Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The problem with money

Posted 8 years ago on Oct. 12, 2011, 1:02 a.m. EST by Coreupt (294)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

It's fake. Its a myth just like religion.

Technology is the impetus for the dawning of the new era. For the first time all of humanity can instantaneously communicate on a global scale. We can control our birth rate with the use of safe effective birth control. We have the resources to feed and house the world’s population. Most all human suffering is manmade or worsened by greed and lack of empathy. Technology has also given us the ability choose our destiny. We can continue the current trajectory: depletion of resources, growing inequalities and war. Or, we can choose a new way.

The path to enlightenment, equality, and sustenance is attainable with a united movement. Part of that movement is time bank. Time bank is a network of humanity. Organized on line. Completely transparent. All inclusive. Hour in. Hour out. That’s it. No person’s hour is more or less valuable than another.

A worldwide time bank can be started now. With enough participation it can catalyze the transition from the current corrupt monetary system to a society where money is irrelevant and each person is valued. Fear and greed will paralyze this movement. Hope and imagination can propel it.

Time is the Substance from which I am made. – Jorge Luis Borges

383 Comments

383 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by itsallcosmic (22) 8 years ago

i love this ! a friend of mine had been talking about this months and months ago. i put this on my blog, thank you for posting it ! read this, if you get the chance:

http://itsallcosmic.com/2011/10/04/pluto-in-capricorn/

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

With modern machinery (abundance) there's no need to barter or hoard.

Half the ppl in U$A work at unnecessary jobs (cashier, banker, insurance, salesmen, etc.)

Technocracy not politicians

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

I still ask you, what incentive is there for someone to stand in a field picking peaches for 12 hour days, if he could instead spend that same 12 hours at a desk.

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

not everyone wants to work at a desk . . . I picked cherries in Fruit Heights, UT, apples in Chelan washington, lemons in Yuma AZ . . . it didn't pay much. with modern machinery (something that didn't exist 130-years ago) farming doesn't employ many ppl. half those farmers are raising food for pigs & cows (corn & soybeans). last I looked, only about 1,000,000 ppl worked in farming (maybe 2M if U include field crops like corn & soybeans). Kids used to get summers off to help on the farm.

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

My point is that money is what keeps people doing the really horrid jobs that need doing. Money is what keeps enough people working in the fields and the sewers. People do those jobs because they HAVE to, because they won't eat if they don't. That need to eat is what keeps people in the mines and on the oil rigs. People need to be hungry enough to do those jobs or our whole society will fall apart. And technology will never, ever remove the need for at least some forms of human labor.

[-] 3 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Money is what keeps them enslaved.

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

ever hear of altruism? ever do anything for nothing but the good feeling U get? ever want to set a good example? ever want to make this world a better place for ur children? ever want to feel like a hero? ppl need to create and be active or they will stagnate & die or kill themselves with alcohol & cigarettes. there are many volunteers working today for nothing.

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

Frankly, I don't think you're going to find enough altruistic people willing to do those jobs. Supply and demand, you know.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Like the post says greed and fear will paralyze this movement. Hope and imagination can propel it. It seems to me that you fear your fellow human. What in you life have you encountered that has you so disillusioned with the nature of man. Perhaps you and I are simply philosophically different in that I believe that man is born good but our society teaches us to be selfish and greedy.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

revolution

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

everybody says that but everybody that says that is altruistic.

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

The Gospel of Eliminating Money: http://666ismoney.com/MoneyQuotes.html

[-] 1 points by indivisible (89) from Leeds, England 8 years ago
[-] 1 points by wweddingMadeintheUSA (135) 8 years ago

We need to boycott imported goods buy made in the USA!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by frankchurch1 (839) from Jersey City, NJ 8 years ago

Guess who wrote this:

"“Calvin Coolidge once said that ‘the chief business of the American people is business,’ and indeed, it would be hard to find a country on earth that’s been more consistently hospitable to the logic of the marketplace. Our Constitution places the ownership of private property at the very heart of our system of liberty. Our religious traditions celebrate the value of hard work and express the conviction that a virtuous life will result in material rewards. Rather than vilify the rich, we hold them up as role models…As Ted Turner famously said, in America money is how we keep score.”

“The result of this business culture has been a prosperity that’s unmatched in human history….America may have been blessed with some of the planet’s best real estate, but clearly it’s not just our natural resources that account for our economic success. Our greatest asset has been our system of social organization, a system that for generations has encouraged constant innovation, individual initiative and efficient allocation of resources…our free market system.”

Barack Obama. Sad. So much for his latent socialism.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Passion, not money drives innovation. innovation regresses when people don't follow their passion for fear of not making enough of the only accepted form of compensation. Money is manipulated to appear scarce while opportunity abounds.

[-] 1 points by frankchurch1 (839) from Jersey City, NJ 8 years ago

Government mostly funds innovation.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

It matters not from where the funds come. Innovation is a product of passion. More passion equates to more innovation.

[-] 1 points by frankchurch1 (839) from Jersey City, NJ 8 years ago

We tend to fund the wrong things. Laser guided missiles instead of laser guided innovation.

But don't forget, car companies killed the first electric car. Some innovation gets in the way to their profits. All this talk about taking risks is bullshit. They avoid risk.

We could have a cancer cure, but they make too much money from the sickness industry.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Have you read the post about time bank?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agree. Greed and money are the root of all evil.

[-] 1 points by metroeco (11) 8 years ago

Labor: the New Gold Standard http://paulglover.org/1107.html

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Thanks for the link. I have read about Ithica hours and while it is a step in the right direction I hope that we can one day reach for a non monetary economy.

[-] 1 points by ichy (0) 8 years ago

money is definitely the problem coupled with human nature. greed envy selfishness are 3 major problems with society.change in ones self is one of the major ways society can change.the problem these days is how people dont seem to care about each other anymore.certain individuals do whatever it takes to get them through the day even if it involves stepping all over someone.money is the blindfold

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I agree except for one point. I don't think that greed is natural. I believe that this trait has been taught and encouraged in our society. It is a product of a false sense of competition and the lie of scarcity.

[-] 1 points by Playability (4) 8 years ago

I think usury and profit are the problem not money. We need to take steps to reign both in while making sure the new system doesn't completely stifle progress. In a way it doesn't matter what the medium of exchange is but we need one, though it must be global so we do away with all that currency trading nonsense. I think it would be better to make all loans zero interest and redistribute all company profits to the poor. Maybe we will need to fine tune to avoid abuses, e.g. introducing salary maximums and a land value tax (wiki Henry George). The general idea is to level the playing field for everyone. Just a few thoughts off the top of my head!

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Yes a currency that is not stealable, hoardable, inheritable, manipulable, inflatable, and fair Hmmm, what could that be?

[-] 1 points by Playability (4) 8 years ago

With respect time is just as stealable, hoardable, inheritable, manipulable, inflatable as anything else. Have you honestly never heard about people fiddling flexible working hours or punching in there friends card in the time clock? I do beleive that one man's time is just as valuable as anothers. An African bushman hunting down food to live is doing the same as everyone else just trying to survive but he's doing it with less resources than say a wall street banker and we should respect that, but going on to say time is an absolute constant so it should be used as a medium of exchange is clearly unworkable.

[-] 1 points by Playability (4) 8 years ago

With respect time is just as stealable, hoardable, inheritable, manipulable, inflatable as anything else. Have you honestly never heard about people fiddling flexible working hours or punching in there friends card in the time clock? I do beleive that one man's time is just as valuable as anothers. An African bushman hunting down food to live is doing the same as everyone else just trying to survive but he's doing it with less resources than say a wall street banker and we should respect that, but going on to say time is an absolute constant so it should be used as a medium of exchange is clearly unworkable.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Many time banks are in existence today. You should check it out.

[-] 1 points by Playability (4) 8 years ago

I'm aware of the concept but it has shortcomings so one can use it as a part of a bigger solution. I live in Andalucia, Spain not far from a village run by a mayor who is unusual because he is not lining his pockets with cash. No-one in the village has a mortgage and everyone has work. If they loose their job the co-operative employs them. They do earn wages because it's more practical but in most ways the society is completely egalitarian - YOU should check it out: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/world/europe/26spain.html?pagewanted=all

[-] 1 points by FamilyFoodGardens (240) 8 years ago

Permaculture food forests produce 3 or more times more food than do Genetically modified crops. Nature is the blue print. The technocratic system is destructive. Support our petition http://www.petitiononline.com/SoLMag/petition.html 1 hectare 1 family. Take back your Motherland! It is all very simple! http://www.backtoedenfilm.com/

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

If I sign your petition will you start a time bank in your area?

[-] 1 points by FamilyFoodGardens (240) 8 years ago

You have to decide whether the petition is for the good of each and the good of all. I have already done something for you by providing you the link.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I have already decided. Have you decided if time bank is for the good of all.

[-] 1 points by FamilyFoodGardens (240) 8 years ago

I think the important thing is whether your time is invested creatively or spent destructively. If everyone has their basic needs met then they can not be easily manipulated to engage in destructive actions. You could use a time bank to do creative or destructive things so the intention is the key. When a time bank is used for creative actions I support it.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Naturally. Destructive time cant be banked. I will sign your petition.

[-] 1 points by FamilyFoodGardens (240) 8 years ago

Thanks, I have done a lot of research and really believe it is extremely important we keep the focus on things people actually need like fresh food, pure water, a living environment and healthy reltationships.

[-] 1 points by lifesprizes (298) 8 years ago

This is a great Idea, its different, its change, that's a good thing! The only real concern is equality for all. That should be the only true purpose. Start there and you will end up in the right direction.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Can you start a time bank in your area?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

The problem will exist as long as power, in any form, is concentrated. Time is equal to all.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

I understand you. This could be effective, as well as a worldwide compensation system based on credits and debits.

the problem is that money is hideable, it can be physically taken and hidden. I think we need a system of currency that is completely visible to anyone, traceable, and fair.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Such as time...Transparent, self regulating, can not be stolen, hoarded or inherited. Thanks for your support. Can you start a time bank in your area?

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

Very good idea! And you're welcome.

Can you direct me on the instructions to do that?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

There are time banks in existence today. I am working on building one that can be implemented uniformly and eventually interchangeably. Those who are willing can begin the process by recruiting volunteers in their area. I will keep you posted on the progress.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 8 years ago

Alright. If you need my personal email, just ask.

[-] 1 points by synonymous (161) from New York, NY 8 years ago

Opensource Baby! Money is imaginary anyway....We made it we can destroy it....

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Tru dat

[-] 1 points by toogoodtobetrue (2) 8 years ago

I agree 100%. Let's get this party started! Most sane solution I've seen..

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I am working on getting the program it started, but It will take actual participation. Can you start a time bank in your area?

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Can you start a time bank in your area?"

Some of the other messages don't have Reply links, I don't know why.

You know, you could get your experiment started practically overnight. But you would have to decide how wedded you are to the idea of your labor hours being stored as 0s and 1s on a database in the cloud. I would suggest you reconsider that. You will need a server, database administrator, and all that sort of thing. Another problem is that you will be discriminating against people who don't have their own computer, or even a smartphone or tablet to mobilize their hours. And sometimes computers crash. And if I get to the store and my battery is dead, I'm stuck. So I would encourage you to consider paper.

Now, if your distaste with paper is that we use paper currency, guess what? Money is 0s and 1s too. How often do you handle cash? Most people use debit cards, credit cards, etc. Billions of dollars are moved around the world with keystrokes. There is nothing magical about a bank in the cloud, whether it is money or labor-hours. It is only an abstract representation of labor.

So here is what you do. You just create a certificate as a PDF or something (put your own picture on it if you like) and you only have to store that online (easier than running a database; if you have internet access you most likely have webspace to do that with, whether you realize it or not). You get yourself some free advertising (lots of ways to do that) and you sign people up. You tell them this: For each hour of labor they perform (outside of work they are being paid for in the conventional economy, maybe, at first) they are entitled to print one certificate (people who don't have a computer can go to the library). Any other member of the club (or whatever you want to call it; you could produce a list) agrees to exchange one hour of labor (as a product or service) for one certificate. There you go, that is all you need. You could do this all by yourself. You'll get on talk radio, morning TV, etc. See what happens. It doesn't get to the free beer and crack, but baby steps, you know?

(By the way, if you like fishing there is a boat in Coz called the Albatros. Pedro and Manuel will treat you right.)

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

If people need to go to the library to print notes why cant they just enter their hours there as well. In communities where access is a problem they can keep track on paper if they wish, although I am betting that few people will have access to the internet by the time "time bank" is that renowned.

Thanks for the fishing tip. I have one for you as well...MSTPA

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Well, maybe I am wrong but I think the paper certificate would get you off the ground quicker. You could do it right now with no help at all.

(I like the ocean.)

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Except that a paper is wasteful and I believe unnecessary.

No pike there.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Except that a paper is wasteful and I believe unnecessary."

Maybe, but it is incredibly simple and you could do it right now. In fact, in 10 minutes you could have your system in place, and then it would just be a matter of publicity. Oh well, everything is a trade-off.

[-] 1 points by Paulka (1) 8 years ago

Jag har på en blogg med artikel om "Occupy Wall Street – en historia om pengarna och krisernas upphovsmän". Se http://www.redjustice.net/?p=3949

Kapitalismen, var det en bra idé? Artikeln är en analys och en beskrivning av en lång och korrupt historia och hur bankerna har arbetat genom tiderna.

Det behövs en reformering av bankerna som frikoppar centralbankerna från finansens spekulationshydror till att bli de nationella bankerna för samhällets allmänna bästa. Lagen finns utformad redan 1933 som Glass-Steagall-lagen.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Thank you for your post, while I agree that the system is broken I feel that any attempt at policy change is futile. In addition it is like putting a bandaid on a gushing wound.

[-] 1 points by doru001 (174) 8 years ago

How would that work?

What if more productive people would refuse to trade their time with the less productive ones?

Who is going to ensure that nobody cheats?

Whatever we do, we return to the problem of politics and gov't, and the solution is that people should be responsible for their politics and gov't.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Doru, You have many good questions. I hope that you have some time to read through this thread as these issues are addressed within.

Time bank is leaderless, transparent and self regulating thus there is no need for police, politics or government in a time based economy.

[-] 1 points by doru001 (174) 8 years ago

Maybe you confuse gov't with centralised gov't. When most people are involved in gov't and there is no central power, I call this a widely distributed gov't.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

or self governed.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"What if more productive people would refuse to trade their time with the less productive ones?"

Five points off for you, you clearly haven't been doing your reading. All people will be equally productive (and we can be sure they won't overindulge in all the free booze and cocaine that will be available).

"Who is going to ensure that nobody cheats?"

If you cheat, "the community" will frown at you.

Now try to keep up, or it'll be detention.

[-] 1 points by doru001 (174) 8 years ago

But you make the bank on the internet. How do you know who does what? If you do this in your neighborhood I can understand ... Don't you think that this time bank will be just like a new currency issuer? If I take two hours to make the work of one (cause I answer the phone), I will still own 1 hour, or $5. Those who make $50 / hour will not join the scheme.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Hey, I'm just the messenger. If you are interested, you really should read the whole thread, it is very entertaining. Personally, I am looking forward to the world where I can drink free booze and get paid to go fishing (and where there will be no physical or mental illness. I have no need for the free crack, but if that is what you like it will be there too).

"How do you know who does what?"

It doesn't matter, everyone is an equal child of god or whatever. As long as you are "following your passion" you will get paid for it.

"Get on board, little children There's room for many-a-more..."

[-] 1 points by doru001 (174) 8 years ago

what thread? I am also looking forward to be paid for fishing. It is true that with no passion nothing works. However, we also need public goods, like law enforcement. For this, we need courage and wisdom and yourself. These are in short supply.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

This whole thread, "the problem with money."

[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

We have confused 'money' with 'value' in this country.

It is our collective labor value that has been hoarded by the 1%. We need a new currency that accurately represents that labor value.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Ah yes...Time is that indeed.

[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Yes.

Global, transparent, inclusive, labor backed currency.

That would be a huge step in the right direction.

http://metapolitik.org/content/demands

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

IT would. Can you start a time bank in your area?

[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

I am certain it is possible, but I am still researching the logistics.

Also, my area is sadly lacking enough radicals to hold a decent protest.

Speaking of which, if you Occupiers get cold up there (which you will), might I suggest you come to the Caribbean and help me 'Occupy the VI'.

There's a nice park here with room for about 200 tents, public bathrooms nearby and a kick ass, white sand beach across the street.

Here's a photo: http://tinyurl.com/6eboeax

For those of you who are unfamiliar with St. John & St. Thomas, this is the place where the 1% come to buy vacation homes and sail their yachts.

How truly awesome it would be for them to arrive on the Ferry, ready for a nice Thanksgiving weekend away from the hustle and bustle of protesters and news media... Only to find 200+ protesters camped-out in the backyard of their favorite escape :)

Wikipedia: http://tinyurl.com/42nglcy

Contact me for details: http://metapolitik.org/contact

Or, check it out the MeetUp page: http://www.meetup.com/occupytogether/St-John-VI/

[-] 1 points by jdragonlee (119) 8 years ago

Most voted demands ( by 10/16/2011):

  1. Money out of Politics. 44 votes
    -Eliminate / Remove / Ban campaign contribution;
    -Public funds all campaigns;
    -Mandate Public fund for all political campaign / election nation wide;
    -28th Amendment to the Constitution that establishes permanent public financing of all elections in this country.

  2. Tax fairness. 26 votes
    -Tax rates from the Clinton administration;
    -Eliminate all tax loopholes;
    -Get rid of tax breaks for the rich;
    -Tax cut for middle class;

  3. Reinstate Glass-Steagall Act. 19 votes

  4. Abolish the Federal Reserve Board. 18 votes
    -Abolish / Eliminate / End Federal Reserve Board;
    -Audit Federal Reserve Board;
    -Put the power to print money back to congress;

  5. Affordable health care. 16 votes
    -singer payer health care;
    -public option;

  6. Ban Lobbyist. 15 votes

  7. End corporate personhood. 14 votes

  8. Financial Reform. 13 votes
    -Financial Reform;
    -Financial Transaction Fee / tax;

  9. Term limit. 12 votes -Have A Term Limit to Congress/Senate/Supreme Court;
    -8 years maximum for any and all nationally elected servants;
    -One 6 year term only for all representatives, senators and president;

  10. End wars. 5 votes

  11. Fully investigate & Prosecute the Wall Street criminal. 5 votes

  12. Restore democracy. 5 votes

  13. Regulation on College loan. 4 votes

  14. Energy reform. 3 votes

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Although they sound great I believe that any attempt at reform of the present is futile. In addition I think it is putting a bandaid on a gushing wound.

[-] 1 points by greedisgood (39) from Washington, DC 8 years ago

Do you know the point of money?

There are 3 but the main point of a currency is to organize resources.

And the first law of econoimcs is "People have UNLIMITED wants and only a limited amount of resources" thus is called Supply and Demand.

There is not enough resources for everyone to have as much as they please. If you believe that then your naive.

And no one on this earth suffers from greed. Greed is not taking from one man to give to yourself. You do realize wealth is created through innovation not force.
Almost all transactions in the US are cooperative. This website payed someone to get the name.

