Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (314)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • remeinds me of what the drug companies do they invent illnesses so that people might take their medicines the drug companies invent diseases like restless legs because they are not going to make money on our health

  • @Ujamesl978 ... The only reason why we all dont have magical hovering castles is because of the monetary system and because people don't believe in magical hovering castles. The lack of evidence only makes it more convincing....I almost forgot..... science.. sciency science .. the scientific method is awesome.

  • @Ujamesl978 "You don't destroy an entire house because one strip of electrical wiring was installed incorrectly." Well said. Ill add to to what Ujames said......you dont destroy an entire house and then propose a magical castle that hovers over the property and evidence its superiority to the prior house by drawing pretty pictures.

  • A NEW SITE WHERE WE (YOU & I) CAN ELECT A CANDIDATE FOR A T H I R D PARTY FOR THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION!!!!!!! BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON ONLY TO THOSE WHO ARE LIKE-MINDED AS US ZEITGEISTERS!!!!!!! 

    americanselect[D0T]org

  • Thank you TZM.

  • 420 likes and 10 dislikes make the perfect joint :3 decriminalize save lives

  • @allibyx lol say not saw . ....I say theres an elephant in a small box. You say its too small to hold an elephant. I say its a micro-elephant. You open it and cant see an elephant. I say its invisible. You say I cant feel it... I say its a special non-physical elephant. If I say its true because you cant prove that it doesnt exist (its valid and untestable) .... you would think I was crazy... yet you apply the same logic to TVP's optimization method. I thought that you were rational.

  • @axe863 It's based on proven and tested models all put together into a concept. You're just another run-of-the-mill naysayer.

  • @ZeerosFate Yeah, Im a non-believer. You obviously arent to fond of science. There is no getting around the fact that there are zero peer reviewed papers on TVP/TZM capitalistic crisis or RBE. ZERO.

    "It's based on proven and tested models all put together into a concept." lol write a research paper ...submit it to peer review... win a Nobel prize in economics ;)

  • @axe863 You can keep ignoring the points brought up to you, but it won't make them disappear. You bring nothing constructive to the table aside from doubt and the conviction that you're in the correct sinking ship.

  • @ZeerosFate Listen... TVP has provided ZERO peer reviewed papers on capitalistically induced collapse or the superiority of a RBE.... Do you understand that if you make a claim that flies in the face of established science....that you need to counter it with valid peer reviewed research and not opinion.

    X,Y have been tested.... therefore a magical AI can overcome computational infeasibility. .... That's logic fail.

  • @axe863 So you're implying the current political system adheres to established laws of science? That's a logic fail in itself. I'd like to hear an actual counterargument from you aside from parroting definitions and (blindly) accusing TVP/TZM of not abiding by rules of science.

  • @ZeerosFate No, Im not. Capitalistic structure is a complex adaptive system....its a system of numerous subsystem interacting and co-evolving on multiple scales. They're highly optimized subsystems on a local level and self-organized on a macro level. Monetary policy is derived through peer reviewed research. How can a scientifically adherent person X conclude the superiority or inferiority of anything without having their ideas go through the process of the scientific method?

  • @axe863 Well, I didn't predict that one response for a change. Good going.

    You're still parroting definitions, however. I also have access to Google so no thanks.

    Pointing out a way that a concept can fail is easy. You just need enough bias or inclination. Pointing out ways it can be better or offering constructive criticism towards a solution is what takes actual work.

  • @ZeerosFate Oh like what Im actually studying... Im actually studying financial crises under a complexity framework. When I have finished my paper, I will have it thoroughly reviewed and if it is a superior paper... it will be published in a renowned journal and will be either supported or thoroughly destroyed by others.

    TVP/TZM completely skipped this validation process and made propaganda films to get their views across.

  • @axe863 So what do you want, a medal for making a claim that you're actually contributing to something, someday? I personally doubt you're even being honest about it at all, considering you've offered nothing tangible in our argument here.

  • @ZeerosFate Congratulation for having doubt :)... now if you would only have that kind of doubt with respect to your quasi-religious belief in TVP/TZM

    BYE :)

  • @axe863 Exactly, you're done. You have nothing to offer but definitions. Once you leave school you'll probably be able to hone in what you learn towards a real solution to the world problems or maybe even an opinion of your own.

    Until then, your only point is "You have no argument because your process didn't follow x or y rules!"

