@rozz2656 Saying we cant move into pure communism because there are too many greedy people is like saying we cant get higher education because too many people are dumb. The end result is both the solution and the cure.
@saydaysago2008 Hi Aaron, your Bribe Mentality video was viewed 100 times over a period of 30h and i allowed me to actually make some connections with TZMpoland! all thanks to you :) I've already uploaded this one as well, so keep up the good work and i'll be widening the audience, at least for now ;)
A holistic society based on equitable resource distribution, egalitarianism exemplified. Good luck with that. To wit: the greed seemingly emblazoned into the very genetic code of, in particular, humans seems to expose the lie of such a utopian system ever functioning.
I would love to see this happen, but it will never happen the cruel addicted to money minds will not allow it to happen, the governments are too corrupted all over the world to allow this to happen, we need a worldwide revolution right now!! because the situation in the world is getting worse not by days but by hours!!
@kajmobile color me confused.. how does distribution via money provide equally. the people with less access to money (like say, many africans, or, homeless people) have less access to goods. money blocks people from having equal access because you need to compete to get it.
under a resource based economy, people would have access to all of their needs without debt, barter, or payment. It's a gift economy where production produces an abundance (post-scarcity), removing the need to ration via $.
@saydaysago2008 if you price everything you produce equal to the amount of labor hours it took to produce, totaled the price of everything you produced and allocated that total equally to everyone as income, then and ONLY then will everyone have equal consumption access
all companies would be publicly owned. so it wouldnt be a capitalist economic system where u had to sell ur labor. ur income is guaranteed.
From my observations, giving people equal income can never result in equal access. Some people will need to spend all that income on medical care, and wouldn't have enough for any recreation, while another family might be able to spend it all on recreation. By using any sort of method of exact tracking (money, credits, etc) we inherently end up with disproportionate distribution.
Even if such emergency things like health care are taken care of, rationing leads to inequality.
@saydaysago2008 medicine is not a market good. it would be paid for thru tax. so everyone would pay for healthcare equally. it is not fair for healthy people to pay less than sick people. sickness is not something people go out and buy.
it is bizarre that u think measuring production and allocating it equally will create unequal distribution and not measuring production and pretending it is equally distributed will create equal distribution
@kajmobile right, i understand the math, and that's fine.. how can i rephrase my question so that you see the point i'm making....
how does a person who already spent their $5000 have equal access to goods than someone who hasn't? they can't, correct? if someone saves $1000 every month, after ten months they will have an extra 10,000 worth of access available to them as compared to someone else.
@saydaysago2008 if we each get paid $12,000 per year and i spend $1000 of it per month and you spend all $12,000 of it on the last day of the year, we still have spent EXACTLY the same amount. it does not matter when you spend your money.
saving money doesnt give u more money, it just changes the time when u spend it.
@saydaysago2008 if we each get paid $12,000 per year and i spend $1000 of it per month and you spend all $12,000 of it on the last day of the year, we still have spent EXACTLY the same amount. it does not matter when you spend your money.
saving money doesnt give u extra money, it just changes the time when u spend it.
@saydaysago2008 post scarcity and full automation doesnt exist. so building an economy based on it is pointless.
but if you used money to ration equally and you did reach a post scarcity future, money is not going to get in the way of that. it would just mean people would have more income than they can spend.
and at that point it would be appropriate to talk about alternatives. but talking about post scarcity today isnt going to help anyone
I don't want to build an economy 'based' on post-scarcity, I want to build an economy that will CREATE post-scarcity. Money does get in the way of that, because in order for money to have any value, it needs to be scarce. In a situation like you describe (everyone making more income than they can spend, using money becomes valueless and pointless, no?
@saydaysago2008 money does not get its value from being scarce! it gets its value by being accepted as payment
$100 is valuable because it buys $100 in stuff, not because $100 bills are rare
in the future when everyone has more money than they can spend AND you have enough automation so u no longer need to pay people to work, money becomes pointless.
so at that point and only at that point can u get rid of it
but that is several decades or centuries in the future
@kajmobile sorry, you are correct. in our current monetary system, money needs to be scarce to have value. this is not intrinsic in any medium of exchange, even if it has been historically true of every medium of exchange to date, we could concievably create money that does not rely on it's own scarcity for valuation.
@saydaysago2008 if you allocated income equally in the US, it would amount to $127,000 per year, enough to make everyone wealthy. that is an indisputable mathematical fact that people can embrace. and you can demonstrate the ability to eventually automate half of all jobs which means you can cut the work week in half.
but nobody is going to embrace the idea of making everything free and refusing to pay workers because they rightfully see that as fantasy
@kajmobile if we could take transitional steps like that, i am in full support, though they still have many problems, they are ten miles ahead of where we are now.
@saydaysago2008 "if we could take transitional steps like that, i am in full support, though they still have many problems, they are ten miles ahead of where we are now. "
that is y u need to start making videos on replacing capitalism with democracy where people r paid equally which is something people will embrace
and stop making videos on an RBE which people think is communism and on making everything free and refusing to pay people to work which everyone thinks is complete fantasy
@kajmobile nowhere has 'refusing to pay people' ever been discussed. that's a sad misrepresentation man, come on. the idea is that people would be paid with their DIRECT ACCESS to goods and services, rather than the satellite access of money. and it's not making things 'free'. free is only a worthwhile concept when some things aren't 'free'. when everything is 'free' 'free' ceases to exist as a meaningful term.
@saydaysago2008 if you allocated income equally in the US, it would amount to $127,000 per year, enough to make everyone wealthy. that is an indisputable mathematical fact that people can embrace. and you can demonstrate the ability to eventually automate half of all jobs which means you can cut the work week in half
but nobody is going to embrace the idea of making everything free and refusing to pay workers because they rightfully see that as fantasy
@saydaysago2008 also ur take on democracy is wrong. democracy is about power over SUBJECTIVE decisions, not technical decisions
democracy is a society organized on the principles of Freedom, Equality and Science
it means every1 has the FREEDOM 2 pursue whatever lifestyle they want, everyone has an EQUAL power to build that lifestyle and the purpose of SCIENCE is to make those lifestyles possible
it means real equality: equal votes, equal ownership in the economy, equal pay 4 equal effort
@kajmobile sure, and i agree, the problem is that now all of societies technical decisions are being determined by our pseudo democratic state.
A true democracy over truly subjective decisions would have very little power to do anything, since so few social decisions are subjective and not technical. mostly small, local decisions that should be made by a community, not a large country wide vote.
@saydaysago2008 i disagree. i would say the vast majority of decisions are subjective. all of the decisions on what to produce are subjective and those are most of the decisions we make.
u only vote for candidates for office occasionally. but you vote with your money every day. your dollar vote determines what the economy produces. that is the most important democratic power you have, the power to decide what gets produced based on how you spend your money.
@kajmobile decisions on what to produce are the least subjective. if people vote with their dollars to build gas guzzling hummers, should we build them? no because the technical requirements of meeting the transport needs of the population demand that we do not use such silly methods, whther the people subjectively desire them or not. we need to base production on what can actually be produced in physical reality to meet everyones needs, not what people think they want.
@saydaysago2008 people could care less how their cars are powered. how power is produced is a technical decision. nobody is going to demand gas. but people will demand certain modes of transit over others and certain designs of cars over others and that their primary method of transportation be private, be on demand, be something that they can access right out their front door and be able to travel more than 30 miles without running out of power
Here's the Truth, We live in an Artificial Scarce Environment created to keep us believing there isn't enough to go around for everyone. When you use Science and Technology to bring people abundance then you are actually eliminating many problems.
People Don't need to work for Living, but People need to Live to Contribute to their Community without Force, or Paid Slavery. It's difficult to see a Reality without money.
@Bigsteelguy3 if income in the US was allocated equally, everyone would get $135k which would make everyone wealthy. but it does not eliminate scarcity. scarcity is real and exists and if people could demand anything they want, they would demand far more than we can produce.
we can also eliminate 55% of current jobs with automation, but if we stopped paying people to work, we would not have enough volunteers to fill the remaining 45% of jobs.