The OWS person thought the resource of this domain name was worth more to them than the say $40. The Domain holder thought it would be worth more for them to have $40 than to have the domain name thus a transaction occurs.

This is a rather simplistic form of capitalism but really refutes your point that resources are taken etc.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

The revolution is to change what and how much is wanted.

Innovation is created through passion. Innovation is stifled when people are afraid to follow their passions because of fear for not making enough money.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Don't rain on the parade. I am looking forward to the world where booze and crack are free, I can get paid to fish and drink all day, everyone will be compensated equally (in time credits) for pursuing his or her passion, mental illness will be a thing of the past, and all the goods and services we want will be readily available. Please read the whole thread and then sign up.

[-] 1 points by mojoelvis (1) 8 years ago

do you REALLY think my time... with my 3 degrees, and 20 years in the IT industry, is really worth a bushman's time from africa? or an uneducated chinese? of even a degreed, but no experience engineer from India?

tell me how you deal with the inequality of experience, and cost of living? my cost of living in Austin Texas is WAY WAY higher than someone in India or China...

WE ARE NOT COMMUNISTS...

[-] 1 points by toogoodtobetrue (2) 8 years ago

Yes. And yes. You're value is equal. There isn't anyone this world can' t do without.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"There isn't anyone this world can' t do without."

That is true, but some deaths have a greater impact. When a bushman in Africa (or my mother) dies, there will be a small local impact. When Fidel Castro dies, there will probably be a more significant impact on a greater number of people.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

do you REALLY think my time... with my 3 degrees, and 20 years in the IT industry, is really worth a bushman's time from africa? or an uneducated chinese? of even a degreed, but no experience engineer from India?

Thank you for your response. It would be impossible to change to a time based economy overnight or even in a generation. Time bank can be started locally. With enough participation services will expand and the realization that time dollars are more valuable than money dollars will inevitably occur.

To specifically answer your question, yes, I do think that all people are equal and should have equal opportunity to pursue their passions. Passion drives innovation. Our culture of competition and the manipulation of the only accepted form of compensation (money) to appear scarce creates a population who fear pursuing their passions, thus repressing innovation.

tell me how you deal with the inequality of experience, and cost of living? my cost of living in Austin Texas is WAY WAY higher than someone in India or China...

This is the result of currency manipulation. Perceived benefit is derived from the disparity of those who are denied access to opportunities for betterment. In other words they are our slaves and we are someone else's slave.

WE ARE NOT COMMUNISTS... Historical communism is a monetary system with a hierarchy of leadership. Time bank is non monetary and leaderless, thus comparison is moot.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"In other words they are our slaves and we are someone else's slave."

Your time bank doesn't really change that. If I want a shawl made by Mary (one hour labor, say) I still have to labor for one hour to get it. All you have done is change from a system with a floating value of work done to one in which there is a single value. In other words, in your society, everyone makes minimum wage (one time-dollar per hour). Since we already have the framework for that, why go to the trouble of setting up a time bank? Why not just pass laws requiring everyone to work for minimum wage? If you wanted to do a trial in a small, self-contained community, that wouldn't be too difficult.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Slavery is the uneven exchange of one labor or service. A slave is one who is compensated less than they are worth. The problem with the minimum wage system that you describe is that it would take immediate uniform change and people naturally resist change. Participation in time bank is voluntary. If it is beneficial more people will volunteer. The shift will be very gradual and will only happen if mutual benefits are derived.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Slavery is the uneven exchange of one labor or service."

No, slavery is the forced uneven exchange of a labor or service.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

You are in essence forced because believe you need their money for survival.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Not really. I could "survive" quite easily without a job. But I like some creature comforts.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

But could we all?

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

That depends on how close to the earth one is willing to live.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Hey, all God's children got a place in the choir. And the OP is creating a society where crack and booze are free, entertainment is free, and I can get paid for spending my day fishing and drinking. And all that inequality of cost of living and whatnot is going to disappear (I don't know how, but that's what's been promised). And technology is going to eliminate all the unpleasant labors of humankind. I suspect all sports events will end in a tie, but we haven't explored that yet. Get on board, man!

[-] 1 points by Heylo (14) 8 years ago

I agree, monetary system is dead. it was useful, but we are beyond it. In Combination with a resource management system or resource based economy this would be awesome.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Can you start a time bank in your area? I am working on getting the program started.

[-] 1 points by TarigAnter (33) from Khartoum, Khartoum 8 years ago

From my long experience in dealing with governments in more than a dozen of them I assure you that if you slash more than half of government officials or the so-called public dis-service and throw them to the streets you will definitely get better, effective and efficient administrations.

I am sure they are the source of corruption and corporate greed support. I have never seen in my long life any government department or an office functioning properly. They are excesses, idles, and the antithesis of innovation, ethics and productivity.

People must have regular and uninterrupted access to monitor what are going on in any government office, low or high, including the judiciary, the police, the security, and the military.

When you deal personally with a successful private business you feel your power as a valued customer even if it was unethical business. But when I personally deal with any government office I feel their arrogance and wickedness; I wish I could spit on their faces.

The public service anywhere in the world is ten times it’s optimal size, and they are very good in employing the failures and the dishonest for life.

To Occupy Wall Street and bring social, political, and economic justice people must axe useless officials first.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed!

[-] 1 points by 5thelement (27) 8 years ago

I totally agree with you! Peace.

[-] 1 points by Overton (15) 8 years ago

a currency based on time or hours is problematic as well. one would still need to set standards on what different goods and services are worth in 'time'. on a large scale you would need to represent a unit of time through tangible exchangeable object, which would replace the current currency of the U.S. dollar. you would run into many of the same problems.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I hope that you have the time to read through some of this thread as many of these issues are addressed within.

[-] 1 points by tesn1 (212) 8 years ago

There are many misguided efforts, and it seems that the OWS movement has become a platform for just about any concern. A movement needs to focus and be very clear on what it seeks to accomplish.

I have spent nearly 4 years researching and educating myself on the law and rules that make up the basis on how business is financed and how the rules affect business and the individuals who own them and work for them.

First let me say that this problem is not liberal or conservative, democrat or republican but it is a common problem we all share. One key point must be stressed we are all affected by the issue at hand.

Now, let’s look at the laws. If you look at the fall of the exchange in 1929, its cause and the reaction by the government you will find most of the problem. In 1929 only ~10% of all businesses were public and the remainder was private. ~2% of the population were involved in trading stocks and most of the individuals we very heavily leveraged (They bought on credit).

Next the market dropped, individuals lost their ability to pay off their margin accounts and wiped out the capital overnight in the banking system, Couple that with the hysteria of the people running on the banks to get there gold out and you have a recipe for disaster.

For most they were not initially affected by the falls of the exchange in 1929 but when banks failed they felt it. Businesses lost credit to operate, accounts were wiped out and small private business failed. No fault of their own but the fault of the overzealous banks. Individuals found there savings wiped out alongside the private businesses and the world plunged into the abyss.

The reaction to this was FDR. and the 1933 securities act and the 1934 securities and exchange act. What these two pieces of legislation did was strip the ability of the small private business (who did not cause the market collapse) to raise capital in a traditional form, Bonds. Direct investment was for many years the mainstay of the entrepreneur. It put the restrictions on who could invest (Qualified institutional investor) and how the investments could be sold. It stripped the ability of the individual to invest and make the high returns they became accustomed to and placed all of it into the hands of the very few 1%.

Today if you are a business owner there is a glass ceiling of about $3 million dollars where a business could potentially get debt to expand, retool, or modernize. The Wall Street and Banks prefer an Equity offering. How often do small business owners sell the majority share of the company they own under a public offering or private sale (sale to high net worth’s) to raise the capital they need. The horror stories of this arrangement are very clear. They give up control, get voted out of the company and the new share holders shut them down move the product manufacture to China to maximize the return to the High Net Worth investor (new owner).

The laws perpetuate the problem. Now remove the Glass-Steagall Act and it becomes a high net worth orgy.

Focus, access the laws, and fix the system that perpetuates the behavior.

FIX THE LAWS

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

All laws are a temporary solution and have special interests. It is not a law change we need, it is a cultural change.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

A friend and i was just talking about this. We need spiritual change, to e-v-o-l-v-e, make money a thing of the past.

Soon we'll have 7-billion people on Earth, when my father was born (1927) there was only 2-billion. We have global warming & peak oil to deal with. We can change/evolve voluntarily, which from some of the wimpy "demands" I've seen on this forum doesn't seem likely or karma will hit us, billions will die and society will devolve into a Mad Max scenario where people will barter. Once the remnant realizes money is unnecessary with abundance we will become.

"There is a very great deal to be said for the Anarchist plan of allowing necessaries, and all commodities that can easily be produced in quantities adequate to any possible demand, to be given away freely to all who ask for them, in any amounts they may require. The question whether this plan should be adopted is, to my mind, a purely technical one: would it be, in fact, possible to adopt it without much waste and consequent diversion of labor to the production of necessaries when it might be more usefully employed otherwise? I have not the means of answering this question, but I think it exceedingly probable that, sooner or later, with continued improvement in the methods of production, this Anarchist plan will become feasible; and when it does, it certainly ought to be adopted." — Bertrand Russell, Proposed Roads to Freedom, 1919

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

How can you help start time bank?

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

We need to educate ppl. Schools would teach the practicality of eliminating money. (I also have a website: http://666isMONEY.com )

My Grand Plan would recall all the currency and reissue 666-dollars (link below), anyone with more than say, $500,000 in cash would have to justify where they got it from. If it was from funny-money casino capitalism (certain transactions on Wall Street), drug dealing and the like, the money would be confiscated.

666 Dollar: http://www.flickr.com/photos/666_is_money/6185926788

[-] 1 points by Pottsandahalf (141) 8 years ago

Thats not going to work because one persons time isn't the same as another persons. For instance, an hour of Steve Jobs' time is waaaay more valuble than say, the crazy bum living on the streetcorner shouting obscenities at people. To try and say that everyones time is worth the same is insulting yourself

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"an hour of Steve Jobs' time is waaaay more valuble than say, the crazy bum living on the streetcorner shouting obscenities at people."

Didn't you know? In the Big Rock Candy Mountain, there won't be any crazy bum on the street corner (even though booze and crack will be free). That is because most of these people are mentally ill, and mental illness (and physical illness too, if I understand correctly) will disappear when we no longer use money. Of course, if it is indeed someone's passion to sit on the street corner shouting obscenities, he will be able to bank his hour credits for his time doing that.

Haven't you been keeping up with your reading?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I hope that you have time to read through this thread as this specific issue is addressed within.

[-] 1 points by Kulafarmer (82) from Kula, HI 8 years ago

Isnt this from that new movie that is previewing?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

What new movie? I hope there is a movie about this. Whatever it takes to get it started!

[-] 1 points by Kulafarmer (82) from Kula, HI 8 years ago

Yea, there is a move that part of the story is based on the new currency being time, everybody has a digital readout on their forearm that shows how much time you have, cant remember who the actors are but it looked good, sorta like a minority report kinda thing where its future but not too distant,

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Like time bank. Don't like digital arm implant. Perhaps a tactic to scare us away from the reality that a time based economy is better for humanity. I believe that nothing is coincidental.

[-] 1 points by zorbaka2 (61) 8 years ago

Most everyone realizes a doctor deserves more compensation than say a janitor. However, it is still not fair to give the doctor 20 million dollars a year and the janitor a penny. that is the present situation. In wall street or at corporate boardrooms they are controlling all the money to their personal accounts and get wealthy even if the business fails. Pay the lobbyists to resist any change. I believe the .1% instead of the 1% who have caused most of this corruption. Some of them are embarrassed that so much money has automatically flowed into their already wealthy families.

[-] 1 points by toogoodtobetrue (2) 8 years ago

I disagree. There ain't nobody this world can't do without Period.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I agree with much of what you say, however I hope that you have the time to read through this thread. The culture you and I live in today neglects to value each human. Inferiority is intentionally maintained so that some people will fail to reach their full potential. In a time based economy all people are given equal opportunity to realize their potential without the false ideas of competition and scarcity that are inherent in a monetary system.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"However, it is still not fair to give the doctor 20 million dollars a year and the janitor a penny. that is the present situation."

Actually, it is not the present situation. Physician income varies by specialty, with an overall average close to $200,000 per year. A busy orthopedic surgeon, neurosurgeon or heart surgeon can make about $500K or so. There are a number of different surveys that are available to the public, and the figures are fairly similar. I know a few doctors, and they would love to know where they can make $20 million.

According to similar sources, the average salary for a janitor is about $25,000 (not including benefits). I do not know of any janitors who work for a penny.

By the way, minimum wage for Major League Baseball players is $414,000 a year (not quite a year, since the season is April (February, if you count spring training) to October).

[-] 1 points by ddiggs690 (277) 8 years ago

The problem is that a lot of people don't realize that we rely on each other is some way, shape or form. A banker thinks his job is so much important than a janitor, but we need all of these jobs to keep the world running. Why do we look down on certain people and not others. I have been guilty of this in the past also, but as a civilized society, we need to be a little more accepting. Maybe that janitor's labor is just as important as everyone else's labor. We need to start accepting that we are a community and by dividing our labor, it should make all of our lives easier, not just a few.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"The problem is that a lot of people don't realize that we rely on each other is some way, shape or form. A banker thinks his job is so much important than a janitor, but we need all of these jobs to keep the world running. Why do we look down on certain people and not others."

I don't think "looking down on people" is the issue. I've been a janitor, a long long time ago. I don't think people looked down on me personally, but I realize they knew (as did I) pretty much anyone could do the job I was doing. Currently, in my consulting business, I can hire any number of people to clean my offices (and yes, that is an important function). On the other hand, I sometimes have to hire people with very unusual technical skills. Should I pay them the same?

[-] 1 points by ddiggs690 (277) 8 years ago

No I don't think everyone needs to be payed the same for everyone to live a pretty decent quality of life. Of course someone who has developed some technical skills has put in more time to learn their trade than an unskilled laborer. With that said, I think it is reasonable for everyone to expect there quality of life to get better. Through new technologies, we are always increasing our productive capacity with less need for human labor. If productivity is growing exponentially, this ought to be reflected in increased wages. Reallt think about this for a moment. What is the point of making things cheaper and easier to make if not eveyone is benefitting from it. I don't mean making everyone rich. But with what we are producing per capita is more than enough to allow everyone to at least have some basic necessities. The problem is that most gains we as a society make from these new technologies go to the few people at the top. SO back to what I was saying in my earlier post. Everyone human has contributed to any technology you can think of either directly or indirectly. So it seems only fair that everyone reap at least some of the befefits of this prosperity.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"No I don't think everyone needs to be payed the same for everyone to live a pretty decent quality of life."

Well, we have no disagreement. I think Henry Ford made it a point to pay his workers enough so that they could buy his cars.

You have a more realistic idea than expecting everyone to work for the same income, which will never happen.

"The problem is that most gains we as a society make from these new technologies go to the few people at the top."

Here's a question and then I have to go for a while. Let's say I have a great idea for a product or service. I consider two choices:

  1. I will make the product, and as a result of the increased revenue I will raise the pay of my employees by 25%, and I will increase my own income 10-fold.
  2. I will forget the whole thing and go fishing.

What should I do? (No other choices, now, one or the other.)

[-] 1 points by ddiggs690 (277) 8 years ago

Here's a question and then I have to go for a while. Let's say I have a great idea for a product or service. I consider two choices:

"I will make the product, and as a result of the increased revenue I will raise the pay of my employees by 25%, and I will increase my own income 10-fold. I will forget the whole thing and go fishing."

Answer: Both If you have a great idea or are a productive person, you should not have to feel guilty about relaxing and taking time out for yourself. But it would be a disservice to the people who helped make you rich to extract every penny you can get without increasing wages along the way. It's a shame that people will continue to make more profits for themselves without ever stepping back and thinking about the people who actually produced that product. Just from simple economics for dummies, the market doesn't not care whether money is put into capital or wages; both will equally increase the total productivity. Here in America, maybe we should start focusing a little more on increasing wages rather than worshipping capital.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"But it would be a disservice to the people who helped make you rich to extract every penny you can get without increasing wages along the way."

I completely agree. I am just trying to quantitate this a bit. In my example, I raised the pay 25%. Is that enough? There is no need to answer, I do not have a theory. It is just something to think about.

[-] 1 points by ddiggs690 (277) 8 years ago

If you ask 100 people how much to raise the wages you will get 100 different answers. I think wages should rise with profits. If a corporation has an excellent year, will make a killing in bonuses. If the CEO chooses to raise his salary through bonuses, it seems only fair that every employee should enjoy the same percentage increase. After all those profits are only possible through the division of labor from ALL of the employees. I think too many people have lost track of why corporations exist. While they must remain profitable, what is the purpose of even having them around if they are not providing additional services. They are not helping anyone by extracted wealth from the public without providing additional services in return. Redistributing corporate profits is not like redistributed peoples wealth. Corporations are not people. They do not need money for food, shelter or clothing. Lets redistribute some of these profits between the employees.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"I think too many people have lost track of why corporations exist."

I think there are a number of reasons why corporations exist. For example, suppose I want a boat like the one Massachusetts Senator John Kerry has (have you seen that thing? He had it built for $7 million dollars in New Zealand. It is a sweet boat). I have an idea, I create a company, I hire people to build my product, I incorporate (my company is now a corporation, which is really just a specific tax status). I become successful and I buy my boat. The reason the corporation exists is that I like sailing. If I would have settled for a rowboat, I would not have had to start as big a company (but then I would not have provided jobs to as many people).

Or, suppose I look around and see a lot of unemployed people. I could start a company specifically to provide jobs to people, pay a living wage or better, produce a product that improves people's lives, and have a good feeling about myself. That is also a valid reason to start a corporation. I do not know for a fact which reason is more common, but I have my suspicions.

"Corporations are not people. They do not need money for food, shelter or clothing. Lets redistribute some of these profits between the employees."

These may be achievable goals, and sound reasonable on paper. However, I am not a legal or constitutional scholar so the details are beyond me. I would, though, encourage everyone to consider the one inviolable law in the universe: the law of unintended consequences.

By the way, I understand what you mean by saying that corporations are not people, but there are exceptions. I am a person, but I am also a corporation (just me, self-employed, I have no full time employees). Incorporation is just a tax status; if you wanted to you could incorporate yourself. I am probably splitting hairs, but that's just my need for precision (or maybe my OCD).

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

It will indeed take a cultural revolution. I believe that we are hanging on a cliff.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

I believe so too: Babylon is falling, the signs of the times are everywhere.

[-] 1 points by EliteNinx (34) 8 years ago

It's sad because the solutions are right in front of us yet predictably, people will often react to the new ideas with little to no investigation and immediate resentment. Why? Because they've lived in this system for their whole lives and are still under the delusion that this is the best possible way. They haven't examined or looked at anything regarding the idea yet they're apparently experts in that they can speak out against it.

Quick example: Someone can spend decades designing a new social order that works out for the betterment of everyone and you will always get a few idiot who takes 4 seconds to put it down without closely looking into it because it's simply "too radical".