    It would be interesting to see how much your tune changes once you face the real world.

  • @axe863 That is, assuming you're going to school at all. Hopefully I didn't give you too much credit.

  • @ZeerosFate Rational people follow the scientific method. You want evidence that I am actually studying complexity whilst you accept the superiority of a system that will have global control of resources without even a falsifiable model. Goodbye. You have thoroughly owned yourself.

  • @axe863 "you accept the superiority of a system that will have global control of resources without even a falsifiable model"

    Go through all my comments and point out something I said which supports this absurd assertion. Your failure to provide anything constructive to the argument has been my topic. Goodbye? I expect you back again with more absurdity any moment now.

  • @ZeerosFate Its not the concept, its the process. I will not accept extraordinary claims without evidence. Bye. Its obvious that nothing is sinking in.

  • @axe863 In other words, if you think something won't work, what do you think will? But that'll be too hard for you wouldn't it? It requires actual research.

  • @ZeerosFate Are you serious? Im merely saying that currently TVP/TZM is purely pseduo-scientific. Its as believable as the tooth fairy. TVP/TZM are making a claim against peer reviewed science with zero testable models. It is not up to me to provide a better model than the current established view or fail. This is akin to saying you don't fully understand how the universe was formed.... therefore, X deity did it.

  • @axe863 Of course, it's not up to you, or me or any organization outside of the government to research what's in humanity's best interest. Let's leave that to wall-street. Our job is to support them no matter what. Now that's science.

  • Comment removed

  • @ZeerosFate Yeah... all those economic journals are all bullshit... Its all a conspiracy :P lol

  • @axe863 Possible response: "But TZM/TVP doesn't have humanity's best interest in mind. Your point is a fail! lol!"

    So what/who does? No one? I rest my case.

  • @ZeerosFate You have a group of people that declare a desire for hardcore scientism and yet they completely neglect the same science that they promote when it doesnt prove their point. You can sugar coat it all you want but that is pure hypocrisy.

  • @axe863 Now this is the part where you quote some scientific definition to support your "doubt", completely missing the point again.

  • @allibyx This makes TZM/TVP, faith based. It is inherently anti-scientific. I dont understand how you can back a movement that states pure adherence to the scientific method in x+A time whilst its purely anti-scientific at x time.

  • @allibyx A fully specified testable model. "..... I'm not really sure you understand the concept of a RBE/TZM because the very nature of asking for a testable model of it is fallacious." I heard this and this is a beautiful way to say my position is valid eventhough it can never be falsfied. I can say theres an elephant is in a small box. You say its too small to hold an elephant. I say its a micro-elephant. You open it and cant see an elephant. I saw its invisible etcc.

  • @axe863 I like your overall approach. Let's stay on this sinking ship with our arms crossed until a verifiable, fully tested one built by someone else comes to rescue us. Why be a part of a solution when we can ask for it to be handed to us in a silver platter. You are evidence why the Zeitgeist movement cannot work under the current social mentality.

  • @ZeerosFate TVP/TZM havent proved anything, all they have made are wild assertions. If they were really scientists, they would have published their model for capitalistic crisis and the superiority of a RBE for peer review. Im sorry if you think some things get special exemption from the scientific method. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Funny example.... It may be the case that running into a wall is beneficial but all our current understanding shows us differently.

  • @axe863 "they would have published their model for capitalistic crisis and the superiority of a RBE for peer review"

    you are right, but we have to start from somewhere.It is obvious that we have a problem and we face collapse everywhere, so we have to invent something new.

  • @TimeChangingTime One doesnt start with the conclusion. This is purely pseudo-scientific. A scientific endeavor would utilize the scientific method and not conclude the statically high "truth" of position X whilst its only a hypothesis, the lowest stage of an "idea" in science. "we face collapse everywhere, so we have to invent something new." There are billions of possibilities with varying degrees of effectiveness. How can you pick the create system with testable no model? Its ridiculous.

  • @TimeChangingTime I meant to say "How can you pick a sufficiently correct system with no testable/falsifiable model? One starts with a model, performs statistical testing to derive its validity and then refines or eliminates it as required. TVPs RBE is completely useless because its allocation methods haven't even been tested for feasibility!!! TVP is operating on the same level of pseudoscience as hollow earthers, over-unity proponents and people who believe in fairies. Science or gtfo...jking

  • It's nice to see hippies get off dope and use more of there brains to change the world. But no money? it's a little far fetched.