@kajmobile thats nonsense. you already asuming somthing and we didnt even try anything yet. what gives you the idea that we dont have any volunteers. believe it or not there are people who acually give a damn about others becuase they need help and not just because they are getting paid. we are raised and conditioned to support this bullshit system. money doesnt clothe, feed, or shelter you so it is NOT a necessity its an excuse. but of course like big steel said its hard to see
The only problem being, uninformed, clueless and/or selfish "votes" can't and shouldn't be weighed as heavily into decisions as the more-informed, intelligent, and considerate opinions. That's how we got here.
Obviously in this resource based economy, scarcity will become more prevalent than it is now. Even if it does not, how will resources be allocated efficiently to without prices to guide them? Who gets what and why.
@snarfels actually, a RBE is a 'post-scarcity' economic model. look it up on wikipedia for more in depth information.
to quickly answer your allocation question the best i can, everyone has equal access to all goods that can possibly be produced given our planetary resources and scientific understandings.
Economics is literally the study of the efficient allocation of scarce resources. Capitalism does not create scarcity, if there is scarcity due to current technology or scientific understanding, price action works to eliminate scarcity by providing incentives to meet consumer demand. The U.S's oil reserves were estimated at something like 16b barrels in the 70's. People KNEW there was 16b for a fact. But, Capitalism proved them wrong. Price action, you do the research.
@snarfels i have, the idea that price action offers any valuable advancement of scarcity elimination is suspect, at best. the intrinsic motivation of completing a task is, and always has been, the reason that problems get solved. this works, often in spite of, price.
An oil company responds to massive surge in price of oil, and spends hundreds of millions of dollars given by wealthy investors looking to turn a profit. From this invested money the oil company hires thousands of employees to research more efficient oil extraction techniques. Engineers who would otherwise have been researching something else are now here, due to higher demand, and more importantly, the rise of oil prices.
The oil company will keep researching ways of reducing the cost of oil extraction until the savings per barrel of oil are no longer greater than the cost of research per barrel of oil. Not only does price action combat scarcity directly as i just described, it also takes labor and resources away from other sectors of the economy with lower demand. This is called efficiency, price action guides resources to where they are most demanded.
@Achokiador hi! your comment makes me wonder, do you think there could possibly be any other mechanisms of reward and motivation that could be harnessed by a human culture in place of money, ways for people in a society to get something back for what they put in, but without the endless hierarchies created by the market system.
@Ihas3pair i've heard about it in my travels through different zeitgeist and rbe resources, but haven't taken the time to look into it. i'm very interested in all manner of solutions though, where do you recommend i start learning about it? got any links to a nice summary video or website?
One of it's ("parecon") strengths and also weakness is that it does not rely on cybernated/automated systems to function. This makes it slower overall but also directly implementable and from there on it is easy to get the work done required for a completely holistic cybernated post-scarcity system.
@Achokiador you wont receive any more goods, but you will receive the satisfaction of creating something. All unrewarding dead-end jobs will be automated. so therefore any jobs you would have would be completely out of choice not necessity, it would stem from your education which would probably be science related. Our morals and goals will be changed in this society so we wouldn't see it as working for free but as bringing the human race forward... plus we always get a kick out of showing off ;)
dude ure pointing out that are someother issues begining and results of another issues .... if u can just makie it as powerful as the outlines of video ... the power is to do good... forget all the korrupted ones... think ur wording is meant to give them power and taking it ..like ure some what bigger than they are.. get it.. our government is doing ok... and the people summit to it or they wont is up to them and how much of the sumitting and are understood theyre bound themselves up with...
Egalitarian is a wonderful way of saying 'Socialist' and your philosophy, broken down in to simple terms is Every resource, is shared equally, so if I create a new type of fuel, I share it with everyone else, you share your corn with everyone, this guy shares his stuff, etc. Everyone is equal. Sounds good, but it lacks one thing. Individualism. What if I don't want to be like everyone else. What if I want to earn a better living, or not share my stuff? What happens than? and WTF is a REEZOURSE
@David1173 You have a very valid question about individualism. There are many detailed answers to that topic that can be found at The Zeitgeist Movement Global/US website, under the heading FAQ - Venus FAQ -- might I suggest a search on the page for "individual" using CTRL-F -- it comes up 24 times -- and I apologize if you already knew about using CTRL-F to do a search, some don't so just trying to be helpful, not be condescending. Peace!
@David1173 "What if I don't want to be like everyone else. What if I want to earn a better living, or not share my stuff? What happens than?"
David, do you currently work for a living? (yes i'd imagine), Do you enjoy your passtime activites and social group? Do you love what you do with your time, at work and off work?
In this system there is no need to "earn" anything, because you have the time you would use at a job to persue whatever you wished. ideas arent mandated, they are made availa
@David1173 "'i feel there are legitimate aspects to both individualist and collectivist philosophies, and i find it sad that people need to identify with one or the other. obviously we're a collective of individuals."
@David1173 Do you mean to tell me that the only way you identify yourself as an individual is by how much you own, or how little you share? That's astonishing...
@David1173 you are very mistaken - equality increases productivity and creativity -thus individuality - if you are free from coerced labor and are free to volunteer for labor based on mutual need and for its intrinsic worth to you individualy - in a resource based economy - every one has acsess to evreything they want -with very little labor and limited only by the sustainable resources available -or the caring capacity of the earth -search zietgiest movement orientation for a basic summary
the world's population is better off then it has ever been but people by design have to believe that it was at one point better or that we could improve it in the future. this is the myth that every human subscribes to, it happens with every generation in early adulthood. it is part of the human condition and can be found expressed in our art and literature for thousands of years. look up Joseph Campbell if you are interested.
The music in the background- is that bluetech? More importantly, excellent video, very clear, gets rights to the CORE and blasts apart the bullshit. Thank you!!
@saydaysago2008 - No rational person should believe any of this video seriously if you can't even give a reason for your blind faith in the reliability of science that your entire movement is based upon other than "that it appears to be".
Can evolution? No, by def'n it is random.
Naturalism? No, it can't even account for the vast lack of anti-matter required when the universe was made.
Materialism? No, universal Laws of Logic are immaterial and thus unaccounted for.
@tgrove2 i don't have blind faith in science, i have seen science work, and give the best answer with the information available time and time again, and have therefore reached the conclusion that it is the best method we have for approximating truth. it's not 'that it appears to be', its that, as a method, it works.
evolution is not random, this is a complete misrepresentation of the idea.
and finding things science hasn't answered yet doesn't prove that it is wrong about what it has answered
creationism may offer a surface explanation for all those things, but how does it explain the fossil record, homology, dna, and every other piece of evidence we have that supports evolution?
@tgrove2 the point i was making with homology, dna, and fossils, is the clear, hierarchical structure that shows a branching evolution from the first single celled organisms to todays humans. this is what the evidence shows. i'm not sure what you mean by 'evidence speaks now', but it seems appropriate to the case for evolution.
as for the idea of a world-wide flood, this has long been shown to be impossible, at least as portrayed in the biblical account..
@saydaysago2008 - all assertions, not a single rational reason given in your post. Regardless of your point, I easily reasoned away your objections to creationism, yet all you respond with is assertions?
Clear branching, please explain why the the Cambrian explosion, to science, appears to happen in a manner inconsistent with anything other than creation?
@tgrove2 assertions? no, i was speaking of evidence. you can 'reason' almost anything. it's called a hypothesis. i could easily reason why we must be either space-aliens, or living in a computer simulation, but i would have no proof. just as you have no proof for god.
and again, i'm done debating this, so if you want to learn about the cambrian explosion, read up on it. but here's a hint. we don't know. that's the beauty of science. we don't pretend to know everything because of one book.
@saydaysago2008 God helps babes, etc. etc. and numbbrained creationist worshippers..you can't convince him/her/it...he KNOWS IT ALL because the bible told him so....he also believes that the world is flat as well....it's his creationist world, leave him alone..
@tgrove2 now no offense, but i'm done debating creationism with you, so just to let you know, unless you have specific rebuttals to any points made in the video, i won't be responding.
i'm sorry ii just don't have time to debate creationism. the free marketers keep me busy enough on my capitalism video, and they at least sometimes have legitimate arguments. this is just sad.
@saydaysago2008 - no offense taken - this has been the typical response from this movement's supporters. None of them will accept rational questions and answers; most run away and say I am not going to do this anymore.