That is the sickness that our social system breeds and until we get over these backwards psychological reflexes we'll always have this disastrous and competitive society based on a fictional commodity such as money.

Coreupt I commend you for bringing to light this issue and discussing and actually thinking outside of the box. Everyone else here wants the solution to come from inside of capitalism with it's inherent profit motive and hope to change certain people and as a result get a better, more peaceful society not realizing that it's the system itself that is wrong and breeds such violent people.

It takes massive psychological understanding (and I don't mean psych 101) to truly understand that we must move past money for the sustainability of the human species and the comfort of all on this planet.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Elite...you are indeed.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Time banking can be started now. People who want to participate can. With enough participation even late adapters will begin to see the benefit and will likely decide to participate.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"It's sad because the solutions are right in front of us yet predictably, people will often react to the new ideas with little to no investigation..."

You are correct, people often come up with ideas that sound good on paper without even scratching the surface of all the ramifications. For example, the topic at hand is the sociologic equivalent of nuclear fission; if you decide to disrupt the most fundamental human interaction (I have something you want, you have something I want: we trade) you have to think long and hard about all the repercussions.

Speaking of nuclear physics, if that neutrino experiment proves correct, then there is only one inviolable law left in the universe: the law of unintended consequences.

[-] 1 points by BenBernanke (12) 8 years ago

the problem with money is the fact banks control it. If we the people control it, thru gov't, we will be half way there.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Half way. Not all the way.

[-] 1 points by itsallcosmic (22) 8 years ago

I LOVE THIS. a friend of mine was talking about it months and months ago. thanks for posting, i put it on my blog :) read this, if you get a chance : http://itsallcosmic.com/2011/10/04/pluto-in-capricorn/

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Wow...cosmic. Thanks for spreading the idea.

[-] 1 points by itsallcosmic (22) 8 years ago

anytime. that is the point.. to spread it... :) <3

[-] 1 points by shreepal (9) 8 years ago

Time Bank is one solution to the problem of money. There could be other ways to eliminate the role of money while retaining the graded quality of work. One who invents (or works hard to produce something useful), should be bestowed graded social RECOGNITION and not opportunity to earn money out of his invention. There can be several models possible to eliminate the ill effects of money and its power. Read more these issues at: http://indianpeoplescongress.org/index.php

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I agree 100%

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Time Bank is one solution to the problem of money. There could be other ways to eliminate the role of money while retaining the graded quality of work."

By "graded quality of work" do you mean that some labor-hours have more value than others? That is fine, but it just seems to be a substitute for dollars.

I was thinking about the fungibility of these labor-hours. Suppose a neighbor has a problem that he could solve in 10 hours, but he knows I can do it in one hour. Do I charge him one labor-hour (for my time) or ten labor-hours (the time I saved him)? Of course, this is hypothetical. I am certainly not going to do it in one hour; the fact that I can do it in one hour means that I could spend ten hours instead (e.g., the automotive flat rate manual).

[-] 1 points by Stileto (10) 8 years ago

You err. Religion falls under mythos. Money falls under tangible. There is no problem with the latter until one assigns the former.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Coins and notes while tangible hold value based only on the faith that you have in its value. Your faith is very strong, for your entire life you have been able to extract service or commodities from the exchange of it. If that faith dissolves its value dissolves thus,it is a faith based system and myth.

[-] 1 points by zer0 (43) 8 years ago

I like this post, thank you. Time-Based Currency is an intriguing concept. How would one buy something with time? There would have to be notes right? But are there just hour notes? Does everything COST an hour? What if it just took someone a minute to make it? Also how are the owners of BUSINESSES paid? Do they pay themselves in hours? What if they don't go to their business? Should they just not get paid?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Time bank is a transitionary tool. Of course a monetary system can not be dissolved overnight. In a society that values equality people are driven by passion, not profits. Business are not relevant in a time based economy because the purpose of business is to generate profit which is not possible in a time based economy. Modern technology has nearly eliminated commodities scarcity. Acquisition of commodities is as needed, but it is expected that you not take more than you need. You have good questions. I hope you have the time to read the rest of this thread.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Business are not relevant in a time based economy because the purpose of business is to generate profit which is not possible in a time based economy"

Businesses are simply groups of people working toward a common goal, producing a product or service and delivering it to people who want it. You need companies (businesses) to make computers, and companies (such as UPS) to get them to the customers. Or, are you proposing a commune in which you make your own clothing, grow your own food, etc.? If so, then I guess you can do without business. Otherwise, who is going to build all those "best cars" you write about?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

People would be motivated to do what their passion drives them to do. Cooperative groups of people with similar passion would of course be motivated by common goals. So long as those goals are communally beneficial it is sustainable.

A group of people with a passion for cars would have the creative freedom and to develop whatever car society deems "best".

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"A group of people with a passion for cars would have the creative freedom and to develop whatever car society deems "best"."

Right. They would get together, maybe in someone's garage (like Jobs and Wozniak) and they would make their plans. They would purchase the tools they need, and source the parts that can be obtained off the shelf. They would hire the people they need to build the cars, and they would try to sell those cars (so that they can pay their workers, whether it is dollars or labor-hours, and so they can pay for their tools, parts, electric bill). I believe that is called a "business." (In fact, that is basically Apple Computer.)

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed, however driven by passion, societal benefit, and technology. Not profit. Jobs was passionate indeed and, as his luck would have it, he lived in an society where his passion was profitable. However true passion does not consider profit. This is why so many of us fail to realize our passions...because we see no way of profiting from them. Imagine the potential if no one was afraid follow their true passion for fear of not making enough money.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Jobs was passionate indeed and, as his luck would have it, he lived in an society where his passion was profitable."

Right, because his passion was to make stuff that people want. Not everyone's passion produces a product or service that people want.

Have you ever done roofing? I have. I doubt that anyone's passion is roofing. But roofs are pretty useful. If the roofer's passion is birdwatching, that doesn't keep the rain off anyone's head. That is why we will generally pay the roofer more to put up a roof than to look at birds. The relative value of tasks is not usually a function of someone's passion.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Right, because his passion was to make stuff that people want. Not everyone's passion produces a product or service that people want. What passion is not sharable? Everyone can teach a class.

Have you ever done roofing? I have. I doubt that anyone's passion is roofing. But roofs are pretty useful. If the roofer's passion is birdwatching, that doesn't keep the rain off anyone's head. That is why we will generally pay the roofer more to put up a roof than to look at birds. The relative value of tasks is not usually a function of someone's passion.

If roofing is miserable but necessary perhaps technology will be developed to ease peoples misery.In Today's monetary system the "misery" of a job has little relation to the pay.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"What passion is not sharable?"

While hoisting a few with the boys at the pub last night, I asked, "What's your passion?" After collecting the answers, we decided that if we will actually be able to engage in our passions and get paid as well, that is a no-brainer; sign us up.

"perhaps technology will be developed to ease peoples misery"

You can't build a society, especially one that disrupts the most fundamental human relationship, based on "perhaps."

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

You can't build a society, especially one that disrupts the most fundamental human relationship, based on "perhaps."

Your right you and I cant but together all of us can. Do you think Thomas Jefferson had a plan for the internet?

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Do you think Thomas Jefferson had a plan for the internet?"

I do not understand the relevance of that. If Jefferson had suggested to someone that the internet would one day exist, he would have had to provide an explanation of how that would come to be (and he would have, because he was a pretty technically savvy guy). But to my knowledge he did not make such a prediction.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Just as I do not the have the ability to predict the future of things that do not yet exist.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 8 years ago

Yes sir! Get rid of money and the world will change!

[-] 2 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

The same could be said of gravity.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 8 years ago

The same could be said of everything.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Get rid of greed and the world will change. Man fears nothing more than equality.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

Voters’ turnout in North America is constantly going down and people are disillusioned with the electoral process and feel it has now become a bit meaningless to vote. It is not enough for most people just to vote once every four years to elect someone that will later be corrupted or do whatever.

In order to create a better democracy, we need to be able to bypass at least some of the representative process. Modern communications is now allowing us to say what we want as individuals and we no longer need to be represented by people in parliament to take decisions for us. The role of the government should be to propose directions society could take but letting the people decide through referendums (direct democracy). This process, while alleviating corruption by removing some power to elected people, would allow some decisions that no political party would ever attempt to take because they would often be against the interests of influent lobby groups and powerful corporations.

So far, the main stomping block for e voting taking on is revolving around confidentiality (anonymity) and hacking concerns. Those issues could be addressed by having an open e voting system by which the database, although anonymous, would be open allowing voters to verify that their vote is accounted for and accurate. The users could get a random number identifying them in the database and check if that number (or key) is associated with the correct vote for the given referendum, many could be run simultaneously. The best would be to create a package using maybe Open Office as a way for the user to manipulate the database to verify his/her vote and analyze the data if desired. The difficulty in having a representative and legitimate vote is to be able to use the electoral database for the constituencies to generate the individual keys; maybe someone would have to be elected the old fashion way clearly stating this goal as a platform... Looking at what is happening in the Arab world, this might be a way to quickly implement a form of democracy in places where there is nothing yet to support it. Your movement is very fertile ground for these ideas to take roots, there are highly educated motivated people in your group that could make this a reality and elaborate a system that would account for minority rights, server setups, phone interface etc. It could also (one can dream) create a whole new world where every voice can finally be heard and be as important towards decision making as anyone else. No matter the size of the voter’s bank account or number of influential friends: we have to take the power back.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

To be uncorruptable is to be unelectable. Intrinsic in capitalism and democracy is corruption. To remove one from the other would be like removing the wag from the tail. You're very smart. How can we start this process now? Can you write the program or teach me? Do you know someone who can/will? We have to stop wasting time and start banking time.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"We have to stop wasting time and start banking time."

Another thing you have to think about is how your banked time, your labor-hour (or whatever you will call it) will behave against other world currencies. At present, the dollar is the world reserve currency (giving the US some important economic advantages). That of course will end in your system, and some other currency (maybe the euro, maybe even the renminbi) will take its place. Will the labor-hour be a closed currency, or will you let it float? That is an important decision, as it will greatly influence the real value of your labor- hour.

(For technical reason I don't think the renminbi can become the reserve currency today, But that is not insurmountable, and that would be an enormous boon to China.)

Speaking of which, what will you do to people and businesses who decide to conduct their affairs in euros, or looneys, or pound sterling, or renminbi, or some other exchange medium?

Oh, maybe trivial, but when I get up from the blackjack table, how do I cash in my chips? And what about lottery tickets?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

We have to stop wasting time and start banking time."

Another thing you have to think about is how your banked time, your labor-hour (or whatever you will call it) will behave against other world currencies. At present, the dollar is the world reserve currency (giving the US some important economic advantages). That of course will end in your system, and some other currency (maybe the euro, maybe even the renminbi) will take its place. Will the labor-hour be a closed currency, or will you let it float? That is an important decision, as it will greatly influence the real value of your labor- hour.

In a purely time based economy you cannot trade time for money. Globalization of time bank would take years upon years. In a purely time based economy international trade would not be as relevant as it is today. Much of today’s problems are created by transport of cheap mass production. In a time based economy this type of transaction becomes unnecessary for the only reason that much of it exists now is for the benefit of profit. Profit does not exist in a time based economy. For example…lets say that you need a new pair of shoes. Today you go to the store and find a pair likely made overseas by very cheap labor. Because the shoe company needs to make money your shoes are made from the cheapest materials they can get away with selling for the most profit. Thus, Chances are that this pair of shoes will need to be replaced in a year or so. The shoe company will again benefit next year when you need another pair of shoes. In a time based economy you may find a pair of skillfully crafted shoes that will last for years. Even if you had to give 8 hours to the shoe guy you’d probably do it because your shoes would last much longer.

(For technical reason I don't think the renminbi can become the reserve currency today, But that is not insurmountable, and that would be an enormous boon to China.)

Speaking of which, what will you do to people and businesses who decide to conduct their affairs in euros, or looneys, or pound sterling, or renminbi, or some other exchange medium?

If time bank proves to be better these business and currencies will naturally dissolve. Nothing needs to be “done” to them.

Oh, maybe trivial, but when I get up from the blackjack table, how do I cash in my chips? And what about lottery tickets? You can of course choose to gamble for pleasure but if money is irrelevant you wouldn’t gamble with it.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Even if you had to give 8 hours to the shoe guy you’d probably do it because your shoes would last much longer. "

How will I know that he spent eight hours making those shoes? If he only spent one hour making the shoes, and I give him eight, he is now seven labor-hours ahead of the game. If he makes a lot of shoes, he will indeed accumulate those hours in his database or however you plan to store them. I believe that is called "profit."

By the way, selling shoes is easy. How are you going to price a strip-casting machine? How much will you charge for an MRI scanner?

"You can of course choose to gamble for pleasure but if money is irrelevant you wouldn’t gamble with it."

Then what will people gamble? Humans love to gamble (and "gambling for pleasure" is like kissing your sister).

"Globalization of time bank would take years upon years."

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for Russia and China to get on board. They've been down this road before.

May I ask you a personal question? Where do you go to college, and what is your major?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Even if you had to give 8 hours to the shoe guy you’d probably do it because your shoes would last much longer. "

How will I know that he spent eight hours making those shoes? If he only spent one hour making the shoes, and I give him eight, he is now seven labor-hours ahead of the game. If he makes a lot of shoes, he will indeed accumulate those hours in his database or however you plan to store them. I believe that is called "profit."

If he inflates his time, even 2 fold, he will accumulate more time than is possible. What’s he gonna do with all that time? Transparency makes the system is self-regulating.

By the way, selling shoes is easy. How are you going to price a strip-casting machine? How much will you charge for an MRI scanner? Technology will be developed and distributed as humanity’s needs progress. In a true time based economy price is irrelevant we would be limited only by physics and spirit.

"You can of course choose to gamble for pleasure but if money is irrelevant you wouldn’t gamble with it."

Then what will people gamble? Humans love to gamble (and "gambling for pleasure" is like kissing your sister).

Gambling for pleasure = playing a game.

"Globalization of time bank would take years upon years."

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for Russia and China to get on board. They've been down this road before.

History of communism is irrelevant: All historic communistic systems had leaders, there was a definitive hierarchy that inevitably led to inequalities and corruption. In addition they were all monetary based. Time banking is leaderless and non-monetary. Comparison is moot.

May I ask you a personal question? Where do you go to college, and what is your major?

If you’re going to make assumptions at least indulge me with the details.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"What’s he gonna do with all that time?"

As I understand it, these labor-hours are exchangeable for goods and services. Maybe he will use them to buy a nice suit, or theatre tickets. or some other product or service (maybe he has an expensive cocaine habit).

"Technology will be developed and distributed as humanity’s needs progress."

Well, right now the world needs strip-casting machines. How are you going to manufacture these things, price them appropriately, and get them to the customers that need them?

"there was a definitive hierarchy that inevitably led to inequalities and corruption"

And why did that happen? Because humans were involved. By the same token, your system does not take into account human nature.

"If you’re going to make assumptions at least indulge me with the details."

What details? It seems pretty obvious to me that you are a college student. Am I correct?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

"What’s he gonna do with all that time?"

As I understand it, these labor-hours are exchangeable for goods and services. Maybe he will use them to buy a nice suit, or theatre tickets. or some other product or service (maybe he has an expensive cocaine habit).

Ok so dude has a 400 hr suite, goes to the theatre (which would not cost time since it is a community service) and likes cocaine (which would be free since it is a commodity) then what??

"Technology will be developed and distributed as humanity’s needs progress."

Well, right now the world needs strip-casting machines. How are you going to manufacture these things, price them appropriately, and get them to the customers that need them?

Time bank can be used as a transitionary tool to get us from here to there. I have said before: it can’t be implemented overnight nor is it inforceable. As time banking evolves things like this can and will inevitably be solved.

"there was a definitive hierarchy that inevitably led to inequalities and corruption"

And why did that happen? Because humans were involved. By the same token, your system does not take into account human nature.

Monetary system does not take into account mans needs. Only the need for profits regardless of the human/environmental toll.

"If you’re going to make assumptions at least indulge me with the details."

What details? It seems pretty obvious to me that you are a college student. Am I correct?

Why would you assume that?

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Ok so dude has a 400 hr suite, goes to the theatre (which would not cost time since it is a community service) and likes cocaine (which would be free since it is a commodity) then what??"

Well, he's going to enjoy looking good in his suit. And he is going to go home and sip some fine cognac. I assume that will be free too. This world is looking better and better.

"As time banking evolves things like this can and will inevitably be solved."

That's a nice statement, but in the real world you have to explain exactly how this will be solved.

"Monetary system does not take into account mans needs."

The only thing man needs is water, food (a certain number of calories per day, along with several essential amino acids, some vitamins and whatnot) and protection from the elements. Bu man is not motivated by what he needs, he is motivated by what he wants. If you plan to build a simple, small hunter-gatherer society, maybe like the Hadza of Tanzania, you can talk about needs. But if you want a computer to type on, an iPhone to play with, and a vehicle to get you places, that won't cut it.

"Why would you assume that?"

Am I incorrect?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

"As time banking evolves things like this can and will inevitably be solved." That's a nice statement, but in the real world you have to explain exactly how this will be solved. I wish I'd saved my Thomas Jefferson Statement for this one but since I didn't... Do you think that Abraham Lincoln had a plan for the highway system?

"Monetary system does not take into account mans needs." The only thing man needs is water, food (a certain number of calories per day, along with several essential amino acids, some vitamins and whatnot) and protection from the elements. Bu man is not motivated by what he needs, he is motivated by what he wants. If you plan to build a simple, small hunter-gatherer society, maybe like the Hadza of Tanzania, you can talk about needs. But if you want a computer to type on, an iPhone to play with, and a vehicle to get you places, that won't cut it.

You describe only a few of mans biological needs. Do you fail to recognize emotional needs?

"Why would you assume that?" Am I incorrect?

In many many ways!

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Do you think that Abraham Lincoln had a plan for the highway system?"

No, but if he had predicted the rise of a highway system he would have had to present a plan. I don't think he had a plan for the atomic bomb either.

"Do you fail to recognize emotional needs?"

Exactly my point. There are many things humans want, including those things which massage their emotional "needs" and stimulate their pleasure centers. And those are things that people will pay good money for.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Exactly my point. There are many things humans want, including those things which massage their emotional "needs" and stimulate their pleasure centers. And those are things that people will pay good money for.---only because they have to.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

No specific program is really needed, all you need is to properly register the voters and issue each one a Key so that they recognize themselves in a database, then when you want the population to express their will, you provide the whole list of all the Keys. Everyone interested in participating in the decision making process would then vote typically yes or no to the proposal associating their specific Key number (known only to them) to a decision yes or no. The database would be open, meaning that you could import the data and verify that your vote is really taken into account in that particular vote. In that way, hacking is detectable since every voter could verify that their vote is accounted for. That way, they can get the same results from the vote by importing the results in Excel or any other similar software as the “official” published results.

I am no IT specialist but you need a server that would contain a database with all the voters represented by their individual Keys. The voters identify his/her specific Key, punches in a PIN numbers and enters a vote (or many votes as many could be run simultaneously).