  • @JZOINKL very far fetched.....but it doesn't make it wrong. You need to remember that money is just a human idea....not a law of nature....once you understand that money is just an invention...you can rationalize that a better invention can be made. Also, the movement has close to 1 million members....I doubt they are all hippies.

  • @allibyx Try the Venus Project's website. It's got the orientation guide etc and how the RBE would be implemented. :).

  • @axe863 Congratulations, you can utilize the English language. Have a medal. You would benefit from an education in social awareness and the needs of our society, or an education in emotional maturity.

  • @allibyx I addressed their complete lack of applying the same scientific method that they seemingly have a fetish for. Pointing out their "logic fails" is not ad hominem.

    They have zero models that I could actually profoundly critique. What do you expect me to do...build a model for them and critique it. :P

  • @allibyx Im busy I didnt mean to say its.... Why do (rational) people laugh at TVP/TZM.....Better?

  • @allibyx The title is Why do people laugh at TVP/TZM? Scientific method fail... Its laughing at the misapplication of the scientific method by fresco, joseph and their supporters.

  • @allibyx I have far better porn than that...so no thanks ;) Ill put splice it into my next video(not talking about porn anymore). Check out my new video on Why do people laugh at TVP/TZM :)

  • @allibyx I have video footage of Jacque Fresco calling bankers criminal... and stating that subjects used to control people will be banned.

  • @axe863 I think you would benefit from an education.

  • @zzzonked333 Maybe youre right... I guess that my doctoral studies in complexity economics are insufficient

  • @allibyx Better :). I didnt say that I was discussing your original question. I believe that you were implying that it was sufficient for individuals to understand/experience the normal functioning of the system. I rebutted that statement by saying that no... one must place primacy on understanding the downside risk due to systemic fragility. Where is the "craziness" in that?

    Why am I a troll for saying that your original quest. was imperfect and then rebutting one of your points.

  • @allibyx My agenda? You said lets look at the normal state of technocracy's "resource based economy" and I showed you why its incorrect to only look at how a system normal works.

    I showed you how system X, our current system, is partially flawed. Central tendency actually increases as the distribution becomes heavier ...thus one needs to thoroughly test technocracy's "RBE" in a peer reviewed setting.

  • @allibyx Let me give you an example of why normal is not a valid way of looking at things. Lets call this system X. System X usually produces semi-heavy tailed distribution of returns for reasons A...J agents start accumulating extreme tail risk in a hierarchically synchronized manner, network densification intensifies as risk diversification under concave error riddled optimization and tail financial imperfections accrue..====> The central tendency increases as systemic fragility spikes.

  • @allibyx No, it would allow a valid scientific critique. Does an engineer just build a structure before hes tested a model that approximates it sufficiently to see its potential flaws. They'll be able to inefficiently build those structures (even though the city structures are extremely systemically fragile) and this superficial act will be praised. They have not proved the dynamic efficiency or even feasibility of their optimization method. This is infinitely more important than buildings.

  • @allibyx Youre asking the wrong question. It should be... Has there ever been any peer reviewed papers on the efficiency and feasibility of a system, RBE, that states pure adherence to science and the scientific method? The answer to this question is NO.

  • @allibyx I think that is what Jacque and Roxanne are working on.

  • @TZMJordanAlexander Im very confused with your wording. Are you making the claim that money is not an emergent phenomena? Are you making the claim that there could be a transition from capitalism to RBE but not vice versa. You're making this extreme claim(which I do not believe) and yet both TZM/TVP have provided zero peer reviewed research papers.... If RBE is highly inefficient system, humanity will be permanently locked in. Beautiful.

  • @TZMJordanAlexander I meant relative efficiency at maximizing utility. 

  • @TZMJordanAlexander Are you referring to my "What if a researcher discovers that after testing RBE's model that aggregate production could be increased under capitalism? ... :) " comment? The researcher would build a RBE model with suppressed money/interactions and a capitalistic model with free interactions and would evaluate their relative advantages. The following is irrelevant to my previous comment but ....why do you think capitalism requires the existence of money?

  • "And the amount of people who participate in the research can tell a lot about it's validity "

    I love how you can say that when both TVP/TZM think that mainstream economists, bankers(financial economists) etc are all criminals and that the "all subjects used to control (who determines if this is the case) people" must be banned

  • ( 11:50 ) " All of us having cancer would improve the GDP. "

    d'accord, d'accord ! D'ACCORD !