So, you still haven't answered many other of my questions in regards to the content of your video. Based upon observations thus far, I don't expect a logical, rational debate about them either :(
@tgrove2 interesting. your original posts seemed to be from the perspective of someone who hadn't heard of the movement. now you make it clear that you have already had discussion with other members. intellectual dishonesty, anyone?
now, i presented you with facts, that you can choose to verify or not, but saying i ran away, when you just refuse to accept my answers, makes you look bad, tbh.
@saydaysago2008 Brilliant as usual saydaysago2008. I love the way you know how to put together information so concisely - the way I very rarely see...Thank God you're on board with us!
@tgrove2 Just stay in your blood bath of corruption and war! The grave truth IS THE TRUTH and nothing your bible-ridden ignorant little world you stay in will change that for you. This vidio POINTS OUT FACTS! It must really be nice to stay in your blissfully ignorant world of conformity and slavery you're not even aware of. The decaying civilization must really turn you on...you seem satisfied with the way things are, TGROVE2. This video is for those who are SICK of SICK SOCIETY u seem to like
@willywillyization thanks for all the nice comments on my vids, man, it means a lot, really, but lay off this guy, getting defensive doesn't help anything
@saydaysago2008 - How do you account for the uniformity in nature? For example, as a researcher, if I do an experiment two times under sufficiently same conditions, I should get the same results...if I don't, do I blame the fact that nature is not uniform...or do I presuppose that nature is uniform and that some condition is different in the experiment?
Biblical creation accounts for uniformity in science; what rational reason do you have to believe in observational or operational science?
@tgrove2 i don't have to know why nature is uniform, only that it appears to be, for all practical purposes, to accept observational science. the same science that is allowing us to converse, the same science that disproves biblical creation.
@saydaysago2008 - I didn't question why it is uniform...How does your worldview account for the uniformity in nature?
Assertions have no place in academics and sciences; children make assertions, adults are expected to have rational reasons for their beliefs and actions; your answer is arbitrary and, inconsistent with what you believe (scientific methods) and the way you live your life (when you wake up in the morning will you presuppose gravity will be the same...why?).
@tgrove2 it's not an assertion, it's an observation. the world, as far as we can test, see, and communicate with one another, is uniform. I don't know in what context you are asking me to 'account' for it, but i don't feel i need to. it is there, apparently. if observation changes that, then so be it. gravity will be the same because it has always been the same. at least since newtons time, we've tested and tested it over and over and it doesnt change, so i presuppose it will stay that way.
@saydaysago2008 - so your only reason to believe in gravity is because it has been in the past?
So, I could assert that I am immortal, because in the past I have never died? That is what I have always observed...your answer is really quite absurd. Basically, you are saying "just because".
@tgrove2 no i am not. i am saying that repeatable scientific observation gives us insight into the nature of things. your immortality strawman was a good try, but in the same way that gravity has been observed, so has the death of every single human being on this planet. for your comparison to work, you would have to be so insane that you forget you are a human.
i'm for having a rational discussion, but if you're going to project, make false associations, and put words in my mouth, i'm done.
@saydaysago2008 - So, you believe in rationale? That requires intelligence, logic, information, and knowledge...all of which are unobservable...How do you account for them?
intelligence, logic, information, and knowledge are abstract concepts. you continuously ask me to 'account' for them, but i don't know what you mean by that word. they are simply words (symbols) we made up to name phenomena that we have observed. nothing needs to be accounted for.
@saydaysago2008 - Your rationale is false, you are assuming that repeated observations are reliable before proving that they are reliable and you are asking me to assume that they are as well...that is a logical fallacy.
So, what reason do you have that scientific observations are reliable?
@saydaysago2008 - Aren't your "proofs, evidences, and tests" predicated upon the principle that uniformity in nature is true? How do you account for this?
What rational reason do you have that nature will be the same tomorrow as it is today?
What rational reason do you have that chemistry and physics will be the same tomorrow as today?
What rational reason do you have for your faith in observational or operational science?
Based upon reality, I have a good reason, biblical creation.
Wow,I watched the whole video and it is nothing new, this is the same old tired Utopian Society wrapped in naturalism and environmentalism. Although they are probably well-meaning people, they are greatly deceived in regards to the nature of men and reality.
They base their system upon nature and the scientific method, but there is no room for nature's God in their system.
I wonder what the hard-working ant would say when they take his food and give it to the lazy grasshopper?
What does "providing for" mean? Sounds like not everyone will be responsible for themselves and therefore this is nothing but a form of welfare; a.k.a. a redistribution of a person's time and talents, however I prefer the words robbery or theft.
What force will be used to ensure people are "provided for"?
@tgrove2 nobody has already decided, the most efficient means possible will be deduced through science, and constantly updated, since science is constantly updating.
@40 secs in the video, you then assert that government is a representative democracy, which the United States is not, it is a Republic. You then assert its duty, which is wrong as well…The oath taken by our representative says: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States..."
Their duty is not to represent the interests of the people, rather to uphold the Constitution.
@tgrove2 i said 'in theory', because in school, they teach us that these people we elect are there to represent us. we are taught that we live in a representative democracy. you can semantisize all you want with the word 'republic', because thats what they called it back then. I know full well that the country was never set up to support the people, but the wealthy land owners, but most people don't.
@15 secs - Your definition of Government is incorrect for the Federal Gov't in the United States; our government is a tool used by the individual states to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to its individual citizens.
The Constitution does not authorize any such power as you define government.
The one thing this gentleman seems to be missing is we don't vote for a leader & their views. We vote for people that will implement our views. Sadly, He and most people have been brainwashed into believing that we do vote for a person and that person's view. This allows them to get away with carrying out their own agenda, instead of the people's. Our Country is NOT a representative democracy. It's a republic ruled by the VAST MAJORITY, 75% or more. Not the majority, 51%. A very real difference.
@ruriod that's a complex question that takes more than 500 characters to answer because there are multiple scenario's which could play out.
One set plan would be detrimental to a movement that encourages constant change and revision. 'bringing this about' is a complex issue that will require continual problem solving and a constant flow of new ideas from people who want to see this change.
right now the best thing i can do is inform ppl about the possibilities.
@saydaysago2008 - i agree. the notion of a 'set plan' leads, as we are becoming aware, to facism. my question was too broad, and what i really should have asked is "how is this idea to be spread?". you are informing people about the possibilities, so by your actions you have answered this question.
i am beginning to understand the value of networks - social exchange of information and ideas. however, i would hope that this web of humanity would be one of mutual aid and support.
@ruriod yes, i am a member of the zeitgeist movement, an organization dedicated to spreading these ideas, this video is just my attempt at some small input.
i am definitely in agreement that our social networks online are very important, and with improved technology, I see them already (check out open source ecology) flourishing into the 'real' world, bringing this web of humanity into something more tangible, of 'mutual aid and support' as you put it.
NICE PRODUCTION/PROPAGANDA BUT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING THAT I HAVE CREATED, EARNED, PROFITTED ON. COMMUNISM DOESN'T NOT WORK AND WHAT YOU'RE SELLING, AND AS YOU ARE AWARE, IS EVIL. - NO HUMAN NOR ANIMAL IS ENTITLED OR GAURANTEED ANYTHING ON THIS BEAUTIFUL PLANET!!!!!!!! SO GO GODBLESSING F#$% OFF!!!!!
"SO GO GODBLESSING F#$% OFF!!!" haha thanks that made my day.
"YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING THAT I HAVE CREATED, EARNED, PROFITTED ON" nor do i want it
"COMMUNISM DOESN'T NOT WORK" okay -- debatable but ultimately irrelevant
"WHAT YOU'RE SELLING, AND AS YOU ARE AWARE, IS EVIL." I sell nothing. I get no profit from video, and i run my website at a loss. sorry bud, s'not evil, it's just information
"NO HUMAN IS.. GAURANTEED ANYTHING ON THIS BEAUTIFUL PLANET!" they should be
yeah man i'm definitely a supporter of the zeitgeist movement. I give the links to TVP and TZM sites at the end of the vid. thanks for the nice words man :).
Congress is an oligarchy and a plutocracy. Oligarchies are just collective dictatorships. Plutocracy is rule by the wealthy. Wealth does not mean wise or moral. What is the difference between the Obama Congress and Chavez in Venezula?