For the first time we would be able to verify that our vote was really registered and not rejected by biased election workers. Voter turnout to be much higher than today and it’s also much greener as you don't need to take your car or be there in person. Those who can't or won't use a computer could use the phone to enter their decision for all current decision society needs to take.

The banks have taken advantage of the internet for a long time with a lot of success, I believe the population is ready to use those tools for a better society.

The novelty is in the open database concept, it takes care of most of the concerns related to the anonymity of the vote while allowing people to verify that their own vote is taken into account.

This movement doesn't seem to be organized to the extent that they have a leader or someone to make it an effective tool towards change. I believe that having the means to consult the crowds in the goal of obtaining a mandate is vital at this time.

I am sure that this could be put in place pretty quickly; there are a lot of good IT people in the protest. The biggest difficulty is to register people so that the vote is recognized as legitimate. To do this in Canada for example the electors’ registry is needed, for the protest movement, they would need to do a proper census in order to start the process.

We have to think about different ways of distributing wealth, the actual electoral process was designed for a world without modern communication and is a stumping block for a better democracy. We have to break that paradigm and use the tools that we have to say what we want as individuals; voting for someone every four years has become meaningless to me.

We have to take the power back.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

What's there to vote for? We need technocracy, not politicians.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

You could vote for everything that concerns your city, your state, your country... We could use a different word to describe the act of filling in your decisions. The whole idea is to get rid of politicians and take the decisions ourselves. Technologies can already support that.

For example, at city level you could be sked if you agree to a major developpement that could affect the neighborhood, or to change the zoning (not sure you have that in the US) of a particular lot of land for agriculture to comercial ? At country level, at the same time, you could voice your opinion on the validity of the death sentence in your state or the use of depleted uranium in your armie's arsenal. Sometimes you would have to educate yourself if you want to really know the ins and out of your decisions. That would responsibilize people towards the affairs of their town, state, country etc.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Yeah, vote local and have a constitution that states your goals & principals but I'm sick of rotten politicians, there's maybe 10 of 'em that are any good on the national level. Look at past elections . . . the majority is not always right or educated.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

That's why we need to get rid of politicians, in direct democracy you decide what becomes law and what is obsolete and should be void. The whole point of this way of doing things is to get rid of politicians and more important, the power that they get when they get elected. As far as the majority not being always right or educated enough to decide what is right, that's a different issue. It's everyone's responsibility to be aware of current issues, in any case what the majority decides should become reality. There are ways to account for the rights of minorities.

The speed at which changes could be implimented would be much more flexible than anything seen anywhere.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

I'm kinda against laws too, the law should be in your heart ("teach your children well"). I'm in favor of a constitution that spells out the goals and has technocrats to implement it . . . here's from a post I wrote about it elsewhere:

I think you'll find the article in Wikipedia on technocracy very interesting. I found out about it because there was a Canadian organization that believed in it that also believed, more or less (as I recall) in eliminating money. I can't remember their name . . . I found out about it 20-years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy

The article on the technocracy Movement mentions Edward Bellamy who's book, "Looking Backward" was a catalyst for the populist movement in the 1880s. They advocated eliminating money and had the most votes for a third-party candidate proportional to electors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement

Here's a quote from Looking Backwards: "I had visited a world incomparably more affluent than this, in which money was unknown and without conceivable use. . . . These exchanges money effected -- how equitably, might be seen in a walk from the tenement house districts to the Back Bay [Boston] -- at a cost of an army of men taken from productive labor to manage it, with constant ruinous breakdowns of its machinery, and a generally debauching influence on mankind which had justified its description, from ancient time as the "root of all evil." — Edward Bellamy, Looking Backward, 1888. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Looking_Backward

Here's a poll on one of the technocracy websites where they ask if money should be used, by far, most of those polled seek to abolish money: http://www.technocracy.org/component/poll/1-nomoneypoll

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"I'm kinda against laws too, the law should be in your heart"

Certainly you aren't referring to all laws, right? Don't you think there should be laws against people murdering each other? If someone broke into your house and killed your family, don't you think that person should be punished in some way?

Of course there is one law you will never get rid of. After all the human laws are removed, what is left is the law of the jungle.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Locally ppl can decide what to do with killers. Here in Tucson someone took law into their own hands and killed the two who molested his son; jury acquitted him twice.

I just gor this email today: "FACED WITH THE CEASELESS STREAM OF NEWS about war, crime, and terrorism, one could easily think we live in the most violent age ever seen. Yet as the Harvard University psychologist and New York Times bestselling author Steven Pinker shows in this startling and engaging new work, just the opposite is true: violence has been diminishing for millennia and we may be living in the most peaceful time in our species’ existence."

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

I may not understand what you mean. Are you referring to doing away with federal laws and sticking to state and local laws? I guess that would work. Or are you referring to ad hoc vigilantism, like your example? Even in your example there was a legal response, and the person was judged by an impartial jury. I don't think most people would agree with removing the laws completely.

I once lived in an Asian country in which, if a murderer was captured, a rifle was handed to a family member of the victim, who could then extract justice. And I see that there is a resurgence of necklacing, a particularly gruesome vigilante technique, in South Africa. But I don't think most Americans would vote in favor of these approaches.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

We've got to evolve. Much crime is related to garbage drugs (like meth . . . I like pot, LSD & 'shrooms), which would certainly decline if we eliminated money. Many ppl take drugs to escape from the reality of the way the world is today. Karl Marx called religion an opiate of the masses to kill the pain of life.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

A true democracy, indeed ideal! I have one question: Would a voter be able to change their vote. Humans minds are ever changing.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

At one point the vote would have to be closed and no further change possible. I don't see any problem to revert a decision before closure, it's your voice.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

As cultural shifts occur laws become irrelevant or problematic to furthering the advancement of humanity. Perhaps "laws" should never become final but instead upheld until society deems that they should be changed.

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

Laws are basic guidelines to organize society, as they become obsolete they are generally phased out at one point. In a direct democracy using fast communications, laws would be much more "in tune" with the will of the population. In fact one of the best benefit would be to void some laws and agreements not wnated by the population.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Right so a "law" would be something that is always up for consideration. It is never "closed". Is this correct?

[-] 1 points by Billyblastoff (33) 8 years ago

As it is the case now. In Canada the long gun registry will be scrapped because the new government said they would do that in case they got a majority vote this time. It's just that the time scale for change to happen is very long and often political parties don't respect their promises. If we were directly voting for that to happen, it would already be a done deal.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed. Revolt!

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Continuing the conversation below (no Reply link for some reason):

Coreupt: "I am not dodging."

Well, it is a simple yes-or-no question. I paid a guy a fair amount to fix my broken thumb. I paid the kid across the street a lot less to mow my lawn. All three of us were happy with the arrangements.

Coreupt: "Hey…are you god? With no need for stock brokers, bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate lawyers, accountants, and CEO’s… the pool of bright motivated individuals is sure to increase."

No, nor are you. This is equivalent speculation. I think the course of human history suggests a higher likelihood of a less rosy scenario.

Coreupt: "Everyone is capable of developing a unique skill that is beneficial to society."

Sure, but the relative values of those skills differ. I put a higher value on the skill of flying an airplane (given that I put my life in the pilot's hands) than I do on the skill of cutting my lawn. It isn't that the lawnmower man is not an equally precious child of God or whatever, it is just that getting to my destination alive is more important to me than a neatly trimmed lawn. And I am willing to pay for that.

Coreupt: "Perhaps you and I have fundamentally different philosophies. I believe that all humans are inherently good but are driven to bad because of a feeling of hopelessness created in an unequal society. The truth is that most are afraid of equality so they make excuses to not strive for it."

Well, the truth is that people are not equal. I would love to play in the NBA, but it ain't happening. I would love to play like Hendrix, but that isn't happening either. Everyone doesn't have the brains of Einstein or the vision of Leonardo. Some people are good, some are bad. These things are not distributed equally in the human population. You are basically predicting The New Soviet Man; well, that didn't work out so well for Trotsky and I don't think it is going to fly in the US either. You are reinventing a broken wheel. As Freud put it, "the psychological premises on which it is based are an untenable illusion."

Now you also need to consider how you will enforce your economic system. For example, I have a unusual skill set that produces a service that a lot of people really really want. If I tell my neighbor I will give him one hour of my service in exchange for five hours of lawnmowing, he will jump at that offer and consider it a great bargain. But if you allow that type of happy voluntary private exchange (a common characteristic of human relations since we emerged from the primordial ooze), your whole system falls apart. So now you need to start the hangings and shootings, and it is just work work work all day long.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Well, it is a simple yes-or-no question. I paid a guy a fair amount to fix my broken thumb. I paid the kid across the street a lot less to mow my lawn. All three of us were happy with the arrangements.

I feel that I have sufficiently answered this question. The only other thing I can say is that all people should have the opportunity to pursue their passion. People find passion when they don't fear inequality. Passion leads to the development of better technology which, in a benevolent society. benefits humanity. , Coreupt: "Hey…are you god? With no need for stock brokers, bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate lawyers, accountants, and CEO’s… the pool of bright motivated individuals is sure to increase."

No, nor are you. This is equivalent speculation. I think the course of human history suggests a higher likelihood of a less rosy scenario. I'm sorry. I dont know what to say other than we don't know the potential for the good and evil of man. We can only attempt to steer our destiny in the best direction.

Coreupt: "Everyone is capable of developing a unique skill that is beneficial to society."

Sure, but the relative values of those skills differ.

Only in a monetary society. A young man who mows a lawn for an hour may find that he does not like mowing lawns and finds another way to contribute. On the other hand if he finds love in grounds keeping and he finds enough grounds to keep he may become the best in his field (pun). If no one finds passion in groundskeeping and you don't want to mow your own lawns will become obsolete. Like I have said before, everyone should have to do their fair share of the "dirty work". You shit too, don't you?

I put a higher value on the skill of flying an airplane (given that I put my life in the pilot's hands) than I do on the skill of cutting my lawn. It isn't that the lawnmower man is not an equally precious child of God or whatever, it is just that getting to my destination alive is more important to me than a neatly trimmed lawn. And I am willing to pay for that. I feel like i have already addressed this issue above. Passion manifest has no price. The monetary system does not reward passion which stifles innovation.

Coreupt: "Perhaps you and I have fundamentally different philosophies. I believe that all humans are inherently good but are driven to bad because of a feeling of hopelessness created in an unequal society. The truth is that most are afraid of equality so they make excuses to not strive for it." Well, the truth is that people are not equal. I would love to play in the NBA, but it ain't happening. I would love to play like Hendrix, but that isn't happening either. Everyone doesn't have the brains of Einstein or the vision of Leonardo. Why do you want to play in the NBA? Fame? Fortune? Jordan & Jimmy just loved to play. Furthermore whose to say that they were meant for other things but they were distracted by the promise of security? They were fortunate to have been born into a culture that places high monetary value on their passion. None of them would have been without the environment to pursue their passion. Equality fosters this environment

Some people are good, some are bad. These things are not distributed equally in the human population. You are basically predicting The New Soviet Man; well, that didn't work out so well for Trotsky. Different era, different motivations, different technology, different leadership, different moral, Edison believed there were no failures only feedback.

and I don't think it is going to fly in the US either. You are reinventing a broken wheel. As Freud put it, "the psychological premises on which it is based are an untenable illusion." How is that we can reinvent that which has never existed? Freud was a man like any other?

Now you also need to consider how you will enforce your economic system. Enforcement is unnecessary, as participation is optional.

For example, I have a unusual skill set that produces a service that a lot of people really really want. If I tell my neighbor I will give him one hour of my service in exchange for five hours of lawnmowing, he will jump at that offer and consider it a great bargain. But if you allow that type of happy voluntary private exchange (a common characteristic of human relations since we emerged from the primordial ooze), your whole system falls apart. So now you need to start the hangings and shootings, and it is just work work work all day long. Perhaps today your neighbor will mow your lawn for five hours but in a time based economy your neighbor may have an equally valued skill set. and will not be so willing to mow your lawn at all. Furthermore in a society that values the conspicuous hoarding of resources is socially unacceptable. You will likely have a very hard time finding 10 people to mow your private golf course while you sip martinis on the 9th.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

Me: "Sure, but the relative values of those skills differ."

Coreupt: "Only in a monetary society."

I think that is incorrect. What is of value to me is one thing; but what is important in human interchange is what is of value to other people, at a given point in time. It you are lying on the road with a femur fracture, you are going to assign far greater value to the skill of the orthopedic surgeon than you are to the skill of the lawnmower man, regardless of what kind of monetary system you inhabit.

There are many "perhapses" in your argument, but I think the course of human history is a better model for what would actually happen. Would you outlaw voluntary exchange between consenting individuals?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Me: "Sure, but the relative values of those skills differ."

Coreupt: "Only in a monetary society."

I think that is incorrect. What is of value to me is one thing; but what is important in human interchange is what is of value to other people, at a given point in time. It you are lying on the road with a femur fracture, you are going to assign far greater value to the skill of the orthopedic surgeon than you are to the skill of the lawnmower man, regardless of what kind of monetary system you inhabit.

YOU have a femur fracture and YOU value a skilled orthopedic surgeon. Many value baseball and value a skilled grounds keeper.

There are many "perhapses" in your argument, but I think the course of human history is a better model for what would actually happen. Would you outlaw voluntary exchange between consenting individuals?

No, but in a society that values equality, giving someone less than is deserved simply for the benefit of your hoarding is socially unacceptable.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"YOU have a femur fracture and YOU value a skilled orthopedic surgeon. Many value baseball and value a skilled grounds keeper."

Correct. The relative value (desirability) of any good or service is dependent on circumstances, it is not a static property. Right now, a gold bar is more valuable to you than a bottle of water. After a day or two in the desert, the relative values change. When the baseball lover has a broken leg, he will value the orthopedic surgeon more than he does a good ball game. Your labor-hours assumes a static, equal value where it does not exist.

"giving someone less than is deserved..."

You determine what is "deserved" every day, based on your desires. If someone offers to do bird calls for an hour, I'm not going to pay for that. Maybe you love bird calls and you will pay the guy, It's your choice (and mine). What the person "deserves" is simply what someone else is willing to pay.

If you don't outlaw the voluntary exchange, then some other medium will arise. That is human nature (even in the Soviet Union, when death was on the line, a black market flourished).

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

"YOU have a femur fracture and YOU value a skilled orthopedic surgeon. Many value baseball and value a skilled grounds keeper."

Correct. The relative value (desirability) of any good or service is dependent on circumstances ,it is not a static property. Right now, a gold bar is more valuable to you than a bottle of water. After a day or two in the desert, the relative values change. When the baseball lover has a broken leg, he will value the orthopedic surgeon more than he does a good ball game. Your labor-hours assumes a static, equal value where it does not exist.

Equal value does not exist now but it does exist in a time-based economy.

Lets follow a time credit: Mary teaches a knitting class and banks an hour She gives that hour to Bill for installing a toilet Bill trades it to Hank for shoes Hank gives it to Wanda for mowing his lawn.

Mary did not give it to Wanda. Each hour was used to benefit the circumstance of the individual at the time it was spent.

"giving someone less than is deserved..."

You determine what is "deserved" every day, based on your desires. If someone offers to do bird calls for an hour, I'm not going to pay for that. Maybe you love bird calls and you will pay the guy, It's your choice (and mine). What the person "deserves" is simply what someone else is willing to pay.

Is your skill valuable enough that someone is willing to trade you an hour of their time for it if not it’s not bankable. Time exchange encourages skill acquisition.

If you don't outlaw the voluntary exchange, then some other medium will arise. That is human nature (even in the Soviet Union, when death was on the line, a black market flourished).

That is because a feeling of scarcity was evident.

A pure time based economy would take a cultural change, which will take several generations.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Lets follow a time credit: Mary teaches a knitting class and banks an hour She gives that hour to Bill for installing a toilet Bill trades it to Hank for shoes Hank gives it to Wanda for mowing his lawn."

This will work in a small self-contained commune, not a technological global economy. A factory in China needs a strip-casting machine by the end of the year. Explain how you will build it (I don't know many people whose passion is building strip-casters) how you will set a price for it, and how you will get it where it needs to go. No "perhapses," I need a real plan.

"Is your skill valuable enough that someone is willing to trade you an hour of their time for it if not it’s not bankable."

So you agree that some people's skills aren't as valuable as others. Supposing my skill is valuable enough that someone will give me a half hour of their banked time for one hour of my service? Will that be permissible?

"That is because a feeling of scarcity was evident."

Ultimately, it was because the will to power is a very strong trait in humans (some more than others).

"A pure time based economy would take a cultural change, which will take several generations."

Even Ian Banks suggested it will take millions of years (evolution is a slow process).

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

This will work in a small self-contained commune, not a technological global economy. A factory in China needs a strip-casting machine by the end of the year. Explain how you will build it (I don't know many people whose passion is building strip-casters) how you will set a price for it, and how you will get it where it needs to go. No "perhapses," I need a real plan.

Ok I'll repeat myself again: Time bank will take generations and a cultural revolution to become global. It is impossible to come up with a "real plan" in a theoretical future economy. I will tell you that if it is needed it will be done. If it is not it wont which is not the case today.

"Is your skill valuable enough that someone is willing to trade you an hour of their time for it if not it’s not bankable." So you agree that some people's skills aren't as valuable as others. Supposing my skill is valuable enough that someone will give me a half hour of their banked time for one hour of my service? Will that be permissible? Nothing is not permissible but socially unacceptable as the short seller is selling short only himself and the buyer is taking advantage of a human which is morally wrong.

"That is because a feeling of scarcity was evident." Ultimately, it was because the will to power is a very strong trait in humans (some more than others).

As is the vulnerability to be led.

"A pure time based economy would take a cultural change, which will take several generations." Even Ian Banks suggested it will take millions of years (evolution is a slow process). So your admitting its possible;)

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Nothing is not permissible but socially unacceptable as the short seller is selling short only himself and the buyer is taking advantage of a human which is morally wrong."

I am not sure the seller would see it that way, any more than he does today. If he badly wants something that costs 1 labor-hour, and all he can do is mow lawns, and I offer him 1 labor-hour for two hours of mowing, he will be happy and so will I. Two happy people; how is that morally wrong? The alternative is that I mow my lawn myself; now he is unhappy, and I maintain some of my wealth (and get a bit of exercise). Is that a better outcome?

(By the way, "selling short" is a technical term on Wall Street with a specific meaning: you know that, right? Just to avoid confusion you might want to use a different term for our lawnmower man.)

"As is the vulnerability to be led."

You do have some understanding of human nature. "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

"So your admitting its possible;)"

Oh, anything is possible. But I think it is exceedingly unlikely. You are basically talking about a sort of gift economy, which can function in a small primitive community, but which has been discarded (in all human cultures) as society becomes more complex (and which exists today only in a handful of hunter-gather groups; even the Amish use money). Now if we have a nuclear holocaust or something like that, and we are reduced to small roving bands (think Mad Max, or A Boy and His Dog) then a gift economy may arise for a while in some groups. But it will eventually evolve to a money economy as groups begin to work together peacefully and need a unit of exchange of value. That is the pattern of human history.

(By the way, consider the source: Ian Banks is a science fiction writer.)