    Cancer is good ! --- for Monsanto, Bayer, & Co. ( as i've been writing, for years)

  • @wda013 His statement is nonsensical. Aggregate productivity would dramatically fall if everyone had cancer.

  • @axe863

    > His statement is nonsensical. Aggregate productivity would dramatically fall..

    I did not hear him mention "aggregate [or any] productivity".

    --

    " Die Krebsmittel fressen mittlerweile ein Viertel des Arzneimitel-Budgets der Krankenkassen, obwohl sie nur 2 % der Verordnungen ausmachen. [Cancer treatments by now devour a quarter of the budget for medication although they account for only 2% of prescriptions.]" -- Stickwort BAYER 4/2010 (=data for Germoney; probably even worse for USA)

  • @wda013 If aggregate labor productivity fell by 20%, what do you think would happen to GDP...... o_0

  • Namasté P.J. & ZGM !

     " To mankind, and the hope that the war against folly may someday be won after all. " -- Isaac Asimov (1920-92) - "The Gods Themselves" 1972

  • Peter Joseph is like the Bruce Lee of the mind

  • @cyuczieekc o_O

  • I love that FB bumper sticker wisdom; "Humans are the only species who pay to live on Earth."

    Sounds like good flyer text, I think I'll throw some images together for that concept:)

  • @iiixtheory

    " Activism is my rent for living on the planet. " -- Alice Walker

  • Welcome Back PJ, Best W!shes to Venus Project. Ze!tge!st Rules, Namast3!

  • Wow!! Rule number one 1). NEVER agree to be the first one to speak after Peter Joseph. Sorry you took that hit Jen Wilding you probably pulled the shortest straw on that one.

  • "The earth should be declared the common heritage to all the earth's people"

    The earth belongs to ALL the worlds creatures, not just humans.

  • JJCPictures

  • i wish i was invited or known about this meeting, message me or us next time yea?we don't wanna miss these awesome little events

  • saben de alguna iniciativa por subtitular esto al español?

  • @Kirschcobric Por lo menos yo no se de ninguna , habrá que aprender Ingles no mas :P

  • Some people who say TVP is a world domination attempt of jews (or anyone for that matter), leave me throughly astonished by the level of ignorance.. Someone (Jacque), who speaks so much sense on every tangible level, would be interested in the product of some primitive mindsets world domination? Achieving what? And this is a 95 year old guy we're talking about. Not only what I mentioned above makes their claim totally meaningless, they also can't provide anything to prove their twisted claims..

  • And people themselves are building the system with their social staus being obsolent, there's no possibility on any level to accomplish "world control of resources for private possessors", or whatever that is consired as these days..

  • @rolynstone48 I pity you.

  • I think those videos are too long, I think they should split the video into max, 15 min parts.

  • Mass Nonviolent Acts of Radiating Change.

  • 56:30 Isn't that chick an actor? she looks very familiar.

  • there is no better system then Democracy, and until everyone participates in our system we wont have a true democracy?We are well informed beings, ignorance is no longer an excuse.We know the consequences of our actions to the environment, we know that war is BS if war were really a necessary evil for the betterment of all we would of fixed Africa back in the 80's,

  • we know population vs resources in a capitalistic system is no longer viable.We are supposed to be critical thinkers, why do we wait until things are critical before we think.Mankind know has the science & technology to house, feed and educate every person on this planet, for free, with a benefit for all of humanity?All that and a big bag of chips, be water my friends be water

  • We have to drill ourselves with this type of format to get this across to others now. Lets put together a town hall meeting and presentation soon. We must organize to communicate this direction away from the current economic model.

  • I so hope that Peter's vision and thoughts will rule the world one day. The thing is: He's simply right. There is no debating it, you can't really have valid arguments against his case. If you have, you're either religious, insane, or not thinking logical about humans and their future. Sure, you can choose to ignore it and disregard humanity and evolution, claim that we should not exist and destroy our planet, but who really wants that?

  • @Meowbay "He's simply right. There is no debating it" Congratulations, you're an anti-scientific individual.

  • @axe863 You're not correct there, actually. Similar to when saying evolution did not take place, or when saying that the sun is flat, one does not become anti-scientific when one makes statements like I did about what Peter is saying here. You will not debate such facts anymore. What Peter says here might be a bit ahead of your time, but after a couple of decades everybody will see the truth versus what's wrong here. There is no good argument against his case here.