Each monetary unit represents a claim on a fraction of the surplus (net) energy available within an economy. Energy that is required to produce the goods and services we consume. Therefore, MONEY IS NOT THE ENEMY, PROFIT IS. Monetary profit systems (eg capitalism) produce energy surplus (profit) via capital investment (energy efficiency) that dislocates labor from access to a share of the net energy gains (income). Energy inequality is our enemy, not what we use to represent surplus energy ;-)
@johnTconover "Each monetary unit represents a CLAIM on a fraction of the surplus (net) energy available within an economy. "
That is why I think money IS the problem. once people start 'claiming' energy and resources, we run into greed-based hoarding tendencies (inequality). I think your disagreement is mostly a semantic one, which is good, because it means we essentially agree :), but I will say that what we use (and how we use it) to represent surplus energy has a major effect on inequality.
To say we are 'dreaming' is simply pointing towards your own lack of knowledge on the current state of technology, and human behavioral studies. What we talk about is very possible.
The computer is going to be produced, along with most other products at automated manufacturing facilities, built with the most robust materials possible, redundancies and sensor systems that allow them to operate at minimum maintenance for 50-100 years (with our current tech, which is always improving)
@saydaysago2008 hi there, Yes I know of the systems you talk about nantechnology molecular manufacturing. Over the the next 10 years or so, this kind of hi tech research will make it very possible do what you say.
@oneplanet07 definitely. the sad part is that it's already possible. Nanotech will make it easier for sure, but the system I talk about has been possible for decades, if not longer. People just aren't aware of the CURRENT state of technology, leaving future possibilities aside. :)
@TheMikesyd . The guy that invented ''How stuff works '' site has a few ideas. his name is Marshall Brain. Also the Technological Singularity master mine Ray Kurzweil has some underlining remarks on this subject. With the non money society, technology will have a major roll to play and so will the million of skeptics on this subject like yourself. The skeptics will be looking for something to help cope with the ups and down we see in the economy and that will get worst not better.
Absolutelly remarkable critic of the illusion we`re living in. I don`t agree with every of your points, but it`s a trully inspiring video, food for thoughts !
This video is a great tool for the Movement. You nailed some major points here, in what I would consider a straight-forward and easy-to-understand kind of way. A+
@W1z3k I'm a 45year old psychologist. I had dreams that people could work together for the benefit of all but now realize that it's impossible. A few reasons: we tend to identify with others who share commonalities with us- forming in-groups/out-goups. As long as we maintain that mentality, we'll never be able to pursue what this video proposes. Also, some humans are greedy, others are lazy, and some can't stand to have their views challenged. @W1z3k, ty, u proved my point- yep, i'm an idiot
@boocat65 I'm well aware of our tendency to identify ourselves with groups, and still, we disagree. I'm sorry for you that you bought into pessimism = associated yourself with a group wich hoped but eventually gave up. I'd rather see myself in the group which succedes in making such a world a reality. You could also, just find someone you could take refference of, a new person, or group of people. As soon as you start looking on yourself as one of them, you will experience optimism one again.
@W1z3k You missed my point. Identifying with a subgroup of our species rather than our entire species (or entire planet) is part of the problem. When we do this, and resources are limited, we tend to 'protect' our own group's interests rather than the interests of all. You seem to advocate belonging to a group, but doing so causes wars and other negative things.Please don't feel sorry for me I never bought into pessimism. I think I'm a realist and my views are founded on empirical research.
@boocat65 Wars only occur if a group chooses to go on war with another. Which only occurs if they don't know any alternative to war. I chose to associate myself with a group who knows better than declaring war on another group. We will never initiate such thing, and due to our structure (I'm not only speaking of the ZM) it would be almost impossible to practise any kind of warfare against us. We are tolerant and patient towards other groups, and let them feel free to join ours whenever they like
@boocat65 you're views, while historically empirical, fail to take into account that our tendency to identify with a subgroup has always manifested in a world where it was pure imagination/impossibility for the world to communicate en mass, hence extending our empathy to the entire planet. Today, we live in a world of global interconnectedness, and if you've done any research into human nature, you'll know that learning new behaviours when our environment allows it is one of our specialties.
@saydaysago2008 The ability to communicate in mass will not necessarily enhance empathy. As long as humans continue to identify w/ groups there will be friction. Also, there are individual differences- some people are just plain greedy. I think I'm familiar with human nature, I'm a psychologist. My view stem from both history and research.
I repect that you're a psychologist, and have experience dealing with how people are, and why they are that way. Do you think people are BORN greedy, or is that something that happens to them as a child? Current genetic research suggests that genes are rarely (if ever) directly responsible for behavior (just proclivities, which are exaserbated [or not] by our environment... want links?).
IE; they've never found a greed, criminal, or gay gene.
@saydaysago2008 Have you heard of moderators & mediators? Many behaviors stem to indiv. personality traits and fear. I commend your video but you proposed an idea without a solution. So everyone in the world is free to do whatever they want and has everything they need, right? How would housing, utilities, food, medical, etc be provided to everyone? Is everyone's contribution considered =? If so, what's the incentive for someone to do an undesireable job, take more years of education, etc?
@boocat65 if you read the description of the video, I say that if you have no background in what I'm talking about, you'll end up with more questions than answers. I knew that making it... that's why I implore people to look deeper into the system I'm proposing. There is a lot of material behind it.
To answer your question, housing, utilities, food, etc, are provided by a globally automated robotic manufacturing and delivery system, this will eliminate most menial labour pretty quickly.
@saydaysago2008 To make your argument stronger, it would be beneficial for you to flesh it out more. Ok, so "globally automated robotic..", who transforms the raw material to create it? who build it? who maintains it? where is the energy to run it coming from? and who will be monitoring that? how is the product shipped? who does all this work?
"I work with what is considered healthy individuals" Behavior is on a continuum.
@boocat65 all very reasonable and important questions. this video was meant to raise these questions. some good resources are the 2009 zeitgeist movement orientation video, and the venus project's main website FAQ.
There is a lot more information available to help answer all these questions. on both the zeitgeist movement and venus project sites, as well as the hundreds of supporting sites.
@boocat65 Aside from that, people, if freed from wage slavery, wouldn't want to just sit in their house doing nothing all day.
They'd want to help, where they can, they'd want to learn and study and experiment. If humans do have a basic nature, it's that of curiosity. The profit incentive has shown to be actually less effective than NO INCENTIVE in a few studies where people were asked to do creative or thoughtful tasks.
@boocat65 "Have you heard of moderators & mediators?"
No, but I'll look into them.
"Many behaviors stem to indiv. personality traits and fear."
True, but where do these traits and fears stem from? Science is showing that it isn't our genetic code. So it seems it must be... our environments (for the most part).
@saydaysago2008 Oh, have you investigated animal behavior? Chimps will wage war to protect their territory (resources). Lions, wolves, etc. claim territory too. It is part of survival. No creature wants to die (even if they're not aware of what death is, they are hard-wired to survive, or try to at least). Humans are not that far removed from animals. When resources are threatened, you see this behavior. Turn to history- holocaust, khmer rouge, rwandan genocide, and so on. No empathy there-
@rozz2656 Saying we cant move into pure communism because there are too many greedy people is like saying we cant get higher education because too many people are dumb. The end result is both the solution and the cure.
ProTipd 6 days ago in playlist Infinit Yes Presents
@saydaysago2008 Hi Aaron, your Bribe Mentality video was viewed 100 times over a period of 30h and i allowed me to actually make some connections with TZMpoland! all thanks to you :) I've already uploaded this one as well, so keep up the good work and i'll be widening the audience, at least for now ;)
michal90ns 4 weeks ago
if only we could have Pure Communism/Marxism but theres too many greedy people.
rozz2656 1 month ago
If voting really changed anything it would be made illegal...
GeneralKlaas 1 month ago in playlist More videos from saydaysago2008
great.
rhplusmovies 2 months ago in playlist Infinit Yes Presents
@wisdomtrek and how do know this if never lived in such a economy, and nobody said this would be a utopia that is a misconception
HHSmarchingfalcons 2 months ago
A holistic society based on equitable resource distribution, egalitarianism exemplified. Good luck with that. To wit: the greed seemingly emblazoned into the very genetic code of, in particular, humans seems to expose the lie of such a utopian system ever functioning.
wisdomtrek 3 months ago
money kills the beauty of human passion
TheUndertakerSaysRIP 4 months ago 2
I would love to see this happen, but it will never happen the cruel addicted to money minds will not allow it to happen, the governments are too corrupted all over the world to allow this to happen, we need a worldwide revolution right now!! because the situation in the world is getting worse not by days but by hours!!