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Communist society will know nothing of money [or barter/work credits] . . . socialism is an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism. -- NIKOLAI BUKHARIN, The ABC of Communism, 1919 Bukharin was a colleague of Lenin and editor of Isvestia; he was arrested for betraying the socialist revolution, his book was banned and in 1938, after a show-trial, he was executed. http://666ismoney.com/Satan.html

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 8 years ago

You should campaign on this idea.

[-] 1 points by quadrawack (280) 8 years ago

I would also add that the way our monetary system is set up is the KEY reason why we have this massive economic problem.

[-] 1 points by quadrawack (280) 8 years ago

I think you're thinking of the Ithaca Hours system. It's a community currency. Here's an intro. http://youtu.be/pWfrnfJmP5w

They've been doing this since 1991. It's a well proven currency/trade system. And that's the function of money in the first place.

Unfortunately, we have a monopoly money, literally, by the Federal Reserve, where the unit of money is a unit of debt that can be inflated to worthlessness. That's completely antithetical to the purpose of money which is a store of value and a method of exchange.

[-] 1 points by simonshortt (14) 8 years ago

greed my friend is a design fault in ever living being

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I disagree. I believe that greed is a learned behavior.

[-] 1 points by lebro (23) 8 years ago

*myth like the big bang.....

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

There is a fundamental difference between myth and theory. One is based on stories which are upheld by nothing other than faith, the other is based on science which has no ego and begs to be replaced with a more provable theory.

[-] 1 points by lebro (23) 8 years ago

dude chill out. i was just trying to get a rise out of you

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I'm not a dude, I'm a lady I'm not sure what you mean by a rise.

[-] 1 points by lebro (23) 8 years ago

not like that ma'am. Its an old term for getting riled up or flustered

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

so why would your comment get a "rise" out of me. Perhaps you should try harder next time.

[-] 1 points by lebro (23) 8 years ago

some people take the internet quite seriously...

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

indeed, some people do somethings sometimes.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 8 years ago

Exactly, but we need a comprehensive strategy that implements all our demands, including this one, at the same time, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures

Join

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/

if you want to be 1 of 100,000 people needed to support a Presidential Candidate – myself – at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

[-] 1 points by andrewbb (16) 8 years ago

Money is always backed by authority (usually at gunpoint).

All transactions are promises to deliver value.

I promise you this beer. You promise me $3.

Transaction.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed, however money=power=corruption absolutely.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

absolute power corrupts absolutely - lord acton

[-] 1 points by andrewbb (16) 8 years ago

I didn't need no stinking authority to make that transaction.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Look at the tag on your shirt. Where was it made? Think about the conditions underwhich the person who made your shirt likely works. Do you think that if that better opportunity was presented that person would not take it for fear of having to work harder? The truth is that that person is your slave and you are someone elses slave. Money blinds us from this reality

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Money is not fake, it is needed for society to function. Some people want to work hard some people want to play World of warcraft all day. There is no way possible at this stage of the game to operate society on a time bank. I say this even though I realize that if all the Americans shared the jobs that NEED to be done in order for society to function each person would only have to work about 3 months each year . That being said, I need to reiterate that right now, today We the People of the united States of America need to reclaim the right to create money back from the 1%. They use various methods to control and create money, the FED is one, COMMERCIAL banks are another. In fact I think its safe to say that there are no purely NATIONAL banks left today because all the MONEY ( gold and silver coin) has been removed from the system. A money system based on Gold and silver can do 2 things, 1) protect savings from inflation 2) ensure money could not be created out of thin air.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I agree that it is not possible to eliminate the current monetary system in a short period of time. Time bank can be a transitionary tool that can take us from our current state of absolute corruption to one of enlightenment, equality and sustenance.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

eff the fed, abolish money, can't eat gold and sliver. gold standard wouldn't work, was cause of the prolonging of great depression.

I wish someone would nail Ron Paul on his "end the Fed" and "sound money" nonsense at one of these debates. Some good criticism of it in the Amazon reviews of his book: http://tinyurl.com/3j2e9zm

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 8 years ago

Money backup on energy shuold work....

http://www.energybackedmoney.com/

[-] 1 points by classicliberal (312) 8 years ago

Um.... if you're looking to the reviews section on Amazon for counter-points, perhaps you already decided a conclusion and are looking for evidence to support it. Saying you can't eat gold and silver doesn't make sense... You can't eat paper, either. This is about economics.

[-] 0 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Also Alex Imas' review is flawed because in his propaganda he fails to realize that gold supplies would also increase over the 25 years and people would save their gold in a bank thus earning interest on their deposits same as the paper money he seems to advocate..

[-] 0 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

how do you plan to store your performed labor until such a time that you choose to spend it. Lets not loose sight of just what exactly money is supposed to do. Money is only supposed to be acting as a storage of labor performed. Labor is true value. Real Money stores that value. you can not trade all your labor today for food. As for the great depression, you do realize the FED came into existence in 1913, before the great depression. Perhaps I misunderstand you and you just want someone to give you food for nothing??

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Earned hours are "stored" in an account just like money. You can spend them later by asking someone to say... paint your shed, harvest your garden or cook you a meal. I know the Fed's history and justification. I believe that it's creators did so with the accumulation of wealth in mind. And, I apologize for not understanding your last comment about free food.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

So I've been thinking about how this would be done in practice. I assume you would have to have some kind of unhackable central computer system (good luck with that) which records your hours. How are those hours entered and stored? If I build a table in my basement workshop, how do I get my hours into the system? How do you know how long it really took me to build that table? Anyway, I suppose when I "buy" something from someone, there would be some way to transfer the hours from one account to the other. I would have to trust that the other person put the actual number of work hours in the system, right? Is that how it would work? By the way, suppose I build that table and no one buys it; do I still get my hours recorded?

See, I went to the local craft fair yesterday with $50 in my pocket. Just by luck there was a guy selling nice little jewelry boxes for $50. I have no idea how long it takes him to make those boxes. He had no idea how long I worked for that $50. But the fact at that moment was that I wanted that box more than I wanted the $50, and he wanted the $50 more than he wanted the box (in fact it was late in the day, he was packing up, I bet I could have haggled him down 5 or 10 bucks). So a happy transaction ensued, similar to zillions of such transactions which have occurred since humans arose on the planet, all over the world.

Now in your system, I assume he would have to display the hours he spent making the box. Suppose it was five hours, and I only have four hours in my account. He would rather not wrap the thing and carry it back out to his van, so he says he would be willing to accept the four hours. Will that be a crime? How will you detect it, enforce it, and punish it?

I imagine your system would have to monitored by the police, and some kind of alarm will indicate when an unequal-hour transaction took place. You will need a vast police state to prevent people from doing what comes naturally, and of course the idea of personal privacy would have to be sacrificed.

Another thing. I pick up a few extra bucks on weekends busking on a busy street corner. People might listen for five or ten minutes, and then throw a buck or two in the hat. In the future, if they want to give me a whole labor-hour (or whatever you plan to call it) will they actually have to listen for an hour? How will we prove that and make that transaction?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

So I've been thinking about how this would be done in practice. I assume you would have to have some kind of unhackable central computer system (good luck with that) which records your hours.----If someone hacked the system or your account and “stole” your hours you could put them back in. If the hour thief steals thousands of hours and then asks someone to make build him a 10,000sf mansion with time credits the builder is sure to question the acquisition of the time credits and is likely to choose to build for another user who actually needs a house. --- How are those hours entered ---by the user---and stored---on a server---? Time bank is totally transparent. It is not possible for someone to get more hours than they are alive for.

In a time bank system equality is valued so there is no desire for conspicuous displays of wealth and power. In fact such displays would be socially unacceptable.

If I build a table in my basement workshop, how do I get my hours into the system? ---you put them there---How do you know how long it really took me to build that table? ---why would you lie?---Anyway, I suppose when I "buy" something from someone, there would be some way to transfer the hours from one account to the other. I would have to trust that the other person put the actual number of work hours in the system, right?---It would be reflected in your account, if it is wrong you could correct it.--- Is that how it would work? By the way, suppose I build that table and no one buys it; do I still get my hours recorded? ---If you build tables for time credits why would you build a table that no one needs?

See, I went to the local craft fair yesterday with $50 in my pocket. Just by luck there was a guy selling nice little jewelry boxes for $50. I have no idea how long it takes him to make those boxes. He had no idea how long I worked for that $50. But the fact at that moment was that I wanted that box more than I wanted the $50, and he wanted the $50 more than he wanted the box (in fact it was late in the day, he was packing up, I bet I could have haggled him down 5 or 10 bucks). So a happy transaction ensued, similar to zillions of such transactions which have occurred since humans arose on the planet, all over the world.

Now in your system, I assume he would have to display the hours he spent making the box. Suppose it was five hours, and I only have four hours in my account. He would rather not wrap the thing and carry it back out to his van, so he says he would be willing to accept the four hours. Will that be a crime? How will you detect it, enforce it, and punish it? In a time based economy barter is irrelevant as profit is irrelevant. If two people choose to participate in an uneven exchange there is nothing that can be done but if many uneven exchanges occur it becomes obvious that someone is hoarding. That type of behavior is socially unacceptable as it undermines the entire system and the hoarder is unlikely to find many more people to exchange time credits with.

I imagine your system would have to monitored by the police, and some kind of alarm will indicate when an unequal-hour transaction took place. You will need a vast police state to prevent people from doing what comes naturally, and of course the idea of personal privacy would have to be sacrificed. Transparency eliminates the need for “police “ or any type of enforcement. What type of privacy are you referring? Why would you want to hide the fact that you are a grounds keeper, table maker or doctor.?

Another thing. I pick up a few extra bucks on weekends busking on a busy street corner. People might listen for five or ten minutes, and then throw a buck or two in the hat. In the future, if they want to give me a whole labor-hour (or whatever you plan to call it) will they actually have to listen for an hour? How will we prove that and make that transaction? OF course you can still entertain people for the enjoyment of it. If it is a community service you can even bank time for it. But there is no need for the passers by to give you their time at all.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"the builder is sure to question the acquisition of the time credits and is likely to choose to build for another user who actually needs a house. "

You don't know many builders, do you?

"Time bank is totally transparent. It is not possible for someone to get more hours than they are alive for."

I still don't understand how the hours get into the time bank.

"why would you lie?"

If I can work three hours, bank five, and spend the other two fishing, that would be a pretty good reason. It seems obvious.

"If you build tables for time credits why would you build a table that no one needs?"

Because if I can trade those time credits for goods or services, I'll spend all day building things whether people want them or not. No, actually, I would call myself a fisherman and spend all my time fishing, putting those hours in the bank. Come to think of it, this idea is starting to grow on me. (Other jobs I would consider would be beer tester or strip club safety inspector).

"there is nothing that can be done but if many uneven exchanges occur it becomes obvious that someone is hoarding. That type of behavior is socially unacceptable as it undermines the entire system and the hoarder is unlikely to find many more people to exchange time credits with."

Well, how will you punish those people? You have to start thinking in terms of prison sentences and that sort of thing; I wouldn't rely on social opprobrium to do the trick. Because if you allow your labor-hours to differ in value, your whole system collapses. And the hoarder will easily find people to trade with, if he has something they want.

"What type of privacy are you referring? Why would you want to hide the fact that you are a grounds keeper, table maker or doctor.?"

Based on what you have said (if I understand you correctly) people will be able to accumulate time credits (valid for exchange for goods and services) by doing work that no one is observing, even if that work doesn't produce a product that anyone wants. (That can't be correct, can it? I must be misinterpreting.) And people are going to sign their own time cards, right? Well, in short order everyone in the country will be working 20 hours a day, but strangely, nothing will be produced. So you will need some form of monitoring to ensure that people are doing the work they say they are doing. You will have to put an Orwellian telescreen in my workshop, to make sure I am really building tables.

"If it is a community service you can even bank time for it."

Who determines if it is a community service? Can I make that determination? After all, you encourage people to follow their passion, right? So I can spend my time fishing and playing my guitar, and I will accumulate labor-hours that I can use to buy beer? Man, that's Utopia.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

You don't know many builders, do you?

Builders today are driven by profit. They’ll build what pays the most. In a time based economy they can chose their job on other merits. His choice could naturally be based on what he/she values. If equality is valued he/she will likely chose not to contribute to the acquisition of idol displays of superiority.

"Time bank is totally transparent. It is not possible for someone to get more hours than they are alive for."

I still don't understand how the hours get into the time bank.

The user puts them there. I would log into my time bank account and go to “deposit time “, add hours and a description of those hours. “ 3 hours, community garden”… 4 hours fishing for communal food…

"why would you lie?"

If I can work three hours, bank five, and spend the other two fishing, that would be a pretty good reason. It seems obvious.

This is called greed. In a society that values equality, greed is socially unacceptable. Greedy people who steal time will not find many people to transact with. In addition you will be accountable to your community.

"If you build tables for time credits why would you build a table that no one needs?"

Because if I can trade those time credits for goods or services, I'll spend all day building things whether people want them or not. No, actually, I would call myself a fisherman and spend all my time fishing, putting those hours in the bank. Come to think of it, this idea is starting to grow on me. (Other jobs I would consider would be beer tester or strip club safety inspector).

New time credits must have societal or interpersonal value. If you can show that your job as a taster or inspector benefits society or you can get someone to trade their hours for your services you can do whatever you want. If you can’t you can still do it but you can’t bank it.

"there is nothing that can be done but if many uneven exchanges occur it becomes obvious that someone is hoarding. That type of behavior is socially unacceptable as it undermines the entire system and the hoarder is unlikely to find many more people to exchange time credits with."

Well, how will you punish those people? You have to start thinking in terms of prison sentences and that sort of thing; I wouldn't rely on social opprobrium to do the trick. ---I would

Because if you allow your labor-hours to differ in value, your whole system collapses. And the hoarder will easily find people to trade with, if he has something they want. ----like what the only thing that he “has”, that they “want “, is time. He is a time hoarder afterall.

"What type of privacy are you referring? Why would you want to hide the fact that you are a grounds keeper, table maker or doctor.?"

Based on what you have said (if I understand you correctly) people will be able to accumulate time credits (valid for exchange for goods and services) Goods? No…If you trade a table that took you 8 hours to make you get 8 hours and more wood.

by doing work that no one is observing, even if that work doesn't produce a product that anyone wants. (That can't be correct, can it? ---absolutly---I must be misinterpreting.) And people are going to sign their own time cards, right? Well, in short order everyone in the country will be working 20 hours a day, but strangely, nothing will be produced.

This is your assumption, you have been raised in a culture that has taught you to be distrustful so you assume that people will cheat.

So you will need some form of monitoring to ensure that people are doing the work they say they are doing. You will have to put an Orwellian telescreen in my workshop, to make sure I am really building tables.

Come on now…Work is productive lack of production is evidence of lack of work.

"If it is a community service you can even bank time for it."

Who determines if it is a community service? Can I make that determination?

Yes, you can, but the other people in your life will be able to determine if you are being honest or if you are playing world of warcraft all day. It is up to the community to ensure honesty. If you try to bank your W.O.W. time your plumber is likely to find out and not fix your sink.

After all, you encourage people to follow their passion, right? So I can spend my time fishing and playing my guitar, ---yes, so long as it benefits the community---, and I will accumulate labor-hours that I can use to buy beer? Man, that's Utopia.

Its better than that…Beer, is a commodity, production of which is a community service thus you do not have to spend your time credits on it…so long as you don’t hoard it, but why would you, there is enough for everyone.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"They’ll build what pays the most. In a time based economy they can chose their job on other merits."

Why? If he can exchange the stolen hours (he doesn't know they are stolen, of course) for luxury goods or whatever, why would he not accept them?

"This is called greed."

Yeah, I believe people in antiquity (who understood the hard-wiring of the human brain) classified it as one of the "seven deadly sins." We are the same humans.

"Greedy people who steal time will not find many people to transact with."

I disagree. If I can look into your heart and determine what you really desire, you will trade with me. On that I have no doubt.

"In addition you will be accountable to your community."

So now we are getting down to brass tacks. How will you punish me? You need to think about that as you build your society.

"New time credits must have societal or interpersonal value."

So you are saying that the values of these hours will not be fixed and static. Who will determine the value of those hours? Oh, in "interpersonal" transactions, I assume it will be my customer. What if my customer says "I will give you one of my hours for two hours of your service"? is that legal?

"If you can’t you can still do it but you can’t bank it."

So some work hours are bankable and others are not? Some work is of more value than other work? OK, I don't disagree. But if I am allowed to bank my own hours (as you explained elsewhere) how will you know whether or not my hours are of value? Suppose I say to you "I spent six hours inspecting that strip club, and it is now the safest club in the city, so I am going to bank six hours." What then? Will you have some kind of committee (elected officials maybe) that will determine the value of work? You could probably produce something akin to the automotive flat rate manual.

"I wouldn't rely on social opprobrium to do the trick. ---I would"

Good luck with that.

"like what the only thing that he “has”, that they “want “, is time"

No, people want other things. Look around you at all the things people want (all over the world). We all have a short time on this planet, and no matter how many hours you put in the bank, that doesn't change. If I can determine what you really desire during your brief sojourn in this world, then you are mine. And if my labor-hours can be exchanged for things I desire, I will collect them to whatever degree I deem necessary.

"This is your assumption, you have been raised in a culture that has taught you to be distrustful so you assume that people will cheat."

No, I have lived in the world (mostly in North America, in Asia in the '80s, and briefer periods in Europe and Central America). I have dealt with all kinds of people in all kinds of cultures. But they all share the fundamentals of human nature. Not all people cheat, but some do.

"Come on now…Work is productive lack of production is evidence of lack of work."

You are mistaken. For example, scientists often spend years, whole careers even, without producing anything. There are people who work very hard without producing anything through no fault of their own. Not every invention succeeds. Can they not bank their hours?

"It is up to the community to ensure honesty."

So there will need to be some kind of penal code.

"If you try to bank your W.O.W. time your plumber is likely to find out and not fix your sink. "

Why wouldn't he? If those hours, when transferred to his account, look like any any other hours, he isn't going to care how I accumulated them. Now if you are going to subdivide these hours (say, WOW hours, housebuilding hours, plumbing hours, etc.) and assign different values to them, then I guess I would be stuck with a broken sink. But then of course you are basically back to the dollar.

"Beer, is a commodity, production of which is a community service thus you do not have to spend your time credits on it…"

Have you ever heard of Harry McClintock?

By the way, you haven't yet told me where you attend college, but you asked for details. I will try my best, though I am not Sherlock Holmes:

You are a female student at a liberal arts college. You are not in a technical/science/business field, but are majoring in a field in the humanities. I don't think you are a freshman or a senior, but I can't pin it any better than that. Private or public college? I am going to guess private, but I'm only 51/49 on that. You grew up in reasonably comfortable circumstances.

So how'd I do? Close?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

"This is called greed."

Yeah, I believe people in antiquity (who understood the hard-wiring of the human brain) classified it as one of the "seven deadly sins." We are the same humans.

Does this mean we should not strive for better?

"Greedy people who steal time will not find many people to transact with."

I disagree. If I can look into your heart and determine what you really desire, you will trade with me. On that I have no doubt.

I fail to see how your statement argues mine but...If you were a fishermen and you could choose to whom you give your fish would you give it to the him?