  • @Meowbay What are you talking about? A valid application of the scientific method deems that nothing, excluding mathematics, is Truth. It is only probabilistically "true" after numerous successful tests have been conducted in a peer reviewed setting. TVP/TZM provides zero models, zero peer reviewed research papers and have not applied their ideas in the real world.....and yet have already concluded their system's superiority. Stop drinking the kool-aid and open a science book.

  • @axe863 It's a train of thought, not a train of models/research papers for you to examine. TZM isn't supposed to provide any "models" except for the first test city which is relaying on how much it gets funds. TZM hasn't determined any particular structure. What just fits the best. It's definitely a better system than monetary from number of viewpoints. You don't need to have real-life examples right in front of you to get it through your thick skull if you fully understand the concept itself.

  • @laitela01 You most likely do not understand how science works. If you do understand how science works and yet you make a special case for it not being required for this instance, then you have committed a logical fallacy.

  • @laitela01 Do I have to repeat the comment that I left to Meowbay? My magical unicorn has no particular structure and thus, it is valid because its untestable. If there is zero testable/falsifiable models of how the systems works... one cannot conclude its superiority or even its feasibility. Assuming the conclusion before sufficient testing is a pre-scientific idea that is reserved for only the most primitive among us.

  • @axe863 The point is to test it with the first "test city". It's mostly for the city structure though, to see whether it works and change it when ever needed. The ideology itself isn't the concern. I'd be damned if something was wrong with the simple ideology itself. If so, point it out? On a global scale it is really nothing more than bunch of cities connected with any plausible transportation systems. Built in most efficient way. ITS A TRAIN OF THOUGHT that has to get through peoples heads.

  • @axe863 Is it the invidual buildings that you're concerned about, or the system as a whole? The invidual buildings will be those that HAVE been tested and proven to work. After that, the buildings will be unified into one structure, and then we see how people like living in that first test city. If somethings wrong, it'll change. Hmm, can we afford for the whole system to be observed for 10 years to see whether it works? No we can't. Then again, did we get monetary system scientifically tested?

  • @laitela01 Building funny looking structures is trivial.The risk adjusted dynamic efficiency and even feasibility of TZM ... I mean TVPs RBE optimization concept is of main concern. 

  • @laitela01 It is funny that money has had the exact opposite effect that technocracy ...I mean Fresco ... I mean Peter Joseph says that it does. The economic history conclusively proves that money helps reduce illiquid drags on the real economy. Money emerged, it wasn't a top-down process. Money is useful in storing value, simplifying calculation, acting as a medium of exchange etc... it is not an optimization process

  • @axe863 It was great for the monetary system 70 years a go. That about the last of it's usefulness. Many research programs by scientists are being slowed up by buying power. I guess I don't need to go on how industrilalization's pollution has been boosted by consuming markets. Monetary economy is everything but economic. Hope you realize that.

  • @laitela01 "It was great for the monetary system 70 years a go." How can you even say that without a testable model? Hypothesis==> construct falsifiable model==> perform testing==> conclusion. You just jumped to the conclusion. "Many research programs by scientists are being slowed up by buying power." ...And RBE will make all resources infinite? LOL "I guess I don't need to go on how ...pollution has been boosted by consuming markets. " RBE will magically eliminate the need for consumption?

  • @axe863 No, don't act like you didn't learn a thing from the movie. Resources won't be infinite, it is stupid to assume so if you know yourself i't isn't possible. RBE is not eliminating consumption, but drastically reducing it. "it was great for the.." was a quote from Jacque Fresco. Tell me that he hasn't seen the world gone from semi-crap to total crap. Consumption is reaching higher and higher levels in a finite planet. Are people "satisfied" in general with current model? Nobody asks that.

  • @laitela01 "It was great for...." Watch "the north American technate". Peter Joseph took his ideas from Fresco who stole technocracy's ideas. I know its stupid to assume it will be infinite but youve just destroyed your own position by admitting that ... You arent arguing about constrained resource flow to researchers... you are merely arguing about the allocation resources of constrained resource flow :) . Thank you for admitting that TVPs RBE would limit consumption and thus utility :)

  • @axe863 I'm worried about the rate of consumption today, and yes, I don't know how much we have natural resources left as i'm not expert what comes to this. One thing to decrease consumption is to create access centers for renting things that actually last for a while.

