The Zeitgeist Movement... why not?

[paximperium]

So what, forcing them to work like current society does is the solution?
Having a world full of slaves is the solution?

Slaves? You do love your hyperbole and melodrama.
If they don't work they don't get anything. Why should people who don't want to work get a free ride of those who do?

There can't be alternatives for this because is word of god?

Be very careful of your strawmen. They are very flammable.

Are you two claiming that work itself could not be interesting enough for people actually WANT to do it? That nobody would get out of their houses to actually keep the energy plants working, or create new ways to gather energy, or new farming techniques?

Nope. Who would want to crawl into a sewer to unclog tons of human excrement unless paid? Would you like to haul goods in blazing hot weather for no pay?

You are living in a fantasy. Not everyone will be a Gardener Farmer or a Volunteer Doctor. People still need to be truckers, waste disposal, crap cleaners, farmers etc. Frankly, I'm not about to trust a Hobby Nuclear Technician with my power supply or a Amateur pilot with a 747.

Not likely, people is different and like to do different things. Do you honestly believe that nobody likes to wash cars, do laundry or repair things? That everyone loves to use their heads or hearts instead of their hands to work?

Do you enjoy your strawman much? For everyone one happy dishwasher volunteer, or cook you'll get fifty people who want to eat without cleaning their dishes.

You still don't have an answer for those questions.

 

[lionking]

He doesn't have an answer because there isn't one, apart, of course, from compelling people to do unpleasant jobs.

 

[quixotecoyote]

pax covered the reply to me fairly well, but I have to wonder, what's your resume like Bodhi? I've worked in factories, food service, and shipping hubs (among other places).

People are not busting their ass hauling boxed furniture from the bellies of trucks for 8 hours a day because they love to do it. They're doing it for the paycheck. Most of the people I was working with were either paying for college, getting self fulfillment through hobbies, making a few bucks before moving on to the next thing/place, stuck there due to supporting a family, and/or one of several varieties of dead inside.

People working in a factory on machines all day are not there for self-fulfillment. It's a repetitive, stressful job with no real sense of fulfillment or satisfaction. You can seal a thousand packages of widgets, but there's always a thousand more tomorrow.

The McJob is not something people take because they value it as an end in itself. People do those things because they find it is (or was) their best available option to enable them to do the things they want outside working hours or in the future.

Sure you might find a few people so lacking in vision and imagination that moving boxes to conveyor belts encompasses all their life's desires, but you'd need a pretty low opinion of humanity to think that's the norm.

 

[balrog666]

Not worldwide, you are absolutely right. Still, imagine this: a small self sufficient city, with hydroponic farms, wind and solar energy, public transportation... you get the idea. Like you, I do not believe it is possible to simply "eradicate money". Projects like this one should start small, like "Biosphere II". Yes, they might fail but I'm also convinced about they are worth a try.

Why would you eliminate money, even in your Utopian, self-sufficient city?

Aren't some people more productive than others?

Don't people choose to spend their leisure time and energy in different pursuits?

What fool is going to choose to be a janitor, waiter, ditch digger, or septic tank cleaner without appropriate compensation?

What if everyone (or even more than one person) wants to be the mayor or chief engineer - how do you choose just one? Or does someone (wink, wink - Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro) get to be the decider?

What a silly idea!

 

[quarky]

I just had to throw 2 cents in here because I admire the bravery of the O.P.

I have to recoil at the notion that what we have now is the best possible outcome, which is an innate prejudice. The normal , gut reaction, for instance, that 'hippie communes' don't 'work' is ate up with feelings of the 'workiness' of the regular show.

Its not working.
That should be taken into consideration, when assessing all the failing of various attempts at workable schemes, however disasterous they appear to be.

The deck is stacked.
And the game is almost over.

Tried and true is failing. Anything new is worth consideration.
The same old same old is the only thing that we can be sure of. To fail.

 

[quixotecoyote]

I propose a dead-baby economy.

I await your admiration.

 

[lionking]

Have to disagree quarky, as would the millions in Asia who have risen from abject poverty and starvation as a result of the "same old". Not perfect for sure, but I'd rather throw my lot in with something that has worked for centuries than some utopian fantasy.

 

[balrog666]

I propose a dead-baby economy.

I await your admiration.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA! I was going to go with baby seals.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

pax covered the reply to me fairly well, but I have to wonder, what's your resume like Bodhi? I've worked in factories, food service, and shipping hubs (among other places).