So now we are getting down to brass tacks. How will you punish me? I will not..people in your community who know you as a thief may choose not to transact with you.

You need to think about that as you build your society. this is not my society. I will not build it. If people deem it superior to monetary currency it will build itself.

"New time credits must have societal or interpersonal value."

So you are saying that the values of these hours will not be fixed and static. Who will determine the value of those hours?

An hour is an hour is an hour.

Oh, in "interpersonal" transactions, I assume it will be my customer. What if my customer says "I will give you one of my hours for two hours of your service"? is that legal?

Nothing is illegal as time bank is transparent and self regulating. If it were to self build as described above and self destruct as you seem to predict then how are we any worse off than we are now? I am beginning to feel like you are asking me to repeat myself.

"If you can’t you can still do it but you can’t bank it." So some work hours are bankable and others are not?

Yes of course, hours spent in non productive personal activity such as sleeping can not be banked.

Some work is of more value than other work? OK, I don't disagree. But if I am allowed to bank my own hours (as you explained elsewhere) how will you know whether or not my hours are of value? Suppose I say to you "I spent six hours inspecting that strip club, and it is now the safest club in the city, so I am going to bank six hours." What then? Will you have some kind of committee (elected officials maybe) that will determine the value of work? You could probably produce something akin to the automotive flat rate manual.

Tiered value would undermine the system.

"I wouldn't rely on social opprobrium to do the trick. ---I would" Good luck with that.

"This is your assumption, you have been raised in a culture that has taught you to be distrustful so you assume that people will cheat." No, I have lived in the world (mostly in North America, in Asia in the '80s, and briefer periods in Europe and Central America). I have dealt with all kinds of people in all kinds of cultures.

Have you ever lived in a non monetary society?

But they all share the fundamentals of human nature. Not all people cheat, but some do. "Come on now…Work is productive lack of production is evidence of lack of work."

You are mistaken. For example, scientists often spend years, whole careers even, without producing anything. There are people who work very hard without producing anything through no fault of their own. Not every invention succeeds. Can they not bank their hours? Sure if they can show examples of productive endevours.

"It is up to the community to ensure honesty." So there will need to be some kind of penal code. No...Dishonest communities will naturally fail.

By the way, you haven't yet told me where you attend college, but you asked for details. I will try my best, though I am not Sherlock Holmes: You are a female student at a liberal arts college. You are not in a technical/science/business field, but are majoring in a field in the humanities. I don't think you are a freshman or a senior, but I can't pin it any better than that. Private or public college? I am going to guess private, but I'm only 51/49 on that. You grew up in reasonably comfortable circumstances. So how'd I do? Close?

Not close but I will tell you this...I am human, I am literate in english, I have access to media and a computer. I am a student of life at the college of earth.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Does this mean we should not strive for better?"

Of course we should. Engineers have to consider the laws of physics, the characteristics of materials, etc. when building something or they will end up with a mess. Social engineers need to consider human psychology, human nature, and the lessons of history.

"If you were a fishermen and you could choose to whom you give your fish would you give it to the him?"

I will give it to the person who will pay the most. That is simple.

"people in your community who know you as a thief may choose not to transact with you."

Maybe, maybe not. If I have something they really want, I think they will trade with me. And what is "my community" anyway? My business is international. If a production engineer at a factory in Indonesia says to his boss "This guy in NY can set us up with a strip-caster by the end of the year, signed sealed and delivered, for $X million," will they trade with me? I think so, unless someone undercuts my bid. Maybe Mary and John will trade a shawl for a birdhouse, but that doesn't scale up very well.

"If people deem it superior to monetary currency it will build itself."

Then I advise you not to spend a whole lot of time on this. Go fishing instead.

"New time credits must have societal or interpersonal value....An hour is an hour is an hour."

Explain to me how this is not a contradiction.

"Have you ever lived in a non monetary society?"

No, because there aren't any (except some small hunter-gather units). There is a reason for that.

"Can they not bank their hours? Sure if they can show examples of productive endevours."

Okay, I can spend eight hours bottom fishing and come back with tons of nondescript fish that are good to eat. I can spend a week marlin fishing and come back with nothing (that's why they call it fishing, not catching). Are they equally bankable hours? If so, I will opt for marlin fishing, which is much more exciting.

"Can they not bank their hours? Sure if they can show examples of productive endevours."

So we are actually arguing digital vs analog. You are assigning binary value to hours - some value (call it 1) or no value (call it 0): a binary system. On the other hand, I suggest a sliding scale of value - an analog system. Now when you say that people will need to "show examples of productive endeavours" that means that there will be someone (a committee or whatever) to whom that productive effort must be demonstrated. That committee will be constrained in its task - it will have to assign a 1 or a 0 to a person's effort. What if that worker is given a 0 and starts crying and carrying on, and says "my effort must be worth something!" and one of the committee members says to the others "c'mon, let's give him a 0.5." Wouldn't that be the compassionate approach? And what appeal process will there be, so that the guy can press his case to the next level?

"So there will need to be some kind of penal code. No...Dishonest communities will naturally fail."

You are in favor of social darwinism? OK, I guess, but the strong will eat you alive. Imagine, no gun laws? You would be amazed at what I will have in my rifle cabinet within a week (come to think of it, it wouldn't fit!).

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

"Does this mean we should not strive for better?"

Of course we should. Engineers have to consider the laws of physics, the characteristics of materials, etc. when building something or they will end up with a mess. Social engineers need to consider human psychology, human nature, and the lessons of history.

As well, they must be able to recognize a problem and have the imagination and desire to fix it.

I will give it to the person who will pay the most. That is simple.

The fish is a commodity thus no one will pay for it.

And what is "my community" anyway?

Part of a community consists of those who do things for you which you cannot do yourself like fix your broken femur.

Do you lack a feeling of community in your life. I bet many Americans do. This is a very unfortunate side effect of a system that does not value relationships.

My business is international. If a production engineer at a factory in Indonesia says to his boss "This guy in NY can set us up with a strip-caster by the end of the year, signed sealed and delivered, for $X million," will they trade with me? I think so, unless someone undercuts my bid. Maybe Mary and John will trade a shawl for a birdhouse, but that doesn't scale up very well.

Maybe those who build strip casters need an MRI machine.

"If people deem it superior to monetary currency it will build itself."

Then I advise you not to spend a whole lot of time on this. Go fishing instead.

I do fish…a lot….it allows me the time to dream.

"New time credits must have societal or interpersonal value....An hour is an hour is an hour."

Explain to me how this is not a contradiction.

Please elaborate why you need explaination. We have discussed the value of time in many other threads.

"Have you ever lived in a non monetary society?"

Wouldn't that be the compassionate approach? And what appeal process will there be, so that the guy can press his case to the next level?

The “committee” is society, his community, his coworkers, his teachers, his students etc.

You are in favor of social darwinism? OK, I guess, but the strong will eat you alive. Imagine, no gun laws? You would be amazed at what I will have in my rifle cabinet within a week (come to think of it, it wouldn't fit!).

Within a week of what?

[-] 1 points by LibertyFirst (325) 8 years ago

So how are units of earned hours stored in an account different form dollars stored in an account?

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

They are not much different. In fact most existing time banks call time credits "time dollars" The difference between time banking and money banking is that time is real, it can not be manipulated by interest, inflation or the (federal reserves) infusion of more, previously nonexistent, time. It is transparent and can not be sold for corrupt, greedy pursuits.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"It is transparent and can not be sold for corrupt, greedy pursuits."

Why not? Suppose you have a bunch of Ithaca Hours (or some other existing hour-based currency) and I have something that you really really want. I can charge you as much as I think you will part with, depending on how badly you desire my product or service. How is that different from using any other currency?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Ithica puts monetary value on their currency. Monetary value inherently leads to corruption as unfair accumulation occurs in a society that does not value equality. It becomes impossible to tell earned and who stole. Time spent in socially productive pursuits is obviously transparent. Time can't be stolen, hoarded or inherited.

[-] 1 points by LibertyFirst (325) 8 years ago

So what you're really saying is we need a sound money system.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Yes and no. I do not believe that a sound monetary system is possible. If it were possible I would be all for it but, history has proven time and time again that money buys power and power corrupts. This is an endless cycle. Time bank can be implemented now and can can be used concurrently with the monetary system that we use now. With enough participation people will realize that time dollars are superior to money dollars, and money dollars will become obsolete. However I realize that this goal is years and a revolutionary, societal change away. But I remain hopeful that humanity will prevail.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

see my comments, two paragraphs down. There's not enough gold discovered to expand the money supply, which as I said was one of the reasons the great depression lasted so long.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

There is plenty of new gold and silver being discovered to increase the monetary supply. I glance at Kitcos from page is as far as you need to go to see that www.kitco.com Also coupled with bartering for lets say a chicken or a cow would be another way to store the value of my labor would be sufficient to sustain a good common law money supply. Bartering would at least let me negotiate FOR MYSELF the value of my labor. "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".- Henry Ford its clear you are one of those people Mr. Ford refers to.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

sorry, kitcos doesn't prove there's enough gold to expand the money supply. In the 1880s the populists wanted to expand the money supply by allowing a silver standard. Edward Bellamy wrote a book during that time where he advocated eliminating money. Many "Bellamy Clubs" appeared and the populist party won over 1,000,000 votes during that election.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Open your eyes, Kitcos front page constantly reports on new gold and silver discoveries. You should change your screen name to " eyes closed by ignorance" At least I looked at your web page to see at least 20% of the people you quoted were discussing the ills of a Fiat monetary system. and not advocating the elimination of money all together.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

The total amount of gold that has ever been mined has been estimated at around 142,000 metric tons. This is less than the value of circulating money in the U.S. alone, where more than $8.3 trillion is in circulation or in deposit (M2). Therefore, a return to the gold standard, if also combined with a mandated end to fractional reserve banking, would result in a significant increase in the current value of gold, which may limit its use in current applications.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

The M1 money supply is the measure of circulating currency ( federal reserve notes). The M2 is notes and other negotiable instruments like savings bonds. Its impossible for you to know the value of the M1 because the FED stopped reporting it like 3 years ago. The Money supply Estimated at around 8.3 trillion as you so well stated. That is due to the fact that the present fiat money system allows for the creation of federal reserve notes out of thin air under fractional reserve But a private for profit entity, the Federal Reserve bank (which is not federal and has no reserves) Also, as always you miss most of the "meat" of this issue by ignoring silver AND barter in the common law lawful money system.. Open your eyes! and stop cutting and pasting the work of other people here, its making you look beyond ignorant.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Barter is unnecessary with abundance. The Fed doesn't just "print up money" U need to read up on how the Fed creates money. In the case of Quantitative Easing, the Fed printed up money to buy assets, they didn't just give $$$ away. They can sell those assets and make a profit. The profit goes into the US Treasury.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

the profit from the FED goes to its shareholders. I'm really getting tired of your perceived knowledge. The fed is neither federal nor has it any reserves.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Profit from fed goes into the US Treasury. That "fed is neither federal nor has any reserves" is just stupid nonsense. The fed requires member banks to keep reserves.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

you really are messed up. the Fed has never been audited, therefore noone knows what ir has for reserves, but most people that have knowledge of the FED and have even read the basics about the FED understand is is private and has shareholders. Any private company with shareholders is making profits for its shareholders.

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

the Fed has assets (not reserves, they require members to have reserves) and "members" (banks) are not shareholders, there are no '\"shareholders". (another of ur unfounded conspiracy theories). I've seen lists of the Fed's assets, here's an example: http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2008/10/fed_blnc2_oct_08.jpg

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

What about the bonds the fed got from the treasury to back the printing of the money?? Or how about the fact that neighborhood banks create money too every time someone gives then a promissory note.. Or the court system, how it bonds transactions in its court then sells the bonds for a profit. You missed a few there bucko. you don't need to try and school me about the fiat money system.... but you should do a little more study yourself.. Do you know what this means? TOWN OF WEARE, NEW HAMPSHIRE a private trading company D.B.A with a DUNN’s # 059922737. HILLSBORO COUNTY, NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPERIOR COURT DUNN’s # 879246734

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

Fed can sell the treasury bonds to get $$$, nothing sinister there except we have to pay the interest. If we just printed money up (Greenbacks) it would lead to inflation and high interest rates. I'm no friend of interest: One of the NAZI party program planks was to abolish interest -- maybe the real reason to demonize Hitler.

The Court transactions U mention are new to me (prolly another one of Ur unfounded conspiracy theories). The court's DUN # = ID number for a business location (Google is my friend) -- prolly another of Ur unfounded conspiracy theories.

I know fiat currency doesn't last long and a Gold/Silver standard wouldn't solve our problems.

The time has come to abolish money and evolve, either that or devolve into a Mad Max scenario. As A.H. said: "Things can not go on as they are."

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

the fed gets treasury bonds for free, they hold them as collateral for the federal reserve notes they print. I'm no conspiricy theorist. since you admit its new to you now its your job to disprove me. you can start with the 2 dunns numbers I listed above, if the court has a dunns# then its a business. All governments, state, county and local have a dunn&bradstreet ID number. Its for trading bonds.(selling debt as a commodity)

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

The Fed buys Treasuries, they don't get them for free. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 8 years ago

Going back to Gold or Silver will be a mess, and truoble will be biger. The solution is a mid term comodity, like energy.

Money backup on tangible resuorce that can be used and can grow.... a sample is better explain here.

http://www.energybackedmoney.com/

[-] 0 points by obamarapist (7) from Staten Island, NY 8 years ago

安息帝國,又名“阿薩息斯王朝”或“帕提亞帝國”,是古波斯地區主要的政治及文化勢力。由阿爾沙克一世建立。全盛時期的安息帝國疆域北達今土耳其東南的幼發拉底河,東抵伊朗。安息帝國座落在地中海的羅馬帝國與中國漢朝之間的貿易路線絲綢之路之上,使帝國成為了商貿中心。法爾斯伊什塔克爾的統治者阿爾達希爾一世叛变,在公元224年殺害了安息帝國最後一位統治者阿爾達班五世。阿爾達希爾一世建立了薩珊王朝,不過安息帝國的分支阿薩息斯王朝則仍在亞美尼亞繼續其統治。安息帝國是一個由不同文化組成的國家,她在很大程度上吸納了包括波斯文化、希臘文化及地區文化的藝術、建築、宗教信仰及皇室標記。安息帝國,又名“阿薩息斯王朝”或“帕提亞帝國”,是古波斯地區主要的政治及文化勢力。由阿爾沙克一世建立。全盛時期的安息帝國疆域北達今土耳其東南的幼發拉底河,東抵伊朗。安息帝國座落在地中海的羅馬帝國與中國漢朝之間的貿易路線絲綢之路之上,使帝國成為了商貿中心。法爾斯伊什塔克爾的統治者阿爾達希爾一世叛变,在公元224年殺害了安息帝國最後一位統治者阿爾達班五世。阿爾達希爾一世建立了薩珊王朝,不過安息帝國的分支阿薩息斯王朝則仍在亞美尼亞繼續其統治。安息帝國是一個由不同文化組成的國家,她在很大程度上吸納了包括波斯文化、希臘文化及地區文化的藝術、建築、宗教信仰及皇室標記。

[-] 0 points by Dontbedaft (155) 8 years ago

Handfuls of crystal meth anyone?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I am unsure of the intent of your comment? Cynicism? Humor? Are you insinuating that because striving for more perfect world is difficult that we should not dare to dream?

[-] 0 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"No person’s hour is more or less valuable than another."

A high school dropout can spend an hour mowing your lawn. A trauma surgeon can spend an hour saving your life. Do you assign equal value to those hours? Sorry, I don't.

Will Alec Baldwin agree to accept the same pay as the cameraman? Will you pay Derek Jeter the same as the hot dog vendor?

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Seriously...I am not foolish enough to think that the abolition on the monetary system will happen overnight.Time bank can be used as a transitionary tool to take us from our current irreversible system of absolute corruption to one more equal. "High school dropouts" indeed anyone's failure to reach their full potential is yet another symptom of our very ill society.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

""High school dropouts" indeed anyone's failure to reach their full potential is yet another symptom of our very ill society."

Maybe so. But some people, by their own nature, just don't want to work that hard and are satisfied with a simpler life with fewer material goods. Nothing wrong with that. But you didn't answer my question: do you put the same value on someone mowing your lawn as you do on someone saving your life?

[-] 3 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I put equal value on all humans. No human is worth more than any other. I do not believe that any human is evil, lazy or stupid by nature. A society that values idol representations of power instead of nurturing the intrinsic value in each human leads to the disparities that you see today.

Additionally "hard work" does not equate with the accumulation of material goods. Look at the tag on your shirt. Where was it made? Think about the conditions underwhich the person who made your shirt likely works. Do you think that if that better opportunity was presented that person would not take it for fear of having to work harder? The truth is that that person is your slave and you are someone elses slave. Money blinds us from this reality

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"I put equal value on all humans. No human is worth more than any other."

No argument there. But would you place the same value on one hour someone spends mowing your lawn that you place on one hour someone spends in the operating room repairing your ruptured aorta? Would you compensate those two labors equally?

"I do not believe that any human is evil, lazy or stupid by nature."

That is arguable, but to avoid the risk of invoking Godwin's law I will let it pass (except to say that goodness, intelligence, and ambition are not evenly distributed in the human population). Anyway, I wasn't talking about laziness but ambition. Some people are not as ambitious as others, and decide to pursue a less demanding, and less lucrative, path. There is nothing wrong with that (I did that myself, and in return for lower monetary income I have more free time. That is my choice. Perhaps some would think I am lazy).

"Additionally "hard work" does not equate with the accumulation of material goods."

No, but many (if not most) people expect that there will be a relationship between the difficulty of their work (and its importance to the customer) and their level of compensation. In my example above, I think we would have to forgive the vascular surgeon (who spent thousands of hours learning and perfecting her craft, which saves lives) for believing that she should be paid more than the teenager mowing the hospital lawn (who learned how to do it in 10 minutes, and whose product is shorter grass).

"Do you think that if that better opportunity was presented that person would not take it for fear of having to work harder?"

What do you mean by a "better opportunity"? Do you mean more money for the same hours of work? If so, then I think you are refuting your own hypothesis. Anyway, I don't think fear is the issue. Some people who could make tons more money by working a lot harder (perhaps I flatter myself by suggesting I occupy that category) choose not to, for whatever reason. I don't think it is fear.

"The truth is that that person is your slave and you are someone elses slave. Money blinds us from this reality"

That's one way to look at it. Another is that in order for you to get someone to give you food (or some other good or service that you want) it would be nice for you to provide that person with something he or she values equally. One way to do that is with some symbolic marker (such as a dollar). Another way, I suppose, would be with "hours" in a "time bank" but it seems to me that is just substituting one symbol for another. And the guy who takes out your appendix is probably not going to settle for having his lawn mowed.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

goodness, intelligence, and ambition are not evenly distributed in the human population

I would have to agree with that. To say otherwise is a little too optimistic :) Interestingly, though, some of these characteristics are encouraged or discouraged by environment and circumstance, while others are largely affected by genetics and environment, so I wouldn't personally lump them together. You can easily impact whatever you call "goodness" if a child is placed in the right environment. Intelligence, as raw capacity to process, that's a lot tougher (although I'm sure some will disagree, but frankly, there are thresholds that I've witnessed that I do not think are anything but genetics; I think everyone can increase intelligence to some degree, but I think there is a ceiling based on biological circumstances). Ambition is, I suspect, a combination of both genetics and environment.