WeedHeadPig 4 months ago
Great vid thanks for posting :)
geemoore 5 months ago
there is a lot that is wrong with this video.
how do you provide for people equally without money? it is impossible.
if person A takes a 60" tv and person B takes a new dining room set, have they both been provided for equally?
the ONLY way to provide equally is to measure production in COMMON units (such as labor time) and then allocate those units equally
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile color me confused.. how does distribution via money provide equally. the people with less access to money (like say, many africans, or, homeless people) have less access to goods. money blocks people from having equal access because you need to compete to get it.
under a resource based economy, people would have access to all of their needs without debt, barter, or payment. It's a gift economy where production produces an abundance (post-scarcity), removing the need to ration via $.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 if you price everything you produce equal to the amount of labor hours it took to produce, totaled the price of everything you produced and allocated that total equally to everyone as income, then and ONLY then will everyone have equal consumption access
all companies would be publicly owned. so it wouldnt be a capitalist economic system where u had to sell ur labor. ur income is guaranteed.
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile
From my observations, giving people equal income can never result in equal access. Some people will need to spend all that income on medical care, and wouldn't have enough for any recreation, while another family might be able to spend it all on recreation. By using any sort of method of exact tracking (money, credits, etc) we inherently end up with disproportionate distribution.
Even if such emergency things like health care are taken care of, rationing leads to inequality.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 medicine is not a market good. it would be paid for thru tax. so everyone would pay for healthcare equally. it is not fair for healthy people to pay less than sick people. sickness is not something people go out and buy.
it is bizarre that u think measuring production and allocating it equally will create unequal distribution and not measuring production and pretending it is equally distributed will create equal distribution
if we both spend $5,000, we both consumed equally
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile hmm. but what if you spend your 5000 on a hot tub and i spend it on a tv and couch. how is that equal?
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 all production comes from labor. so the cost of everything produced is how much of our labor hours it took to make.
if $1 = 1 labor hour and if we both get access to $5000 labor hours worth of production, we both are getting equal access to our productive capacity.
u may spend ur $5000 labor hours differently than i do, but we are both consuming EQUAL amounts of labor hours
if it takes 5000 labor hours to make a tub and 5000 to make a tv & couch, then they r both equal in cost
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile right, i understand the math, and that's fine.. how can i rephrase my question so that you see the point i'm making....
how does a person who already spent their $5000 have equal access to goods than someone who hasn't? they can't, correct? if someone saves $1000 every month, after ten months they will have an extra 10,000 worth of access available to them as compared to someone else.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 if we each get paid $12,000 per year and i spend $1000 of it per month and you spend all $12,000 of it on the last day of the year, we still have spent EXACTLY the same amount. it does not matter when you spend your money.
saving money doesnt give u more money, it just changes the time when u spend it.
kajmobile 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@saydaysago2008 if we each get paid $12,000 per year and i spend $1000 of it per month and you spend all $12,000 of it on the last day of the year, we still have spent EXACTLY the same amount. it does not matter when you spend your money.
saving money doesnt give u extra money, it just changes the time when u spend it.
kajmobile 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 post scarcity and full automation doesnt exist. so building an economy based on it is pointless.
but if you used money to ration equally and you did reach a post scarcity future, money is not going to get in the way of that. it would just mean people would have more income than they can spend.
and at that point it would be appropriate to talk about alternatives. but talking about post scarcity today isnt going to help anyone
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile
I don't want to build an economy 'based' on post-scarcity, I want to build an economy that will CREATE post-scarcity. Money does get in the way of that, because in order for money to have any value, it needs to be scarce. In a situation like you describe (everyone making more income than they can spend, using money becomes valueless and pointless, no?
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 money does not get its value from being scarce! it gets its value by being accepted as payment
$100 is valuable because it buys $100 in stuff, not because $100 bills are rare
in the future when everyone has more money than they can spend AND you have enough automation so u no longer need to pay people to work, money becomes pointless.
so at that point and only at that point can u get rid of it
but that is several decades or centuries in the future
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile sorry, you are correct. in our current monetary system, money needs to be scarce to have value. this is not intrinsic in any medium of exchange, even if it has been historically true of every medium of exchange to date, we could concievably create money that does not rely on it's own scarcity for valuation.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 if you allocated income equally in the US, it would amount to $127,000 per year, enough to make everyone wealthy. that is an indisputable mathematical fact that people can embrace. and you can demonstrate the ability to eventually automate half of all jobs which means you can cut the work week in half.
but nobody is going to embrace the idea of making everything free and refusing to pay workers because they rightfully see that as fantasy
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile if we could take transitional steps like that, i am in full support, though they still have many problems, they are ten miles ahead of where we are now.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 "if we could take transitional steps like that, i am in full support, though they still have many problems, they are ten miles ahead of where we are now. "
that is y u need to start making videos on replacing capitalism with democracy where people r paid equally which is something people will embrace
and stop making videos on an RBE which people think is communism and on making everything free and refusing to pay people to work which everyone thinks is complete fantasy
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile nowhere has 'refusing to pay people' ever been discussed. that's a sad misrepresentation man, come on. the idea is that people would be paid with their DIRECT ACCESS to goods and services, rather than the satellite access of money. and it's not making things 'free'. free is only a worthwhile concept when some things aren't 'free'. when everything is 'free' 'free' ceases to exist as a meaningful term.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@saydaysago2008 if you allocated income equally in the US, it would amount to $127,000 per year, enough to make everyone wealthy. that is an indisputable mathematical fact that people can embrace. and you can demonstrate the ability to eventually automate half of all jobs which means you can cut the work week in half
but nobody is going to embrace the idea of making everything free and refusing to pay workers because they rightfully see that as fantasy
kajmobile 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 also ur take on democracy is wrong. democracy is about power over SUBJECTIVE decisions, not technical decisions
democracy is a society organized on the principles of Freedom, Equality and Science
it means every1 has the FREEDOM 2 pursue whatever lifestyle they want, everyone has an EQUAL power to build that lifestyle and the purpose of SCIENCE is to make those lifestyles possible
it means real equality: equal votes, equal ownership in the economy, equal pay 4 equal effort
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile sure, and i agree, the problem is that now all of societies technical decisions are being determined by our pseudo democratic state.
A true democracy over truly subjective decisions would have very little power to do anything, since so few social decisions are subjective and not technical. mostly small, local decisions that should be made by a community, not a large country wide vote.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 i disagree. i would say the vast majority of decisions are subjective. all of the decisions on what to produce are subjective and those are most of the decisions we make.
u only vote for candidates for office occasionally. but you vote with your money every day. your dollar vote determines what the economy produces. that is the most important democratic power you have, the power to decide what gets produced based on how you spend your money.
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile decisions on what to produce are the least subjective. if people vote with their dollars to build gas guzzling hummers, should we build them? no because the technical requirements of meeting the transport needs of the population demand that we do not use such silly methods, whther the people subjectively desire them or not. we need to base production on what can actually be produced in physical reality to meet everyones needs, not what people think they want.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 people could care less how their cars are powered. how power is produced is a technical decision. nobody is going to demand gas. but people will demand certain modes of transit over others and certain designs of cars over others and that their primary method of transportation be private, be on demand, be something that they can access right out their front door and be able to travel more than 30 miles without running out of power
kajmobile 5 months ago
@kajmobile
Here's the Truth, We live in an Artificial Scarce Environment created to keep us believing there isn't enough to go around for everyone. When you use Science and Technology to bring people abundance then you are actually eliminating many problems.
People Don't need to work for Living, but People need to Live to Contribute to their Community without Force, or Paid Slavery. It's difficult to see a Reality without money.