  • @laitela01 You actually have to prove that the monetary system induces sub-par products with something called the scientific method and not rely on conspiracy theory bullshit.

  • @axe863 The fact that you'd have to buy cheapest products (Like majority which tries to cut on spending), and those products eventually will break down. This is something I base on my own experiences too. My sister has bought 10 cellphones in 10 years since they all broke down due to some malfunction (Normal use). They're made "cost-efficiently". So no actual sustainibility on those products.

  • @laitela01 Thanks for the anecdotal evidence. Ill give you some of my trivial anecdotal evidence. Ive had the same cell phone for 5+ years. I have dropped it down over 15 times on asphalt and other hard surfaces and yet it still works. What now....?

  • @laitela01 Why do you have to buy the cheapest products? Buying the absolute cheapest product is not cost efficient if it must be replaced ever year. Your sister is extremely irrational from an economic standpoint.

  • @axe863 Then I said, majority tries to cut on spending. They can't afford to buy sustainable phones. See where it gets? She's just a brainwashed victim in our society. And this of course expands to countless amount of different products. Why can't monetary system provide sustainable phones for everyone? That would be inefficient by terms of cost in money. Not inefficient by terms of resource sustainibility.

  • @laitela01 I meant to say "allocation mechanism of constrained resource flow :)"

  • @axe863 That's something you can search from TVP site (FAQ?). It has been answered there as far as i'm concerned. You might have to shape your question though. I suggest you read the FAQ. BTW, TZM isn't holding on this TVP city/model structure, as they're separated organizations now. I'm not interested in debating anymore when i've made my point.

  • @laitela01 Don't redirect me. Have some balls and answer my valid questions. If a global RBE comes to fruition, how can individuals democratically vote out the system if it turns to not be to their liking if all elections are eliminated? How can individual effectively leave a global RBE, a system which controls all the worlds resources, without starving to death/ committing suicide?

    Id love to here your answers.

  • @axe863 I try to answer, but what lacks is my mobility in english language. That's why you'd be much better off by reading from sources ratherly than jumping to conclusions by my words. Leaving RBE, is easy as leaving from the city, because almost everything is localized. I't has been clearly stated that you can live outside RBE if you prefer to. Would be pretty weird choice by all means though. Your existance won't do harm unless you chop every tree in forest.

  • @laitela01 "Leaving RBE, is easy as leaving from the city, because almost everything is localized."

    Global RBE ===> global resource management....aka controlling all the world resources.

  • @axe863 "Your existance won't do any harm as long as you don't chop all the trees in the forest". Your consumption outside RBE won't affect really anything.

  • @laitela01 I have no potential for consumption outside of RBE because there is nothing outside a global RBE. Global RBE is the global management of resource ===> All life nourishing resources are under the control of the RBE.

    Thus, to actively escape, I must commit suicide or continually steal from the RBE. If a sufficient number of individual try to escape the RBE, the amount of theft would be significant and suppression will be enacted against those that rejected RBE===> tyrannical rule

  • @axe863 This scenario is highly unlike to happen. Even if you have a group of people wanting to leave, it wouldn't still make any relevant difference in amount of resources. However, if there would be a relatively large amount of people who want to live outside RBE, then we have to deal with the problem and arrive at the best decision from both viewpoints.

  • @laitela01 How can you give a probability if you don't even have a testable model? I just demonstrated one reason why a power structure is required in the long run and you dismiss it as if its nothing. News flash ===> In a RBE, there are zero explicit checks and balances of power... if a power hierarchy were required for X reason...it would be disastrous. There is a long history of emergence of tyrannical from ill defined balances. Its the reason why checks and balances were formed

  • @axe863 RBE's main purpose is to provide necessities of life for everyone. From that point on, it could be anything like people want. The model that has been introduced in the movie seems logically most relevant solution (what I know up to now) . This is all assuming "if that happens". But the best medicine is preventive. There is really no need for power hierarchies. Don't try to come up with "if that happens" scenario in order to construct power hierarchy.

  • @laitela01 "RBE's main purpose is to provide necessities of life for everyone. From that point on, it could be anything like people want. " 1. Oh necessities :). From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. 2. It has been empirically verified that wants are not bounded so obviously the second part is non-sense.