What do you mean by a "better opportunity"?

Yeah, I agree, that's a vague term. Better is different for everyone, although I suspect the intention is to say, better wages, better working conditions. Hmm, rereading it though, I'm not certain... "for fear of working harder"? Is that to say every person is intrinsically lazy at heart?

[-] 1 points by wakeUp (22) from Virginia Beach, VA 8 years ago

Actually, the surgeon just might settle for having his lawn mowed. What if he hated mowing is lawn himself? Having someone else do it for him frees up his time so that he may help others. He has skills that make his time valuable just as others do. Other people may not have have medical degrees, that's true. But, that does not mean that their contribution is necessarily less valuable. They may be skilled in some other area and still have something of value to offer.

Also, just as a side note, there are machines being developed now that will soon be able to perform surgical procedures and the technology to mow your lawn automoatically by machine/robot exists now. So, the hypothetical doctor and lawn service person in the above example would be irrelevant outside of a monetary system. There are several other threads here that address the issue of how technology has eliminated a long list of jobs and chores that humans are now free from. Yet, humanity is still trapped by needing a job to earn money to survive. Our technological advancements have rendered capitalism and a monetary system obsolete.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Actually, the surgeon just might settle for having his lawn mowed. What if he hated mowing is lawn himself? Having someone else do it for him frees up his time so that he may help others."

Absolutely. Suppose he says, "It will take me 2 hours to fix your leg. Once you heal, you can mow my lawn. I have a big yard, it will take about 8 hours. Deal"? If that is acceptable to both parties, would your system outlaw such a transaction? If not, then your whole system falls apart; you have only replaced one marker (dollar) with another (labor hour). If you would outlaw this, you better start building your gulags.

"But, that does not mean that their contribution is necessarily less valuable. They may be skilled in some other area and still have something of value to offer."

I have to disagree. The ability to create a neatly trimmed lawn has less value, to me, than the ability to save my life (or the courage to go into a burning building and save my children, etc.).

"Also, just as a side note, there are machines being developed now that will soon be able to perform surgical procedures and the technology to mow your lawn automoatically by machine/robot exists now."

I am well aware of that; someday we will also have flying cars and time travel. But that is dodging the here-and-now issue.

"Yet, humanity is still trapped by needing a job to earn money to survive."

Actually, that is not technically true. "Humanity" is not trapped in that way. For example, the Hadza of Tanzania (who are just as human as you and me) live without jobs or money or thing like that. Of course, they still have to eat, that is a function of biology. The people who are trapped by jobs are those who are unwilling to live a hunter-gatherer existence. It is a trade-off; I think after spending a month or two with the Hadza, most people would be happy to go back to their regular jobs.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

This is a reply to a comment below which has no "Reply" link.

WakeUp: "We are talking about a hypothetical set of people here that do not even exist."

Really? I (a real person) broke my thumb. The surgeon (a real person) who fixed it charged me more for the hour he spent on it than I make in an hour. I think the price was quite fair and I was happy with the transaction (I generally pay out of pocket for health care). Obviously we didn't have that actual conversation from my post above, but behind the scenes that was the reality (oh, of course I didn't mow his lawn, that was just for literary effect).

My question (and maybe you aren't the person interested in this aspect) is, would you outlaw consenting transactions like this one?

WakeUp: "Just because a neat lawn has little value to you, does not mean it is not important to others. "

Exactly my point. The value (maybe I should use the word "desirability" instead, since people seem to be conflating the "value" of a task with some philosophical "value" of a human being) of a particular service fluctuates and is dependent on many factors. The best lawnmower man in the world is of no value to you if you live in an apartment, but if you move out to a suburban home with a big lawn, that changes. Lawnmower man is unchanged, but his value to you has changed. (I'm sticking with value, it is easier to type.) Some people have a skill that is very common, and is not highly desired by other people. Others have unusual, highly desirable skills. Unless you outlaw the ability of people to voluntarily enter into mutually beneficial transactions based on their own desires, you are just trading one currency for another.

[-] 1 points by wakeUp (22) from Virginia Beach, VA 8 years ago

Ok, first of all you are addressing this from your personal view point. We are talking about a hypothetical set of people here that do not even exist. My point is that in this type of system it may be perfectly acceptable to both parties. Just because a neat lawn has little value to you, does not mean it is not important to others. There are wealthy people out there that pay outrageous sums of money for other people to do the most simple and mundane of tasks so they can spare themselves the sweat.

Next, this is not my system and I am not necessarily a supporter of it. I was merely making a comment on a possible strength it may have. I support abandoning the monetary system and switching to a resource economy.

Lastly on my statement of humanity being trapped by needing jobs. I concede the point. Even though hunter-gathering cultures would see a raised standard of living under a system like the Venus Project, "humanity" may not have been the best word choice. My intent was to indicate those living in a monetary based system. Thank you for pointing that out.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I put equal value on all humans. No human is worth more than any other."

No argument there. But would you place the same value on one hour someone spends mowing your lawn that you place on one hour someone spends in the operating room repairing your ruptured aorta? Would you compensate those two labors equally?

With monetary incentive it becomes difficult to discern whether you genuinely need your aorta repaired or the cardiologist has a large mortgage payment to make. In a nonmonetary, time based economy one would choose to become a cardiologist by following his passion for cardiology not his passion for the accumulation of wealth. Thus only the most passionate would have the intrinsic motivation to become highly skilled in their field. This benefits all of society. Furthermore, without monetary incentive surgery would be performed only as necessity dictates, eliminating waste. If lawn mowing is miserable then you would not find many willing to do it and you’d have to do it yourself or perhaps xeroscape your yard. No one should be exempt from performing some of the “dirty work” of life. You shit too don’t you?

"I do not believe that any human is evil, lazy or stupid by nature."

That is arguable, but to avoid the risk of invoking Godwin's law I will let it pass (except to say that goodness, intelligence, and ambition are not evenly distributed in the human population). Anyway, I wasn't talking about laziness but ambition. Some people are not as ambitious as others, and decide to pursue a less demanding, and less lucrative, path. There is nothing wrong with that (I did that myself, and in return for lower monetary income I have more free time. That is my choice. Perhaps some would think I am lazy).

Less “ambitious” people may accumulate less time in their accounts. Some people are driven toward a singular goal of say becoming a cardiologist, others have varied interests say gardening, carpentry and teaching. Time cannot be accumulated playing world of warcraft because there is no societal value in that, so those who do not want to participate by contributing their time will not get much time contributed to their needs.

"Additionally "hard work" does not equate with the accumulation of material goods."

No, but many (if not most) people expect that there will be a relationship between the difficulty of their work (and its importance to the customer) and their level of compensation.

I believe that this truism is one of the reasons that OWS came to be. The lack of compensation is being vocalized as a lack of opportunity. The truth is opportunity abounds but the supply of the only accepted form of compensation is manipulated to appear scarce. Time can not be manipulated.

In my example above, I think we would have to forgive the vascular surgeon (who spent thousands of hours learning and perfecting her craft, which saves lives) for believing that she should be paid more than the teenager mowing the hospital lawn (who learned how to do it in 10 minutes, and whose product is shorter grass).

It is true that the source of motivation would have to change from idol forms of superiority to something deeper.

"Do you think that if that better opportunity was presented that person would not take it for fear of having to work harder?

"What do you mean by a "better opportunity"? Do you mean more money for the same hours of work?

No, I mean a more fulfilling possibility in life.

If so, then I think you are refuting your own hypothesis. Anyway, I don't think fear is the issue. Some people who could make tons more money by working a lot harder (perhaps I flatter myself by suggesting I occupy that category) choose not to, for whatever reason. I don't think it is fear.

I agree. I don't think people fear hard work.

"The truth is that that person is your slave and you are someone else's slave. Money blinds us from this reality"

That's one way to look at it. Another is that in order for you to get someone to give you food (or some other good or service that you want) it would be nice for you to provide that person with something he or she values equally. One way to do that is with some symbolic marker (such as a dollar). Another way, I suppose, would be with "hours" in a "time bank" but it seems to me that is just substituting one symbol for another. And the guy who takes out your appendix is probably not going to settle for having his lawn mowed.

Then he probably wont get many people to practice his craft on.

[-] 2 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"With monetary incentive it becomes difficult to discern whether you genuinely need your aorta repaired or the cardiologist has a large mortgage payment to make."

You are dodging the question, so let's change it to an open fracture of the femur. No one can possibly deny that you need that fixed. Would you pay the orthopedic surgeon the same amount you would pay the lawn mowing guy?

"In a nonmonetary, time based economy one would choose to become a cardiologist by following his passion for cardiology not his passion for the accumulation of wealth."

Given the years of brutal work involved in becoming a cardiologist, I can guarantee that you will have far fewer cardiologists.

"If lawn mowing is miserable then you would not find many willing to do it and you’d have to do it yourself."

Lawn mowing isn't miserable, in some ways it is fun (mindless, time to think, etc.). I do my own, though sometimes I will pay the local high school kids who knock at the door (though I don't pay them what I paid the guy who fixed my broken thumb).

"Then he probably wont get many people to practice his craft on."

Well, then there will be a large increase in ruptures of the appendix. I can mow my own lawn, or I can get a high school kid to do it. But there are things that only a relatively few people have the skills or training to do, and they will always get higher compensation, even if that requires a black market.

You know, throughout history people have tried this sort of thing: from each according to his ability, to each each according to his need, and all that. But when it inevitably doesn't work (because humans are primarily motivated by self-interest) they get frustrated, and that is when the rivers of blood start to flow.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

With monetary incentive it becomes difficult to discern whether you genuinely need your aorta repaired or the cardiologist has a large mortgage payment to make."

You are dodging the question, so let's change it to an open fracture of the femur. No one can possibly deny that you need that fixed. Would you pay the orthopedic surgeon the same amount you would pay the lawn mowing guy?

I am not dodging. Any MD worth his weight would not hesitate to help someone based on ability to pay. Unfortunately that is the way the system works now which is why it’s so fucked. If no one will become Dr’s because they don’t find the incentive to help their fellow man benefit enough then we are all fucked anyway. Perhaps a system could be devised where in the Dr could accumulate time credits for hours of studies. At this point it is all theoretical and who's to say what could be.

"In a nonmonetary, time based economy one would choose to become a cardiologist by following his passion for cardiology not his passion for the accumulation of wealth."

Given the years of brutal work involved in becoming a cardiologist, I can guarantee that you will have far fewer cardiologists.

You cannot definitively say that. How do you know the potential of humanity. Hey…are you god? With no need for stock brokers, bankers, hedge fund managers, corporate lawyers, accountants, and CEO’s… the pool of bright motivated individuals is sure to increase.

"If lawn mowing is miserable then you would not find many willing to do it and you’d have to do it yourself."

Lawn mowing isn't miserable, in some ways it is fun (mindless, time to think, etc.). I do my own, though sometimes I will pay the local high school kids who knock at the door (though I don't pay them what I paid the guy who fixed my broken thumb).

And perhaps you won’t mind mowing your neighbors lawn for time credit.

"Then he probably wont get many people to practice his craft on."

Well, then there will be a large increase in ruptures of the appendix. I can mow my own lawn, or I can get a high school kid to do it. But there are things that only a relatively few people have the skills or training to do, and they will always get higher compensation, even if that requires a black market.

Everyone is capable of developing a unique skill that is beneficial to society. If a person is driven to medicine or engineering or chemistry they care not about the compensation if their other needs are met.

You know, throughout history people have tried this sort of thing: from each according to his ability, to each each according to his need, and all that. But when it inevitably doesn't work (because humans are primarily motivated by self-interest) they get frustrated, and that is when the rivers of blood start to flow.

Perhaps you and I have fundamentally different philosophies. I believe that all humans are inherently good but are driven to bad because of a feeling of hopelessness created in an unequal society. The truth is that most are afraid of equality so they make excuses to not strive for it.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

What if the guy mowing the lawn uncovers a small stone, and discards it? That stone, later, if not discarded, would have tripped a child, causing her to fall in front of a vehicle as it departs, and killing her. Perhaps that child would have later become a researcher who found the cure for cancer.

What if that trauma surgeon saves your life, and your name is Ted Bundy, and you kill many people after the surgery?

You can't predict the future outcomes from any given small or large event, so attempting to put a value on seems pretty futile, and only based on very superficial assumptions.

Hehe, the moral is (obviously): mow lawns, cure cancer.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Yes... follow your passions.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"You can't predict the future outcomes from any given small or large event, so attempting to put a value on seems pretty futile, and only based on very superficial assumptions."

Here is something I can predict with reasonable certainty. If you are on the operating table with, say, a traumatic amputation of the leg, your likelihood of death is very high without treatment. The likelihood of the lawnmower man someday saving the world (by some freak occurrence that will happen that day) is small (non-zero likelihood, but small). At this moment, too, the ability of the lawnmower man to maybe save the world sometime in the indeterminate future is not of great importance to you. We have to play the cards as they have been dealt, not as we surmise they may possibly be dealt someday (e.g., play your hand, don't wait to be dealt a royal flush). "What ifs" and "maybes" and "perhapses" don't cut it when the rubber meets the road.

So again, you are lying on the operating room table, and the surgeon and the lawnmower man are waiting for you to decide to whom you will give your last dollar (or labor-hour). What's it gonna be? You will make a value decision, and I bet I know what it will be.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

The problem with your analogy, that I was trying to humorously point out, is that you are providing a situation that favors the skill of the surgreon in that given moment. What if you are plummeting towards earth in an airplane that was suddenly without a pilot? Neither the surgeon nor the lawnmower will be of any use to you. I still assert it is foolish to think you know everything, that any outcome from a given event can be measured by the surface.

And what if it's not a life threatening situation, but one as simple as needing your lawn mown, or your dinner made, or your hair cut? And what if the lawnmowing kid knows CPR, and does happen to save your life, just because he was there when you collapsed from a heart attack? You simply can't predict the value of any given event or span of time. To do so suggests that you have more power than a mere mortal, which I'm sure is not what you're trying to say. There are simply too many variables in this to, with complete confidence, determine the value of one event versus another.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"The problem with your analogy, that I was trying to humorously point out, is that you are providing a situation that favors the skill of the surgreon in that given moment. "

Exactly, because that is what it is all about. The fundamental human interaction throughout the history of our species - I have something you want, you have something I want: we trade. The value of the thing I have is simply a function of how badly you want it, right now. If I offered you, right now, your choice of a gold bar or a bottle of water, you would take the gold. But if I gave you the same choice after you hiked with me for a week in the Sierra Madre, your decision might be different. The value (desirability) of any good or service is not a fixed static characteristic, but varies depending on the circumstances. And that is one flaw of the labor-hour, which assumes a fixed value that doesn't exist.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

Hmm, maybe I misunderstood - I thought you were saying there can be a fixed value set upon a certain skill or action, which seems far too assumptive - it leaves too many X factors out, eg. current need, available resources, future impact, etc. My apologies if so, and I'm glad we agree on that point. I do think the idea of considering time a resource is intriguing - I think we even do this in some cases, such as paying doctors who spend nearly a decade in school more than we pay unskilled "lawn mowers", who typically spend much less (i.e. time credits of 6+ years versus two weeks, for example, though the long term divergence probably surpasses the initial investment ratio by far in today's economy). However, if we are to consider time a part of the equation in compensation, I do think it will only be a component of the equation, not the primary factor. I think it is under-accounted currently, though.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"I do think the idea of considering time a resource is intriguing"

Yeah, you could do that, but how does it not just become a dollar substitute?

There's another funny thing about time. As a consultant, a client asks me to solve a problem. If I tell them it will take 24 hours of work, they will go elsewhere. If I tell them "I will have that problem solved by end of business today" they will give me lots and lots of money. How do you reconcile that type of interaction using your time bank? (This is not the most common pattern, but does occur.)

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

Yeah, you could do that, but how does it not just become a dollar substitute?

Hmm, good question. Let's see - the dollar is an arbitrary value that fluctuates based on what factors? What does the dollar produce? I think that might be a key difference: the dollar, of its own merit, has never produced anything (well, OK, some people have used it as wrapping paper, some people have burned it, but you know what I mean). It's just a means of exchanging goods between individuals using an agreed upon value that is static at the time of transaction - X cogs = Y dollars = Z bread. Time, however, is also a literal commodity, though one we've never successfully put value on - I suspect because of the complexity of actually representing the value of a given action or event (though we do assign some very rough approximations, such as paying skilled laborers more than those with no skills - an excellent example is a professor versus a farmer) - so there are some differences that would be interesting to see play out in both systems. Wondering if the OP would care to illustrate a potential scenario for us on that.

Oh, and it's not my time bank ;)

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"What does the dollar produce?"

The dollar is an abstract symbol of work done. Now once your labor-hour is placed in the time bank, it is also an abstract symbol (0s and 1s in a database rather than a piece of metal or paper). It is not the actual hour of labor (that is finished, past) it is an exchangeable symbol of the labor, basically proof that the labor was performed.

So suppose we have two proposals:

  1. For every hour of work you do, I will put one labor hour in the database. You will have to carry around some kind of electronic device so you can transfer it to others. Make sure to keep it charged, and hope the software doesn't crash. Oh, and don't get it wet.

  2. For every hour of work you do, I will give you one slip of special paper. It is pretty sturdy, you can fold it, crumple it, roll it up, whatever. It can even go through the washing machine. You can stick it in your pocket, and then just pull it out and hand it to someone.

I think the second system is better. In fact, after a while, I think people in the first system would be asking for a simpler symbolic representation of the labor-hour.

[-] 1 points by e000 (371) 8 years ago

So, it's a symbol of labor, and not actual goods? I guess that's true in many cases - there are jobs out there that produce absolutely nothing of value these days :) Middle men who simply negotiate a higher price (adding no value to the product in transaction or otherwise), empty stock traders (as in, valueless stock), etc. It seems most but not all exchanges are over goods or labor as a product. If a company did not produce some form of product, it would not make money, and then could not pay workers (although, why would it need any, right?) It seems it's the actual product value, whether that's a loaf of bread, a paved highway, or a finished book or new theory, that drives most of commerce. If two companies could both build a brick wall, and one took twice as long, the customer would not expect to pay twice as much for the same brick wall - the value of the produced good would drive them to the company that built the same wall for less. That in turn would drive the slower company to become faster at the brick wall building, to be able to compete - to provide the same product for a comparable value. I think when we abstract from the actual value of the product, we allow a lot of corruption and unnecessary inefficiencies to bloom. Sorry, I know we're talking about a time bank, but I got off on a mild tangent.

So you're saying today's economy is more focused on the labor hour versus the product of that hour? This seems more suited to a 'time bank' adaptation, but it does seem fraught with peril to me. Hmm... very interesting concepts.