Bigsteelguy3 2 months ago 2
@Bigsteelguy3 if income in the US was allocated equally, everyone would get $135k which would make everyone wealthy. but it does not eliminate scarcity. scarcity is real and exists and if people could demand anything they want, they would demand far more than we can produce.
we can also eliminate 55% of current jobs with automation, but if we stopped paying people to work, we would not have enough volunteers to fill the remaining 45% of jobs.
money is a necessity.
kajmobile 2 months ago
@kajmobile thats nonsense. you already asuming somthing and we didnt even try anything yet. what gives you the idea that we dont have any volunteers. believe it or not there are people who acually give a damn about others becuase they need help and not just because they are getting paid. we are raised and conditioned to support this bullshit system. money doesnt clothe, feed, or shelter you so it is NOT a necessity its an excuse. but of course like big steel said its hard to see
HHSmarchingfalcons 2 months ago
@HHSmarchingfalcons reality without money. we know nothing else
HHSmarchingfalcons 2 months ago
where can i translate this.
aganon77 5 months ago
@aganon77 i will message you my script if that helps. :)
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
Brilliantly explained, cleared many things up which some videos only touch on. Thankyou
GlennLSmith 5 months ago 7
The only problem being, uninformed, clueless and/or selfish "votes" can't and shouldn't be weighed as heavily into decisions as the more-informed, intelligent, and considerate opinions. That's how we got here.
TrumanTehSupraTiger 5 months ago
@TrumanTehSupraTiger that's why the video doesn't advocate using votes, it advocates using science. :D
saydaysago2008 5 months ago 2
If humans have a future, this is it.
nintendow1 5 months ago in playlist More videos from saydaysago2008 13
Obviously in this resource based economy, scarcity will become more prevalent than it is now. Even if it does not, how will resources be allocated efficiently to without prices to guide them? Who gets what and why.
snarfels 5 months ago
@snarfels actually, a RBE is a 'post-scarcity' economic model. look it up on wikipedia for more in depth information.
to quickly answer your allocation question the best i can, everyone has equal access to all goods that can possibly be produced given our planetary resources and scientific understandings.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008
Economics is literally the study of the efficient allocation of scarce resources. Capitalism does not create scarcity, if there is scarcity due to current technology or scientific understanding, price action works to eliminate scarcity by providing incentives to meet consumer demand. The U.S's oil reserves were estimated at something like 16b barrels in the 70's. People KNEW there was 16b for a fact. But, Capitalism proved them wrong. Price action, you do the research.
snarfels 5 months ago
@snarfels i have, the idea that price action offers any valuable advancement of scarcity elimination is suspect, at best. the intrinsic motivation of completing a task is, and always has been, the reason that problems get solved. this works, often in spite of, price.
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008
That is a very naive opinion indeed, friend.
Example:
An oil company responds to massive surge in price of oil, and spends hundreds of millions of dollars given by wealthy investors looking to turn a profit. From this invested money the oil company hires thousands of employees to research more efficient oil extraction techniques. Engineers who would otherwise have been researching something else are now here, due to higher demand, and more importantly, the rise of oil prices.
snarfels 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 cont...
The oil company will keep researching ways of reducing the cost of oil extraction until the savings per barrel of oil are no longer greater than the cost of research per barrel of oil. Not only does price action combat scarcity directly as i just described, it also takes labor and resources away from other sectors of the economy with lower demand. This is called efficiency, price action guides resources to where they are most demanded.
snarfels 5 months ago
Shared this on my facebook... Good job, and thank you.
somaticcinema 6 months ago
The problem is, nobody want's to work without receiving something back.
Achokiador 8 months ago
@Achokiador hi! your comment makes me wonder, do you think there could possibly be any other mechanisms of reward and motivation that could be harnessed by a human culture in place of money, ways for people in a society to get something back for what they put in, but without the endless hierarchies created by the market system.
saydaysago2008 8 months ago
@saydaysago2008 Do you know about "parecon" ? (participatory economics)
It's an economic system based on consumer and worker councils that make production and distribution decisions in a participatory manner.
An interesting thing about this system is it's remuneration for effort and sacrifice (instead of for capital, power, prestige, etc.)
Ihas3pair 5 months ago
@Ihas3pair i've heard about it in my travels through different zeitgeist and rbe resources, but haven't taken the time to look into it. i'm very interested in all manner of solutions though, where do you recommend i start learning about it? got any links to a nice summary video or website?
cheers
saydaysago2008 5 months ago
@saydaysago2008 watch?v=Pd60nYW577U is an OK introduction.
parecon*org is the best resource for parecon info.
Alternatively you can read debates on Zcommunication*org -> Znet -> debates.
Ihas3pair 5 months ago
One of it's ("parecon") strengths and also weakness is that it does not rely on cybernated/automated systems to function. This makes it slower overall but also directly implementable and from there on it is easy to get the work done required for a completely holistic cybernated post-scarcity system.
Ihas3pair 5 months ago
@Achokiador you wont receive any more goods, but you will receive the satisfaction of creating something. All unrewarding dead-end jobs will be automated. so therefore any jobs you would have would be completely out of choice not necessity, it would stem from your education which would probably be science related. Our morals and goals will be changed in this society so we wouldn't see it as working for free but as bringing the human race forward... plus we always get a kick out of showing off ;)
MrDRocketfingers 5 months ago 2
god save the QUEEN X Now pay your tax, and make me sooooo wealthy.
Royal1England 8 months ago
each individual must defend his right and not a government. I can say that capitalism is like a poker game. Your gain depends of you raise bet
adelinamaries 8 months ago
The roman empire had a absolute monarchy and look what it became
MrWhosaywhat 8 months ago
dude ure pointing out that are someother issues begining and results of another issues .... if u can just makie it as powerful as the outlines of video ... the power is to do good... forget all the korrupted ones... think ur wording is meant to give them power and taking it ..like ure some what bigger than they are.. get it.. our government is doing ok... and the people summit to it or they wont is up to them and how much of the sumitting and are understood theyre bound themselves up with...
Kwantwothree 11 months ago
Egalitarian is a wonderful way of saying 'Socialist' and your philosophy, broken down in to simple terms is Every resource, is shared equally, so if I create a new type of fuel, I share it with everyone else, you share your corn with everyone, this guy shares his stuff, etc. Everyone is equal. Sounds good, but it lacks one thing. Individualism. What if I don't want to be like everyone else. What if I want to earn a better living, or not share my stuff? What happens than? and WTF is a REEZOURSE
David1173 1 year ago
@David1173 You have a very valid question about individualism. There are many detailed answers to that topic that can be found at The Zeitgeist Movement Global/US website, under the heading FAQ - Venus FAQ -- might I suggest a search on the page for "individual" using CTRL-F -- it comes up 24 times -- and I apologize if you already knew about using CTRL-F to do a search, some don't so just trying to be helpful, not be condescending. Peace!
vincent835 11 months ago
@David1173 "What if I don't want to be like everyone else. What if I want to earn a better living, or not share my stuff? What happens than?"
David, do you currently work for a living? (yes i'd imagine), Do you enjoy your passtime activites and social group? Do you love what you do with your time, at work and off work?
In this system there is no need to "earn" anything, because you have the time you would use at a job to persue whatever you wished. ideas arent mandated, they are made availa
rcollins779x 11 months ago
@David1173 "'i feel there are legitimate aspects to both individualist and collectivist philosophies, and i find it sad that people need to identify with one or the other. obviously we're a collective of individuals."
saydaysago2008 11 months ago
@David1173 Do you mean to tell me that the only way you identify yourself as an individual is by how much you own, or how little you share? That's astonishing...
ChaotePD 9 months ago
@David1173 you are very mistaken - equality increases productivity and creativity -thus individuality - if you are free from coerced labor and are free to volunteer for labor based on mutual need and for its intrinsic worth to you individualy - in a resource based economy - every one has acsess to evreything they want -with very little labor and limited only by the sustainable resources available -or the caring capacity of the earth -search zietgiest movement orientation for a basic summary
MrIzzyDizzy 9 months ago
the world's population is better off then it has ever been but people by design have to believe that it was at one point better or that we could improve it in the future. this is the myth that every human subscribes to, it happens with every generation in early adulthood. it is part of the human condition and can be found expressed in our art and literature for thousands of years. look up Joseph Campbell if you are interested.
noleftturnunstoned 1 year ago
@noleftturnunstoned i agree. i like what i've heard from campbell already, a few great talks, ad i look forward to more.
i am simply speaking of an improved future, not a static one (though forgive me if you weren't implying that).
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
The music in the background- is that bluetech? More importantly, excellent video, very clear, gets rights to the CORE and blasts apart the bullshit. Thank you!!
orion7319 1 year ago
all your videos are great man...keep it up :)
TheAvianos 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - No rational person should believe any of this video seriously if you can't even give a reason for your blind faith in the reliability of science that your entire movement is based upon other than "that it appears to be".