    [This is all assuming "if that happens"] Yeah...what if reality happens. If the hypothesized system only works if reality is eliminated, its a shitty system

  • @axe863 It could be, but I'm all for the system that has been introduced in the movie. And you already know what's it is all about. I'm not saying I't will be based on peoples wants, especially with the current mindset the majority haves.

  • @laitela01 Under static energy based optimization, utility maximization is highly unlikely to be maximized given that product differentiation is energy costly and that one is not explicitly maximizing utility (duh).

    I make a stronger claim that RBE will be extraordinarily inefficient if they even attempt to satisfy wants because they have no price system or competitive forces to efficiently allocate resources to match subjective preferences

  • @axe863 Example; why would we need to have 10 types of different computers to match each subjective preferences? Sure, some things are relaying on user's preferences, but we do have a lot of wants, that are very irrelevant..

  • @laitela01 There is a long history of the emergence of tyrannical rule from ill defined balances. Its the reason why checks and balances were formed

    lol

  • @laitela01 Go to the library and read up on the scientific method and economics. If you're going to go against something, you need to understand it to a sufficient degree.

  • @axe863 Just to argue with someone? No thanks. I hate when people argue against system that they find okay to begin with, but don't think for a second what could fix the problem. Especially when the system is established by average people like you and me.

  • @laitela01 Not to argue... to critically consider your position.

  • @laitela01 I can give you numerous other reason for a power structure.

    Who determines what is valid scientific research

    Who writes the code for resource optimization

    If an individual's wants deviate too much for energy efficiency, who restrains their consumption

    If a different belief system emerges, who will eliminate it

    Who determines social design

    etc etc

  • @axe863 The one who want's to do the research can determine it's validity. If he knows that it can take up a lot of equipment that might risk other more relevant researches (human health first, curing diseases), then he most likely won't do it. And the amount of people who participate in the research can tell a lot about it's validity (when they have been all educated, what is the most important).

  • @laitela01 "The one who want's to do the research can determine it's validity" Thats completely circular.

  • @axe863 Yes, I draw a lot of circles around me when I speak, sorry. My mobility in english and lack of knowledge in some areas do cause a lot of misunderstandings.

  • @laitela01 I meant circular reasoning on the part of your constructed researcher. Anyway I have to get back to writing my doctoral thesis...i hope i finish it before RBE comes to power and im banned from speaking about complexity economics :) 

  • @axe863 You're much better off by debating with former economists who advocate RBE. Not going to  search one for you though.

  • @laitela01 No need. Theyre better off publishing research papers in peer reviewed journals.

  • What if a researcher discovers that after testing RBE's model that aggregate production could be increased under capitalism? Would the RBE revert to capitalism? :)

  • @axe863 Well, that would be funny, if proven so. I'm done with debates now. Have a good life.

  • @axe863 Mate, have a read of the Frequently Asked Questions and Orientation Guide before you spout your ignorance. Your concerns have already been considered. Read!

  • @SlaveryHelped Yea ...I looked. I didnt see anything in that page of TZM faq. How about this... link me to what youre talking about

  • Comment removed

  • @axe863 There has to be something IN the system that people are not satisfied with. To be not satisfied with the system is such a broad statement. Especially when the system is made with peoples needs as a number priority ratherly than serving just elitists interests.

  • hear not here ...lol multitasking sucks ;)

  • @laitela01 You do know that you can go move to another country if you're not satisfied with your country's system. Hell, you can even form non-capitalistic communes within the US. If a global RBE comes to fruition, the only way to actively escape is by suicide.

  • @Meowbay "What X says here might be a bit ahead of your time, but after a couple of decades everybody will see the truth"

    I, person X, say that magical unicorns will cry 4 course meals around the world effectively ending world hunger if we all eat 1 pound of skittles per day. I have come to this conclusion without any evidence but when the time comes... you'll see the truth of my position. Whats really sad is that this non-sense is more likely to TVP's RBE.

  • @axe863 You are what I would call a "verbal pervert". I currently have no interest in word-games with some bored uninformed person like you. Try /watch?v=jzJrMelS7kU

  • @Meowbay Congratulations. I have never ever been called a "verbal pervert" before. :) I thought you were going to link me to a peer reviewed research paper..... I was sadly mistake. I like hermit crabs though. They're awesome.

  • This video needs to get viral!

  • @plaina Why ...so it can infect susceptible minds? ;)

  • Good job people. It is good to see members of the movement taking turns in the seat, as well as hearing endless progression currently taking place within the movement as an entity. For the is crucial.