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 8 years ago

you have a noble position by all means. but there are all different types of work, would you agree? some work is hard, very very hard. some work is easy. how do you evaluate what that time is worth? if you pay the same for all types of work, that is socialism. the problem with socialism is explained with this question. "Why would i work harder if i'm going to make the same amount?"

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

We have been taught that human nature is to be lazy, indifferent and selfish. I disagree. I think that, given the opportunity, all people will "work hard". Once you let go of the false notion that some people are takers by default, you'll realize that all people are doing the best that they can under their given circumstances. Each human has something to contribute. Perhaps we can all learn to "work hard" simply for the satisfaction of accomplishment. Furthermore, in today's society hard work does not equate to a larger paycheck.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 8 years ago

"some people are takers by default" is not a false notion. exibit a: wanona rider shoplifting... the list goes on but yeah, some people have an overly active sense of entitlement above and beyond what they are really entitled to. this is also known as narcissism.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Richard Gates, I saw, on another posting, that you are a web developer. Can you help/teach me to build a time bank? I have lots of ideas and you can even have time credit for the time you put in to build the site:)

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 8 years ago

i could yes. holla@richardkentgates.com i can write you a script but you have to supply the server.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed, however in a nonmonetary system those people will be lass able to exploit others for selfish endeavours. Furthermore mental health disorders and all health disparities are diminished in a society where each human has equal intrinsic value and opportunity is not scarce.

[-] 0 points by bhosage (3) 8 years ago

Governments should go back to being backed by gold and silver. How is a piece paper worth a 100 dollars when it costs 5 cents to make.

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 8 years ago

No, going back to Gold or Silver will be a mess, and truoble will be biger. The solution is a mid term comodity, like energy.

Money backup on resuorce.... is better explain here.

http://www.energybackedmoney.com/

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

It's not.

[-] 1 points by andrewbb (16) 8 years ago

Nope. No money needed.

I promise you this beer. You promise me that cigar.

Transaction.

[-] 1 points by quadrawack (280) 8 years ago

But I don't want the beer.

See the problem? Money is completely negotiable. Barter tends not to be,

[-] 1 points by andrewbb (16) 8 years ago

I agree. The proper term for negotiable in that sense is currency. This system kites checks to create currency with interest attached. That is the definition of usury because we have to pay interest for the use of currency.

Replace that with Promise Language and the choice of currency opens up to be anything.

Example:

  • Diamond card with MC logo
  • physical diamond in a wealth storage facility
  • go to grocery store
  • hand clerk Diamond card
  • grocery store receives USD
  • a small part of your diamond is sold behind the scenes

Transaction complete.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Yes however with the current system you only get to smoke half the cigar because the other half is already allocated to the "system" that enabled your acquisition of said cigar.

[-] 1 points by andrewbb (16) 8 years ago

Yep, that is usury. (Requiring payment for the use of currency)

[-] 0 points by classicliberal (312) 8 years ago

Money is merely a tangible representation of labor committed... to get rid of money is to get rid of work.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

So you'd do nothing for the betterment of yourself, your family or society if you weren't given dollars in return? This type of thinking is a product of a system that teaches us that human nature gravitates to stupidity and laziness and that we need an outside force (money) for motivation. I believe that human nature is empathetic, intelligent, and intrinsically motivated.

[-] 1 points by technoviking (484) 8 years ago

the number of people who collapse from playing world of warcraft, or starve their babies to death while they are busy playing video games, suggest to me that there are people, who even after throwing a lot of money at them, wouldn't want to work.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

That is because our society perpetuates and enables this type of behavior. In a time based economy everyone is valued and thus everyone is needed. It will take a cultural revolution.

[-] 1 points by technoviking (484) 8 years ago

i'd like to be able to play wow for a living in this new economy too.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

prove its societal benefit and you can.

[-] 1 points by technoviking (484) 8 years ago

it makes people happier.

ok done.

RBE, get ready for me

[-] 1 points by classicliberal (312) 8 years ago

Well, I respect your opinion, but human nature is inherently evil. Watch what happens during a major natural disaster and you see human nature. I didn't say I wouldn't work if I weren't given dollars in return. The only reason anyone does anything is because they receive something in return. Even a lunatic continues to cut himself because he enjoys the feeling it gives him. Now, you may fix a neighbor's deck steps for "free", but you are still getting things in return. The neighbor will owe you a social favor, for one. Another is the endorphin release that helping someone gives you. Another is the social benefit you will receive if another neighbor sees you doing something good. Since money is only a representation of labor committed, I'd gladly work for a variety of other useful things, such as trading a good for a service or similar transactions. The idea of capitalism (I only help you if you help me) is an inherent aspect of basic human trading, established by many indigenous people across the world.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I am sorry that you feel that humans are evil by nature. I sincerely hope that you can change your mind about this. If it is post disaster rioting and looting you are referring to I believe that that too is learned behavior encouraged by a society that teaches us that greed is a desirable, indeed necessary, trait. Capitalism is not quid pro quo as you described. Inherent in capitalism is the drive for profit. Profit can only be derived with the exploitation of resources be that human or earth. Profit concentrates wealth.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

power corrupts

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 8 years ago

half the jobs in U$A are unnecessary, very few ppl produce anything . . . cities need to be redesigned. read some of the other posts below.

[-] 1 points by anonbloom (55) 8 years ago

http://deoxy.org/endwork.htm

"The Abolition of Work" !!! toward a global revolt against quantification!

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Ideal indeed!

[-] 1 points by luparb (290) 8 years ago

It's not an accurate representation of labor though.

A machine made t-shirt could be sold for as much as one that took 3 hours to be made by hand.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Indeed, technology can be used for relieving man of the mundane but a fine hand made shirt made by a passionate artist is of infinite value.

[-] 1 points by classicliberal (312) 8 years ago

Yes, but the reason the T-shirt costs the same, is due to other labor down the line. The steel workers, that machined, rolled, and cast the metal made from the ore that the miners quarried, the secretary who did the books for the miners, the electrician who installed the lights in the foundry...etc. The direct reason the t-shirt costs the same is because of the costs of operating and obtaining the machine to make the shirts.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Yes freeing the "laborer" to do something productive and fulfilling. Now we are compelled to do"jobs" for money When you eliminate money from the equation all "work" is intrinsically motivated.

[-] 0 points by GeoffH (214) from Jacksonville, FL 8 years ago

I'm 'all in' for the Occupation Movement but, this form or socialism is not what this is about. This is about returning our Government to the People and getting it out of the Capitalist's clutches. Don't confuse that with wanting to be rid of Capitalism. Capitalism is a fine economic system, it just sucks as a system of Government.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Thank you for your comment but I respectfully ask you who are you to say what this movement is or can be about. Capitalism IS a proven failure!

[-] 0 points by ConcernedEconomist (67) 8 years ago

Explain to me how is a gas station attendants time is worth the same amount as a doctor's...what incentive would there then be to get an education and work hard to provide for others?

[-] 3 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I sympathize with your disillusionment. Gas station attendants can be replaced with smart technology and can go on to do something productive and fulfilling. People would work harder simply for the sake of bettering themselves and humanity not to earn a dollar in often unproductive and monotonous "jobs"

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"People would work harder simply for the sake of bettering themselves and humanity"

Do you have evidence for that hypothesis that is consistent with our observations of human behavior over the course of history?

By the way, the goal you are dreaming about has been discussed by many others over the centuries. You can call it Eden, Utopia, Cockayne, Shangri-La, Eldorado, The Worker's Paradise, the Big Rock Candy Mountain or whatever. But given that it has not existed in any substantial way in about 5000 years of recorded history, I think the odds are against it appearing in the next thousand.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I believe humans are capable of many things we don't yet know, both good and evil. It is up to the good to prevent the evil. Evidence for mans intrinsic motivation exists everywhere you look. Perhaps those who don't see it are, in fact, themselves lacking it. Humanity is more aware than ever of others suffering.
I believe that the most worthy cause of all is to strive toward that goal. For what else can we hope for.

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

You my friend are delusional. The majority of the population has no desire to "better themselves". They just want to get by in life doing as little as possible. Which is nature at work. Path of least resistance.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Calling names (delusional) is not productive. I am sorry that you think so little of humanity that you believe the majority does not have the desire to better themselves. I disagree. I think that the reason that we see so much hopelessness and poverty is the lie of scarcity and needless competitiveness upon which our current society operates. No one would choose a life of deprivation but many find themselves in that circumstance because our society does little to support human needs. The fact that you are literate and have access to the internet makes me think that you are quite fortunate. Perhaps you can use some of your knowledge and good fortune to help someone else with fewer resources instead of chalking up their suffering to "nature at work".

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"I am sorry that you think so little of humanity that you believe the majority does not have the desire to better themselves."

Humans are mammals. Specifically, we are omnivorous predatory mammals. We are motivated by the same things as other animals: food, avoiding becoming food, reproduction (and propagation of our our own genetic lines), and stimulation of the pleasure centers of our brains. Given that we lack the advantages of some other animals (claws, fangs, speed, strength, etc.) we are fortunate that evolution has given us the ability to work cooperatively with others of our species (to the degree that we are a top predator in ecosystems that contain far more robust creatures). But that ability is limited, we are not bees or ants. Self interest is still predominant, and energy conservation (expending as little energy as necessary to achieve our survival goals) still plays a role.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Agreed, sense of self preservation is a paramount to survival. However we are not animals. We have a moral compass and can act upon innate moral directive. Culture greatly influences, indeed dictates our values. Modern western culture has valued self sufficiency and greed leading to the enormous gap of inequality we see today. Scarcity has little to do with this the depravity we see today. The foundation of Maslows hierarchy has been secured thanks in no small part to technology. It is moral indeed, when our needs have been met, that we help others meet theirs. For that is what makes us human.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"However we are not animals."

Yes, we are. We are primates, mammals (all life is basically either plant or animal, though purists will point to those odd forms that are somewhere in between). Our "moral compass" evolved to allow us to work together as a group (a survival advantage in a harsh world). However, as history (and even your morning paper) demonstrate, it is not absolute.

"For that is what makes us human."

Among our closest relatives, we may have more in common with chimpanzees than with bonobos.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

However we are not animals."

Yes, we are. biologically perhaps but spiritually no.

Among our closest relatives, we may have more in common with chimpanzees than with bonobos. And yet infinitely different.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Yes, we are. biologically perhaps but spiritually no."

I apologize if I have offended any religious beliefs you may have.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

No apology needed as you have not offended.

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

So if every hour is equal, why would people choose to dig ditches in 120 degree weather if an hour spend typing at a desk is considered just as good?

If every hour is worth the same, and anyone can choose to do anything for that hour, we're going to have a big problem getting the real dirty work done that needs to happen.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

If people weren't forced to monotonous unproductive work for money they could use their intellect to build technology to dig ditches. Furthermore why should anyone be subjected to work in dangerous, miserable conditions. The "dirty work" is everyones job. You shit too don't you?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

None but ourselves can free our minds -marley

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"If people weren't forced to monotonous unproductive work for money they could use their intellect to build technology to dig ditches."

Do you believe that all humans have the intellect to do high level technical work? I think intelligence and competence are distributed about as evenly as athletic ability. Not all of us can be Olympic athletes, and not all of us can design supercomputers.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Read about multiple intelligences. The culture we live in values some qualities more than others. I believe that all men are created with equal potential.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"The culture we live in values some qualities more than others. I believe that all men are created with equal potential."

Potential for what? I have no potential (and never did) to play professional football. Physical and mental capabilities vary greatly (probably a Gaussian distribution). All cultures value some qualities more than others. A warrior culture values the ability to fight. A hunter/gatherer culture values the ability to hunt and gather.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Potential for greatness, for happiness, for fulfillment, acceptance, equality...

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

I achieve happiness fishing and drinking beer. If your system is going to pay me for that, sign me up. (Though instead of beer, could I have single malt Scotch or good bourbon?)

By the way, where do you go to college and what is your major?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

As long as your fishing and beer drinking leads to societal benefit and you are being honest to yourself about fulfilling your potential...sure fish on!

By the way, where do you go to college and what is your major?

Like I said...If you're going to make assumptions please indulge me with the details.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"As long as your fishing and beer drinking leads to societal benefit and you are being honest to yourself about fulfilling your potential...sure fish on!"

How will you ensure there is "societal benefit"? I think that you are implying that the hours I spend pursuing my passion may be less valuable than the hours someone else is spending pursuing his. So you will have to assign different values to these hours, based on their benefit to society, correct?

"Like I said...If you're going to make assumptions please indulge me with the details."

What details?

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

So now we've gone from "every hour is equal" to "certain hours are necessary (more important) and we will have to force people to do these jobs"

Oh AND between the now and the time that the technology to dig a ditch is created, how will those ditches get dug?

[-] 3 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Its called transition. Rome wasn't built in a day. THe mess we are in is irreversible. We must find a way to move forward. And Time Bank is a start. It is not perfect but like I said: Fear and greed (someone else should dig my ditches) will paralyze it. Hope and imagination will propel it.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Oh AND between the now and the time that the technology to dig a ditch is created, how will those ditches get dug?"

I have some friends in China who survived the Cultural Revolution. They told me how those ditches get dug; the stories are not pretty.

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 8 years ago

So how would I buy groceries or a new car?

What would I trade?

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

All cars would belong to all drivers. If you drive you can contribute to maintaining the fleet. As far as trading is concerned you wouldn't need to trade anything because all needs can be met through the development of intelligent technology. Earths resources are the collective heritage of all of humanity.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Earths resources are the collective heritage of all of humanity."

So are you proposing the abolition of personal private property?

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

What is personal private property? The earths resources? Yes, indeed. However your moral directive tells you that it is wrong to take from someone what is his. Just as you trust not to be taken from. For if you have extra of what he needs you give it to him?

[-] 0 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Try getting the UAW to work for this time bank nonsense.

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

In a time banking system unions are irrelevant.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Tell that to those people. They are the PEOPLE that hold those jobs now.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Those "jobs" would also be irrelevant. People would be free to do what satisfies them, and what betters humanity.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"Those "jobs" would also be irrelevant. People would be free to do what satisfies them, and what betters humanity."

Suppose I decide to be a fisherman (I actually do find great personal fulfillment in fishing). So I go out for ten hours and I come back with 5 fish. Under your labor-hour system, I will have to charge 2 labor-hours for each fish. But the guy at the next dock also went out for 10 hours and came back with 20 fish, so he has to charge 0.5 labor-hours per fish. Well, it is pretty clear I'm not going to sell any fish today (the other guy basically set the market rate, i.e., the value of fish today). I have a couple of options. I can simply bask in the satisfaction I received out on the boat, but that doesn't feed my family (I can feed them the fish I caught, but they don't like seafood). I can lie (oh, I was only out for an hour...).

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Food does not cost time because it is a necessary societal benefit. You, of course, bank the time you spent fishing but the person who gets your fish would not have to spend his time. Just as one who works in the community garden does not need to sell vegetables in order to bank time spent gardening.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Well, I guess i should put that in my utopian pipe and smoke it.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Dare to dream. The reality is that the protestors demands for policy change will not solve the problem. The fed is to too powerful to bring down. Even if each person in the 99% put forth half their income we couldn't match the feds political buying power. Trying to elect a leader with a grass roots effort is futile because we are a nation intentionally divided. The system in irreversibly and absolutely corrupt. The fed is designed to be indestructible. Money=power=corruption The only solution is to remove money from the system thus equalizing all. The truth is that society is afraid of true equality. So we have to start somewhere.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

the FED is not too big to bring down, it can be done with the stroke of a pen. We the People repealed prohibition, we can repeal the federal reserve act. You people are whack. The people don't have control over the money supply. If you want to end Money you need to REGAIN control over it first in order to destroy it. You need to go back and study propaganda 101 so at least you can stop contradicting your self. The fed is designed to be indestructible. Money=power=corruption The only solution is to remove money from the system. If they are so indestructible how do you propose to take their money away from them? Because that would be a change in policy.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I am not advocating "taking" anything from anyone as it seems some OWSers support. I think that the proverbial pen stroke you mention is an impossibility because it would in effect do that (take the money) and they (the 1%) will never let that happen. Comparing the fed to prohibition is like comparing a lamborghini to a vespa. Even the abolition of slavery doesn't compare, and that took civil war. If the people want jobs, fairness, eqality etc...another system must be devised and time bank is a great start. Even if time banking is immensely used there will be long period of transition when both a monetary system and a time bank system run concurrently. Rome wasn't built in a day.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Nothing at all can be accomplished until the problem at hand is rectified. That problem being that a private for profit entity has the power to create the money supply and not only regulate that money supply, but cause it to fluctuate at will. NO OTHER plan of action need be attempted until such a time when the power to create and regulate the value of money is taken away from the private entities that have it presently. Furthermore to show you that I am not a complete Neanderthal, I have come to realize something. I Figure that every American need ONLY work probably 3 months out of each year in order to provide for the basic needs of society. Knowing this I still understand that no new system of civilization will ever be implemented until the power to create money and regulate its value is returned to We the People of the united States of America. Because at this point in time, even if the American People wanted to forsake money for another form of civilization the choice to dispose of Money is not theirs as they have so foolishly allowed their power to create money be given away by bought and paid for politicians. One can not destroy what belongs to another. I hope you catch what I am saying, and just in case you don't I'll make it plain and simple.. We the people must cease bickering about ones personal ideals, wants,values, and whatever else and unite in the one common goal needed before anyone of us has any hope of advancing what they think is a proper course of action for the future of America and the world. That common goal being to return the power of creating and regulating the value of money to the people where it belongs, then if the people want to forsake money they will have the power to dispose of money as the power to create and therefore destroy money would be theirs and theirs alone.

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

Good luck with that. Look at the tag on your shirt. Where was it made? Think about the conditions underwhich the person who made your shirt likely works. The truth is that that person is your slave and you are someonelse's slave. Money blinds us from this reality. Until we fight for the rights of all of humanity we will continue to be a part of problems that OWS is protesting. By endorsing capitalism we enable slavery. The solution is the dissolution of capitalism.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

Are you speaking for the Chinese laborer who made my Shirt? I don't need to think about the conditions he works in, I have been there to see it with my own eyes. its not as bad as you think it is, Ever heard of SA 8000,, yea, didn't think so...

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

I think you and I are arguing both sides of the same coin. Seems we both agree that things are fucked. Until OWS (i.e. America) can unite and quit the divisiveness we will continue to get the same results from our govt.

[-] 1 points by amanoftheland (452) from Boston, MA 8 years ago

"Until OWS (i.e. America) can unite and quit the divisiveness we will continue to get the same results from our govt". Agreed

[-] 0 points by Daennera (765) from Griffith, IN 8 years ago

But what if I want a better care than this fleet offers?

[-] 2 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

All cars would be the best. Commercialism ensures planned obsolesence and use of the cheapest part that the manufacturer can get away with selling for the most profit. If want you better than everyone else simply for the sake of proving your own superiority you are greed pure and simple. Greed is what has caused our current state of affairs.

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"All cars would be the best."

You could call them "Trabant."

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

That is cynical. Do you have an actual question? Your others have been so entertaining!

[-] 1 points by fitzcarraldo (77) 8 years ago

"That is cynical."

Cynic, n: a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be. -Ambrose Bierce

[-] 1 points by Coreupt (294) 8 years ago

bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cynical