Fair enough. Yes, I have not actually done anything like that. My only experience comes from some "Retreats" in which for say a month, I had to clean the floors. Granted, it is VERY different from having to do it because you have no other option. But, hey! Here is precisely part of the conundrum that its behind a project like the Zeitgeist Movement, there is not an actual need for a Mcdonalds to even exist in a non monetary based society, nor would be need for many of the works that are needed now.

 

[quarky]

Have to disagree quarky, as would the millions in Asia who have risen from abject poverty and starvation as a result of the "same old". Not perfect for sure, but I'd rather throw my lot in with something that has worked for centuries than some utopian fantasy.

I forget. What is it that has worked for 'centuries'?

China's communism?
The American Dream?

Utopian dreams are the mainstay of almost all 'isms'.
None have passed the test.

What has worked the longest, as per human history and pre-history, is a sort of blind hunter-gatherer, warring tribal mentality. Why not have sentimental feelings about that?

We're still firmly locked into that primitive outlook, in spite of improved weaponry and birth control.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Slaves? You do love your hyperbole and melodrama. If they don't work they don't get anything. Why should people who don't want to work get a free ride of those who do?

Its not melodrama, most individuals in this society are slaves, they are forced to work doing things they don't like to pay for the right to be alive. Answering your question, why do we let people to enjoy free rides in current society? What about people using public services without paying a dime in taxes? Point is, this already happens, and you don't seem to be upset by them.

Now, I do not CLAIM to have all the answers, in fact, I initiated this thread asking questions!

 

[lionking]

I forget. What is it that has worked for 'centuries'?

China's communism?
The American Dream?

Utopian dreams are the mainstay of almost all 'isms'.
None have passed the test.

What has worked the longest, as per human history and pre-history, is a sort of blind hunter-gatherer, warring tribal mentality. Why not have sentimental feelings about that?

We're still firmly locked into that primitive outlook, in spite of improved weaponry and birth control.

Well capitalism has been around since at least the middle ages, and "modern" capitalism since the 18th century, so I will go with "worked for centuries". Don't you think that China, for example, has benefited since adopting capitalism? There needs to be some very convincing evidence (and this current financial crisis is not sufficient IMO) before dumping it for a utopian fantasy.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

There needs to be some very convincing evidence (and this current financial crisis is not sufficient IMO) before dumping it for a utopian fantasy.

Wow. What would qualify as "convincing evidence" for you? Sure, the current crisis only demonstrates that the "free markets" theory is a failure. That the rich ones can get all the benefits from communism and the rest of the people will have to work more and have less (in the end they are nothing but slaves).

You claim that a society that is based on debt is a good one? Because since you born you are in debt, this is a system that works on the premise that you owe money just for being alive. You are permanently in debt and have to pay for your right to live.

And let's not enter in to poverty, or health care, or pollution, white collar banksters, how resources are wasted because its selling price is not "good enough" (entire perfectly nice crops are wasted this way), etc.

Now.. regarding the "Utopian fantasy". We LIVE in an Utopian Fantasy right now. Here, allow me to quote myself:

Say you can go back in time and tell the people of Middle Ages that, in the future, the church would not have infinite power, that people would be able to choose their governors, and for crying out loud, that it will be possible for anyone to talk to others that are far away in an instant way and they could turn their heads looking for the inquisitor to burn you.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Fair enough. Yes, I have not actually done anything like that. My only experience comes from some "Retreats" in which for say a month, I had to clean the floors. Granted, it is VERY different from having to do it because you have no other option.

No offense, but after you pull a 9-5 in one of those manual labor jobs, it's difficult to imagine it as something people would do as volunteers.

But, hey! Here is precisely part of the conundrum that its behind a project like the Zeitgeist Movement, there is not an actual need for a Mcdonalds to even exist in a non monetary based society, nor would be need for many of the works that are needed now.

Two points:

1) Now the millions of people who like fast food can't have it. This translates to every other poor job. In Zeitopia, there's not an actual need for shipping hubs! Ok, now your packages can't go place to place. In Zeitopia, there's not an actual need for factories! Ok, well nothing gets manufactured. You see the problem with this direction.

2) A McJob is American slang for an undesirable job you take as a more-or-less last resort. Apologies for the ethnocentrism.

 

[quixotecoyote]

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA! I was going to go with baby seals.