    I just wish there was a chapter where I live - which is basically a small rock in the middle of the sea... The isle of man, if you have heard of it... It's a little frustrating, but I'm moving off this rock to study soon. Perhaps then could I get involved.

  • OMG U SEE AT THE START HOW PETER STARTED TO WRINKLE UP HE IS A REPTILIAN I SAW HIS SCA- Oh no wait that's the video compiler.

  • the current system we live under is unsustainable for only one reason:

    the existence of the monetary system which places an artificial value on goods, services, and labor because the monetary value of these services is based on political power rather than actual value.

    lack of money for the costs of living are the only thing causing the problems for people trying to survive, it is only those who are forcing us to pay money for the things we can get for free who are causing the problems.

  • the earth is a round circle an we all live different locations and have different believes of the each other with made up so called religions, cultures, money and our lack of education due to our corrupted school system. The new generation are getting dumber by the second with all the music in their ears, obsessed with television 4 to 8 hours a day not going to even talk about Facebook addicts no wonder they all believe everything that they see no commonsense and time to think about anything.

  • I got depressed when I first got some real info and started to think about the place our world is heading. This is not even an American problem, its the same shit all over the world. This is fucked up and I feel powerless in this situation. Not cool..

  • @wederwoord I suggest you look at some history and see that in the end, the people always win. Ghandi said it himself, and if you give it a good enough think, for every monumental social change, the majority has always gotten their way. Our job now is to awaken the general public and expose the ideas so that these ideas are commonplace in the household. The internet has made this much easier so don't sweat it. Keep talking about it.

  • @wederwoord yeah so true. My mom often says she is glad she wasn't around in medival times-but someone wouldn't say that if you wouldn't know what future will be. Zeitgeist shows what humans could be capable of and gave me the impression that we today live in darkest medival times. Even if TZM is about "Spreading the word", I can't help to think twice before I talk with someone about it, because I imagine a lot of people are better of not knowing right now.

  • HEY.. WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ME? ;)

    "First they came for the communists,

    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,

    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,

    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

    Then they came for me

    and there was no one left to speak out for me."

    Pastor Martin Niemöller about his 1937 arrest and confinement to concentration camps by the Nazis.

  • Economic growth is not a measure of how well it is going. What matters is not the wealth made and distributed among a tiny "superior" minority, but the wealth in long term for the majority. Building the future-aware infrastructure costs money and shows results firstly in 20-50 yrs.

  • Thumbs up.. It is nice to hear the futuristic visions of The Venus are a facet but not all of the Zeitgeist movement.

  • I suspect the $5,000 handbag may last longer than the $10 handbag. The $5,000 bag is also more likely to be repaired (if damaged) and to last at a life time. In saying this I would never buy a $5,000 handbag. In fact I wouldn't buy a handbag at all because they are for girls.

  • @Leibinz The point is that a $5,000 handbag probably costs around $10 to produce. It is the associations of status and brand image which we are conditioned into us that gives the handbag its "value" in our society. Modern marketing and branding is a psychological process. It is essentially a form of manipulation... young children with developing minds are especially vulnerable to this sort of crap. I'm saying all this, and I work in marketing!

  • @InvertedFox While I agree with the point that you have made this is not the point that Peter has made in the speech.

    Peter (aprox 12 mins) highlights the point that there is no utility difference between a $10 handbag and a $5000 handbag not that a $5,000 handbag costs $10 to make. I would suspect that a $5000 handbag contains better quality materials and workmanship than a $10 one, would last longer and hence have greater utility.

  • @Leibinz I'm sure you could find examples of a low build quality $5,000 handbag and a high quality $10 handbag and vice versa. The $5,000 handbag isn't necessarily higher quality. I have always bought cheap but tough and long lasting clothing! LOL. The additional value comes from perceived brand status etc. not increased build quality.

    Still, this is such a minor point. We basically agree :)

  • @Leibinz What people miss in the comparison of $10 and $5000 is that extra $4990 isn't buried under a rock, it's not burned up, it is invested to earn interest where other people borrow that money to create other products which is what makes it possible for someone to start a company to make a $10 handbag.

  • @justintempler You're arguing in a circle. What is fundamentally different from a $10 handbag when compared with a $5000 handbag other than an arbitrarily set figure by the makers of the handbag? In terms of tangible physical material, energy consumption and human effort cost to make what is the difference?