Explanation for kiddies.

Mike wrote:
- therefore, the internet only exists because of money.

Space Bandit wrote:
Absolutely yeah, without money the entire universe would disappear because it needs money, obviously lol.

(say anything, absolutely anything to avoid brain coming to startlingly scary conclusion)

andyh wrote:
That's a bit disingenuous Andy.

So you'd agree we all need food to survive, right? So how do I get food? I only have a back yard that cannot possibly sustain the growing of crops. And that back yard came with a house that cost tens of thousands of pounds and I'm still paying for. I cannot start digging up land and growing things on it because I'd need to buy said land or get them removed and me possibly arrested for digging up someone else's property. I guess I could rummage through bins, but you can get arrested for doing that.
I need clothes - even if I learned how to make them, I need the raw materials and relevant tools.
In theory I could maybe survive without money, but without the capital to establish my self-sufficient utopia, it would be a miserable, desperate existence.

I totally agree money is overall a shit idea. And I mean ALL money, not some 'we should all barter' bullshit - that's still money for people with a money mentality. But right here and right now we both need it. I kind of suspect it's only because you're reasonably well off that you think the way you do. Because if you have money, it can stop seeming so important. If you don't it becomes very important indeed. Try telling somebody whose benefit has just been stoppped or who has just lost their job they don't need money. If Mike lives on benefits, he will know the importance of money because he has to get by on a small amount and understands the consequences of its absence.
People in countries without a health service can literally die because they don't have the money they need for treatment. How could you say they don't need money?

dogsmilk wrote:
In theory yes. The theory has to be put to the test.

money.cnn.com/2010/12/01/news/economy/fe...ta_release/index.htm

^ If you prefer this kind of thing by all means just say so, otherwise I guess we're in agreement.

andyh wrote:
?

I'm not sure of the relevance.

Andy, all I'm saying is:

1/Money is a shit idea. In fact, measuring everything along the lines of who owes who what is a shit idea however it's done. But one incredibly deep in our consciousness through being indoctrinated into the ideology of money.

2/The fact I think that does not mean the electricity bill will go away or I can default on my mortgage payments without consequences. And the same goes for you. You have a small business that makes money to support you & your family. If that revenue stream vanished totally tomorrow, I'd wager you would not be a happy man.

We don't "need" money as humans and our societies would probably be far fairer and more pleasant without it and its psychological trappings.

We do "need" money to live our current day to day existence because neither you nor I can overturn capitalism

dogsmilk wrote: Correct yep and we're in total agreement there.

Depends on the situation, if the world went to hell in a handbasket tomorrow it would be just desserts and I'd be happy that people would begin to learn a hard lesson, perhaps have something good come of it. Denial will never solve anything.
It is from my experience something self employed people are more aware of than either the standard employed or the unemployed because the self employed get to see some inner workings of the system not to mention are naturally more self reliant and headstrong in many cases.

Actually 2 of us cannot. 100 million probably could. You should be working towards that number if its in your own interests to do so.

andyh wrote: Yes I know, I've said as much, you've been the one in this thread bullshitting to yourself and others that you don't.

Emma Goldman

Mike wrote:
You 'want' money because everyone else 'wants' money.
When you understand the difference you can probably consider it a step on the path to full adulthood and responsibility which you seem to hate so much

*for response see my avatar*

Mike wrote:
lol, plenty of people can embrace and understand the logic of it, dogsmilk clearly has above.
'We don't "need" money as humans and our societies would probably be far fairer and more pleasant without it and its psychological trappings.'

Thats all that needs saying about it. Note how he says 'fairer and more pleasant' he doesn't bother with any of the usual 'utopian bollox'.
I don't see why you can't see the same thing.

Mike wrote:
Nice pic

andyh wrote:
What 'lesson' would they learn? Of course I guess it's how the world went to hell in a handcart.

What has self-employment got to do with anything? It's just another facet of the same system. And one I'm not sure what 'inner workings' of anything it makes you privy to. Do you get free admission to Whitehall or something?
I'm also not sure how it makes you inherently 'self-reliant'. Ok you don't get sick pay, holiday pay or compassionate leave, but I spent a short spell working as technically self-employed via one of those payroll companies and I don't feel it made me more self-reliant. I just paid very little tax and missed out on a lot of benefits in return. I know an unemployed guy who lives in a tent. That's pretty hardcore.

I do try. 100 million is a big number though. I might be able to manage 10 or so.

dogsmilk wrote:
The lesson would be to learn to co-operate, to be pro-active instead of inactive. To be self reliant instead of reliant on crumbs off the rich mans table.
If you're self employed then you know how to offset tax, and if you see how easily its done for a small guy then you get to realise how much more magnified it is for the big guys and then ofc you realise that the big guys are not pulling their weight and if they're not pulling their weight then what is the point of the system?
Normal PAYE employed people (and the unemployed) do not have this first hand explicit knowledge of how fucked up and biased the system is. The guys at the top rely on the guys in the middle playing ball.

I've been doing it for almost a decade, bit of a difference when you have a wife and 4 kids to support with bugger all state help for a decade dm
You don't just start to see the world differently you feel it differently.
It can go either way I guess, you can go all daily mail or you can go the complete opposite which is what I did.


10 is 10 more than Gue/Mike will manage to convince of anything. Good job.
Its just a drop in an ocean but an ocean is simply lots of drops. Don't give up is the message tbh, rage against the dying of the light.

andyh wrote:
Your right Andy as human beings we do not love each other enough this is why we need money because if you do not have money to pay for roof over our heads ,food,etc then we are screwed. Unless we become religious Muslims,mormons,christians etc seem to really look after each other if they are part of the same congregation.

We could also learn alot from the Asian community who really stick together. Ive worked in care homes up and down the country and its rare you see Asian families putting their elderly family members in to care homes.

foonclown wrote:
Well I don't think we need to be religious to do whats right, if anything atheists and agnostics can be some of the most humanistic people around and they don't care what 'congregation' you are or what colour you are or what nationality you are or what gender you are or what age you are.

Spirituality is whats important, religion is something I detest because it is something that seeks to dampen it as does any form of authority except for the authority of the inner voice.
If religion was truly spiritual then it would be flexible.

Dogsmilk what does this Jargon actually mean?
"incredibly deep in our consciousness through being indoctrinated into the ideology of money."

It means we don't know any better. Why don't you read it as that?