Can we move past money?

An excellent one if we embrace progressive change.

 

Leaving the most difficult task, that's just cruelty.

 

Which task is that?

 

Getting out of bed

 

We've lived that way pretty much our entire existence as a species. And many places today are either free of money or will be soon.

 

I love how people think that greed will cease to exist after we abolish money

 

Greed is an inherent human trait. But it will likely not be catered to in the same damaging way an overly capitalistic and materialistic focussed society often does.

 

How do you figure greed and capitalism will be different in a money-free society?

Even in moneyless societies, people will work on ways of acquiring and hoarding more material wealth. Material items that have good trade value.

 

I doubt anybody is going to work on abolishing money without also abolishing capitalism.

In most societies, that has not/does not happen. Because historically there has been no need. When a society is based entirely around mutual aid and "each according to their need".

 

How about this: If someone wants a motorboat, they can go join the other people who want a motorboat in the motorboat manufacturing facility and put in the necessary time and energy to earn that motorboat.

 

How about this: If someone wants a motorboat, they can go join the other people who want a motorboat in the motorboat manufacturing facility and put in the necessary time and energy to earn that motorboat.

 

Deja Vu !!!!

 

Unfocuse

I wrote an essay on this, The economics of Star Trek, but so long about that I think the only copy is on a floppy disk, my conclusion was the there was money within the ST universe wherever there was interactions between differing societies, but that it was a complete mess because different writers muddied the waters so much.

But it all came down to replicators and extreme automation, if you had your own personal replicator or if there were public replicators then you would have access to something that could supply all you needs and if everything is automated then there are no essential jobs to do.

Thing is if you can replicate a glass of wine why do the Picard’s still grow vines? You might say because they want to but still what happens to the product? And I’m thinking that snobbery been what it is that ‘real’ wine will have a greater value than ‘synthetic’ wine.

Basically money is a reward system but that unregulated capitalism has been shown to be very bad at proportioning rewards.

Who is more important to a society the labourer trudging through shit to keep the sowers working or a corporate money markets speculator? Does an advertiser have more value than a teacher or a nurse less than a PR consultant?

To move toward a moneyless society we would have to relearn what has value, there are lots of ‘job’ in Star Trek, they might not be paid but they do bring rewards through value, they are valued for doing that work. Sisko’s father has a restaurant where he likes to cook, the free food but his reward is the praise people give him and the people go to his place (rather than just getting it replicated) because they are rewarded with ‘real’ food (as it has a greater value it ‘synthetic’ equivalent).

This value system has worked in some areas a public sector nurse or teacher might not be paid well but they are given status within society.

In a capitalist system education is in one sense tied to a carrot and stick – if you work hard get educated you will be rewarded with money (a ‘good’ job) and if you don’t you will be punished with poverty or a ‘bad’ job.

But for that to work ‘capitalism’ has to supply enough of the ‘good’ jobs to make the carrot and stick system seem ‘fair’ and efficient, neoliberal capitalism isn’t very good at that because it deadens or kills social mobility. It also has a tendency to categorise people as ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ dependant on wealth or income rather than on worth, which messes up the value system you would need to develop for a no work no money society.

OK enough for the moment but I’ll be back to this and I’ll try and find that essay.

 

Very true. I cannot imagine being able to just have what I wanted without having to work for it.
I think that quite a few people would give up work and just laze about all day.

 

I think that one factor that we have forgotten is that without money, how would we pay taxes for our civilization to survive.

I have been guilty of a bit of bartering over the years, where I have done a few repairs for neighbors and they give us vegetables from their allotments.
I suppose the tax man will catch up with me one day and I will have to give him a few cabbages.

 

Wils

Would you be one of those?

Is that what most people do when they retire? I think most of the people I know who are retired are active they have hobbies, do charity work, become members of societies (my wife runs an over 60's acting group) I know of two that are guides at National Trust properties.

My point been that work does not define people and they would do other things they define as having value if work was not there, and that if others praise the worthiness of the things been done that encourage others to follow their example.

I know people that love doing DIY (sometimes for their neighbours) and of others that grow things on their allotments because they like doing that not to save money (in one place I lived a friend would leave rhubarb and other stuff on our doorstep that he had grown on his allotment).

 

No they will not. What you call hoarding is possible since we value it. People are meant to have more than the next guy. If greed is not respected or rewarded it's not as easy.

Even if this were true it's not really a reason to have cash. Cash is a symbol of greed. There is no reason to keep it for moral or logical reasons if you think greed is a human trait. It's like giving extra bullets to a mass shooter. I mean he's going to shoot anyway.

 

That people still want luxury and material stuff in such a society is not an issue. We can have our cake and eat it too. Not in our current system obviously. Then we can only have that at the expense of others.
If everybody can get it though and earning money isn't the primary goal for working it is likely wealth will become unimportant. Having luxury items or material stuff won't be a status symbol anymore.

The big advantage of such a society and economy is that greed will not be catered to as in our current system: (too) cheap parts and ingredients in products and food. Getting rid of waste illegally because its cheaper. Bogus products altogether because one can market it and its cheaper and convenient for the poor consumer who can save a dime by buying crappier stuff. Etc. etc.
Greed in combination with a system that caters to it is why things are going bad and are so terribly unsustainable in the end. After all, its worth it for the person making money that way. If the system is non profit and focussed on cooperation, and everyone is entitled to material items and luxury (i leave wealth out of it. As it would likely become meaningless), there is simply no need to be a dubious business man. Status will not be determined by wealth or your paycheck anymore and thus no one sees the use of dubious business practices. Now status is often linked how competent one is at making money. Which caters to greed.