Can evolution? No, by def'n it is random.
Naturalism? No, it can't even account for the vast lack of anti-matter required when the universe was made.
Materialism? No, universal Laws of Logic are immaterial and thus unaccounted for.
Creationism, Yes to all!
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 i don't have blind faith in science, i have seen science work, and give the best answer with the information available time and time again, and have therefore reached the conclusion that it is the best method we have for approximating truth. it's not 'that it appears to be', its that, as a method, it works.
evolution is not random, this is a complete misrepresentation of the idea.
and finding things science hasn't answered yet doesn't prove that it is wrong about what it has answered
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@tgrove2
creationism may offer a surface explanation for all those things, but how does it explain the fossil record, homology, dna, and every other piece of evidence we have that supports evolution?
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008
Fossils are formed by what means; a gradual covering or a sudden covering? Sounds like a flood to me.
Fossils are found where? In layers of sedimentation; not scattered all over the world...flood.
Homology - An artist's (creator's) work is easily identified because of it similarity to other creations...sounds like creationism to me
DNA - Not sure what point you are making here.
Evidence for evolution? Evidence speaks now or have you interpreted it through your biased worldview?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 the point i was making with homology, dna, and fossils, is the clear, hierarchical structure that shows a branching evolution from the first single celled organisms to todays humans. this is what the evidence shows. i'm not sure what you mean by 'evidence speaks now', but it seems appropriate to the case for evolution.
as for the idea of a world-wide flood, this has long been shown to be impossible, at least as portrayed in the biblical account..
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - all assertions, not a single rational reason given in your post. Regardless of your point, I easily reasoned away your objections to creationism, yet all you respond with is assertions?
Clear branching, please explain why the the Cambrian explosion, to science, appears to happen in a manner inconsistent with anything other than creation?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 assertions? no, i was speaking of evidence. you can 'reason' almost anything. it's called a hypothesis. i could easily reason why we must be either space-aliens, or living in a computer simulation, but i would have no proof. just as you have no proof for god.
and again, i'm done debating this, so if you want to learn about the cambrian explosion, read up on it. but here's a hint. we don't know. that's the beauty of science. we don't pretend to know everything because of one book.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 God helps babes, etc. etc. and numbbrained creationist worshippers..you can't convince him/her/it...he KNOWS IT ALL because the bible told him so....he also believes that the world is flat as well....it's his creationist world, leave him alone..
willywillyization 1 year ago
@tgrove2 now no offense, but i'm done debating creationism with you, so just to let you know, unless you have specific rebuttals to any points made in the video, i won't be responding.
i'm sorry ii just don't have time to debate creationism. the free marketers keep me busy enough on my capitalism video, and they at least sometimes have legitimate arguments. this is just sad.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - no offense taken - this has been the typical response from this movement's supporters. None of them will accept rational questions and answers; most run away and say I am not going to do this anymore.
So, you still haven't answered many other of my questions in regards to the content of your video. Based upon observations thus far, I don't expect a logical, rational debate about them either :(
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 interesting. your original posts seemed to be from the perspective of someone who hadn't heard of the movement. now you make it clear that you have already had discussion with other members. intellectual dishonesty, anyone?
now, i presented you with facts, that you can choose to verify or not, but saying i ran away, when you just refuse to accept my answers, makes you look bad, tbh.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 Brilliant as usual saydaysago2008. I love the way you know how to put together information so concisely - the way I very rarely see...Thank God you're on board with us!
willywillyization 1 year ago
@tgrove2 Hey, TBONE, you wanna grow the f,#@ up here!! I suppose you think the world is flat also , you retard
willywillyization 1 year ago
@tgrove2 Just stay in your blood bath of corruption and war! The grave truth IS THE TRUTH and nothing your bible-ridden ignorant little world you stay in will change that for you. This vidio POINTS OUT FACTS! It must really be nice to stay in your blissfully ignorant world of conformity and slavery you're not even aware of. The decaying civilization must really turn you on...you seem satisfied with the way things are, TGROVE2. This video is for those who are SICK of SICK SOCIETY u seem to like
willywillyization 1 year ago
@willywillyization thanks for all the nice comments on my vids, man, it means a lot, really, but lay off this guy, getting defensive doesn't help anything
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
From your FB page, I get the impression you don't believe in the Biblical account of creation.
If that is true, what rational reason can you argue for trusting in nature and the scientific method that your entire premise is based upon?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 the biblical account of creation is demonstrably false. i trust in the scientific method because it requires proofs, evidences, and tests.
God meets none of those standards, and hence I don't believe in God. I acknowledge the possibility, though, however small.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - How do you account for the uniformity in nature? For example, as a researcher, if I do an experiment two times under sufficiently same conditions, I should get the same results...if I don't, do I blame the fact that nature is not uniform...or do I presuppose that nature is uniform and that some condition is different in the experiment?
Biblical creation accounts for uniformity in science; what rational reason do you have to believe in observational or operational science?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 i don't have to know why nature is uniform, only that it appears to be, for all practical purposes, to accept observational science. the same science that is allowing us to converse, the same science that disproves biblical creation.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - I didn't question why it is uniform...How does your worldview account for the uniformity in nature?
Assertions have no place in academics and sciences; children make assertions, adults are expected to have rational reasons for their beliefs and actions; your answer is arbitrary and, inconsistent with what you believe (scientific methods) and the way you live your life (when you wake up in the morning will you presuppose gravity will be the same...why?).
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 it's not an assertion, it's an observation. the world, as far as we can test, see, and communicate with one another, is uniform. I don't know in what context you are asking me to 'account' for it, but i don't feel i need to. it is there, apparently. if observation changes that, then so be it. gravity will be the same because it has always been the same. at least since newtons time, we've tested and tested it over and over and it doesnt change, so i presuppose it will stay that way.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - so your only reason to believe in gravity is because it has been in the past?
So, I could assert that I am immortal, because in the past I have never died? That is what I have always observed...your answer is really quite absurd. Basically, you are saying "just because".
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 no i am not. i am saying that repeatable scientific observation gives us insight into the nature of things. your immortality strawman was a good try, but in the same way that gravity has been observed, so has the death of every single human being on this planet. for your comparison to work, you would have to be so insane that you forget you are a human.
i'm for having a rational discussion, but if you're going to project, make false associations, and put words in my mouth, i'm done.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - So, you believe in rationale? That requires intelligence, logic, information, and knowledge...all of which are unobservable...How do you account for them?
The Biblical creation accounts for all of them.
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove
intelligence, logic, information, and knowledge are abstract concepts. you continuously ask me to 'account' for them, but i don't know what you mean by that word. they are simply words (symbols) we made up to name phenomena that we have observed. nothing needs to be accounted for.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - Your rationale is false, you are assuming that repeated observations are reliable before proving that they are reliable and you are asking me to assume that they are as well...that is a logical fallacy.
So, what reason do you have that scientific observations are reliable?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - Aren't your "proofs, evidences, and tests" predicated upon the principle that uniformity in nature is true? How do you account for this?
What rational reason do you have that nature will be the same tomorrow as it is today?
What rational reason do you have that chemistry and physics will be the same tomorrow as today?
What rational reason do you have for your faith in observational or operational science?
Based upon reality, I have a good reason, biblical creation.
tgrove2 1 year ago
Wow,I watched the whole video and it is nothing new, this is the same old tired Utopian Society wrapped in naturalism and environmentalism. Although they are probably well-meaning people, they are greatly deceived in regards to the nature of men and reality.
They base their system upon nature and the scientific method, but there is no room for nature's God in their system.
I wonder what the hard-working ant would say when they take his food and give it to the lazy grasshopper?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 we do not propose taking anything away from anyone, we propose providing for more people using technology and rationality.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008
What does "providing for" mean? Sounds like not everyone will be responsible for themselves and therefore this is nothing but a form of welfare; a.k.a. a redistribution of a person's time and talents, however I prefer the words robbery or theft.
What force will be used to ensure people are "provided for"?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 no force, just efficient societal design, high automation, and volunteerism.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008
What is "efficient societal design"?
Who has already decided what that means?
On what authority have they done so?
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 nobody has already decided, the most efficient means possible will be deduced through science, and constantly updated, since science is constantly updating.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@40 secs in the video, you then assert that government is a representative democracy, which the United States is not, it is a Republic. You then assert its duty, which is wrong as well…The oath taken by our representative says: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States..."