Not bad, but mine solves overpopulation too.

 

[lionking]

Wow. What would qualify as "convincing evidence" for you? Sure, the current crisis only demonstrates that the "free markets" theory is a failure. That the rich ones can get all the benefits from communism and the rest of the people will have to work more and have less (in the end they are nothing but slaves).

You claim that a society that is based on debt is a good one? Because since you born you are in debt, this is a system that works on the premise that you owe money just for being alive. You are permanently in debt and have to pay for your right to live.

And let's not enter in to poverty, or health care, or pollution, white collar banksters, how resources are wasted because its selling price is not "good enough" (entire perfectly nice crops are wasted this way), etc.

Now.. regarding the "Utopian fantasy". We LIVE in an Utopian Fantasy right now. Here, allow me to quote myself:

For someone who is just "asking questions", you seem to have convinced yourself about the superiority of the ZM (and you have no idea if I am in debt).

So tell me, how would you run China under Zeitgeist principals?

 

[paximperium]

Its not melodrama, most individuals in this society are slaves, they are forced to work doing things they don't like to pay for the right to be alive.

People are not forced to do anything. They can go live in a jungle and hunt monkeys. You want the benefits of modern society, you work for it.

Answering your question, why do we let people to enjoy free rides in current society? What about people using public services without paying a dime in taxes? Point is, this already happens, and you don't seem to be upset by them.

Was that suppose to be an actual answer?
What has this has anything to do with taxes? I'm talking about work.

Poor analogy. Public services are public goods paid for by the hardwork of an entire society. People have to work for it. I as well as society benefit from public services as much as the "freeloaders". Try again.

 

[paximperium]

Wow. What would qualify as "convincing evidence" for you? Sure, the current crisis only demonstrates that the "free markets" theory is a failure.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
This is not a failure of "free markets". This is a failure of financial regulation and an overheated real estate market and improper lending. The current financial crisis will pass, just like all the others.

That the rich ones can get all the benefits from communism and the rest of the people will have to work more and have less (in the end they are nothing but slaves).

More melodramatic crap.

You claim that a society that is based on debt is a good one? Because since you born you are in debt, this is a system that works on the premise that you owe money just for being alive. You are permanently in debt and have to pay for your right to live.

Do you love your strawmen that much? I suggest you stop projecting your own biases on to others.

And let's not enter in to poverty, or health care, or pollution, white collar banksters, how resources are wasted because its selling price is not "good enough" (entire perfectly nice crops are wasted this way), etc.

Relevance? So what do you want to do with crops that are "perfectly nice" but cannot compete?

 

[Francesca R]

To put this in context, I said that "I'm willing to argue that the best incentives are related to gaining recognition, respect and love" [ . . . ]

Well that's odd. I invited you to do just that, and to explain why it was the case. Yet your response amounts to "Well it just is". Not a great start (it isn't difficult to argue what you said you could--why not try properly?)

 

[Francesca R]

Yes, "property" is, in a way, a claim of benefit. But lets think for a moment in another possible definition: "use". People use the bus to go to schools, but they do not "own them", they are not "their property". Same goes for all public services, people uses the pavement yet nobody claims to "own" it. The water flows in our houses, we use it, but it would be weird if someone tells you that you can use "their" water, claiming property over it because it is in their houses.

Consumption of goods and services is also benefit.

Now, regarding "personal benefit" yes, arguably that is what really moves us, even those who are considered to be less selfish simply find satisfaction in giving (to put an example). But I find it weird when people simply asumes that "personal gain" or "personal benefit" are, somehow, synonymous of getting money out of an activity. Yes, they are related in the way things are now, but that's about it.

They are synonymous to the extent that it is often possible, if not necessary, to quantify these things in money terms.

Yes, but you should reckon that it is a flawed system. Very flawed.

What would you change it to?

MM sorry but this is an insubstantial claim. Actually I have several incomes, and I love everyone of them.

Good for you. If you already have sufficient assets to support yourself you ought to be happy. But assets are property, as is human capital. So you are in favour of property ownership aren't you? If not, consider giviing away your assets, and/or rent their wealth-generation out for free.

For instance, one of my passions is photography, and I get paid (sometimes well paid) because people loves what I do. And I would still take pictures in a world without money.

I don't think you have said how you would support yourself in a "world without money". Never mind how everyone else would. Perhaps you could?