Their duty is not to represent the interests of the people, rather to uphold the Constitution.
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 i said 'in theory', because in school, they teach us that these people we elect are there to represent us. we are taught that we live in a representative democracy. you can semantisize all you want with the word 'republic', because thats what they called it back then. I know full well that the country was never set up to support the people, but the wealthy land owners, but most people don't.
popular delusion is what i was describing here.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@15 secs - Your definition of Government is incorrect for the Federal Gov't in the United States; our government is a tool used by the individual states to ensure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to its individual citizens.
The Constitution does not authorize any such power as you define government.
tgrove2 1 year ago
@tgrove2 but the government has those powers nonetheless..
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
needs to lose the monotone
rmack08409 1 year ago
@rmack08409 haha listening back, i hear ya. especially the beginning of this vid... i think i've gotten better though.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
Truly eyeopening.
iAthie 1 year ago
The one thing this gentleman seems to be missing is we don't vote for a leader & their views. We vote for people that will implement our views. Sadly, He and most people have been brainwashed into believing that we do vote for a person and that person's view. This allows them to get away with carrying out their own agenda, instead of the people's. Our Country is NOT a representative democracy. It's a republic ruled by the VAST MAJORITY, 75% or more. Not the majority, 51%. A very real difference.
tkcomputerservice 1 year ago
how is this to be brought about?
ruriod 1 year ago
@ruriod that's a complex question that takes more than 500 characters to answer because there are multiple scenario's which could play out.
One set plan would be detrimental to a movement that encourages constant change and revision. 'bringing this about' is a complex issue that will require continual problem solving and a constant flow of new ideas from people who want to see this change.
right now the best thing i can do is inform ppl about the possibilities.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 - i agree. the notion of a 'set plan' leads, as we are becoming aware, to facism. my question was too broad, and what i really should have asked is "how is this idea to be spread?". you are informing people about the possibilities, so by your actions you have answered this question.
i am beginning to understand the value of networks - social exchange of information and ideas. however, i would hope that this web of humanity would be one of mutual aid and support.
ruriod 1 year ago
@ruriod yes, i am a member of the zeitgeist movement, an organization dedicated to spreading these ideas, this video is just my attempt at some small input.
i am definitely in agreement that our social networks online are very important, and with improved technology, I see them already (check out open source ecology) flourishing into the 'real' world, bringing this web of humanity into something more tangible, of 'mutual aid and support' as you put it.
Interesting times, my friend.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
NICE PRODUCTION/PROPAGANDA BUT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING THAT I HAVE CREATED, EARNED, PROFITTED ON. COMMUNISM DOESN'T NOT WORK AND WHAT YOU'RE SELLING, AND AS YOU ARE AWARE, IS EVIL. - NO HUMAN NOR ANIMAL IS ENTITLED OR GAURANTEED ANYTHING ON THIS BEAUTIFUL PLANET!!!!!!!! SO GO GODBLESSING F#$% OFF!!!!!
6strngstrnglr 1 year ago
@6strngstrnglr
"SO GO GODBLESSING F#$% OFF!!!" haha thanks that made my day.
"YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING THAT I HAVE CREATED, EARNED, PROFITTED ON" nor do i want it
"COMMUNISM DOESN'T NOT WORK" okay -- debatable but ultimately irrelevant
"WHAT YOU'RE SELLING, AND AS YOU ARE AWARE, IS EVIL." I sell nothing. I get no profit from video, and i run my website at a loss. sorry bud, s'not evil, it's just information
"NO HUMAN IS.. GAURANTEED ANYTHING ON THIS BEAUTIFUL PLANET!" they should be
saydaysago2008 1 year ago 3
If power corrupts with our vote, then why vote? I don't vote anymore cuz of that
silvermystic2001 1 year ago
aint gone work
azharbinhafiz 1 year ago
Dude you totally sound like Peter Joseph. I love your message. For some reason I feel like you're from TZM / TVP.
Of course, I agree entirely with the words and teachings of Peter Joseph and TZM.
Beautiful production. Thank you for creating this video.
Xeletoph 1 year ago
@Xeletoph
yeah man i'm definitely a supporter of the zeitgeist movement. I give the links to TVP and TZM sites at the end of the vid. thanks for the nice words man :).
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
Congress is an oligarchy and a plutocracy. Oligarchies are just collective dictatorships. Plutocracy is rule by the wealthy. Wealth does not mean wise or moral. What is the difference between the Obama Congress and Chavez in Venezula?
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne
hmmm, 2000 miles, give or take?
IntuitiveLeap 1 year ago
Earth government is absolute government. Absolute government is absolute slavery.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
Great video my friend..
Love&Peace too you and all living things.
AmenChangeThaWorld 1 year ago
My jaw hit the pavement. This is terrific. Thank you.
hybrid212 1 year ago
Each monetary unit represents a claim on a fraction of the surplus (net) energy available within an economy. Energy that is required to produce the goods and services we consume. Therefore, MONEY IS NOT THE ENEMY, PROFIT IS. Monetary profit systems (eg capitalism) produce energy surplus (profit) via capital investment (energy efficiency) that dislocates labor from access to a share of the net energy gains (income). Energy inequality is our enemy, not what we use to represent surplus energy ;-)
johnTconover 1 year ago
@johnTconover "Each monetary unit represents a CLAIM on a fraction of the surplus (net) energy available within an economy. "
That is why I think money IS the problem. once people start 'claiming' energy and resources, we run into greed-based hoarding tendencies (inequality). I think your disagreement is mostly a semantic one, which is good, because it means we essentially agree :), but I will say that what we use (and how we use it) to represent surplus energy has a major effect on inequality.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
I dont see it ever happening you guys are dreaming!!!
so someone is going to give me and my family a home to live in without money.blah blah blah please wake up and except the reality.
the computer you are now using were are you going to get that from??? who is going to produce the product for free...???
fuck I can go on...
TheMikesyd 1 year ago
@TheMikesyd
To say we are 'dreaming' is simply pointing towards your own lack of knowledge on the current state of technology, and human behavioral studies. What we talk about is very possible.
The computer is going to be produced, along with most other products at automated manufacturing facilities, built with the most robust materials possible, redundancies and sensor systems that allow them to operate at minimum maintenance for 50-100 years (with our current tech, which is always improving)
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 hi there, Yes I know of the systems you talk about nantechnology molecular manufacturing. Over the the next 10 years or so, this kind of hi tech research will make it very possible do what you say.
oneplanet07 1 year ago
@oneplanet07 definitely. the sad part is that it's already possible. Nanotech will make it easier for sure, but the system I talk about has been possible for decades, if not longer. People just aren't aware of the CURRENT state of technology, leaving future possibilities aside. :)
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@TheMikesyd and "except" the reality loooooooool the irony here is beautiful
bizybozo 1 year ago
@TheMikesyd . The guy that invented ''How stuff works '' site has a few ideas. his name is Marshall Brain. Also the Technological Singularity master mine Ray Kurzweil has some underlining remarks on this subject. With the non money society, technology will have a major roll to play and so will the million of skeptics on this subject like yourself. The skeptics will be looking for something to help cope with the ups and down we see in the economy and that will get worst not better.
oneplanet07 1 year ago
Good stuff :)
christianTZM 1 year ago
Good stuff :)
christianTZM 1 year ago
put in my favorites :)
guitarkittie 1 year ago
F... ing cell phones LOL
Absolutelly remarkable critic of the illusion we`re living in. I don`t agree with every of your points, but it`s a trully inspiring video, food for thoughts !
Sub and greetings from Warsaw.
MaximusProteus 1 year ago
This video is a great tool for the Movement. You nailed some major points here, in what I would consider a straight-forward and easy-to-understand kind of way. A+
TVPchallenge 1 year ago
@TVPchallenge
Thanks. Big fan of your videos as well.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
WELL DONE!! Give the masses something to think about. Open your minds and your hearts people~its that easy! We have a choice!
jeddas30 1 year ago
Would never work
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 why?
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 hi saydaysago2008, please see my response to w1z3k
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 Just as easy to say those three words as I could say to you: "You are an idiot." But let's never use inconsiderate statements, shall we?
W1z3k 1 year ago
@W1z3k I'm a 45year old psychologist. I had dreams that people could work together for the benefit of all but now realize that it's impossible. A few reasons: we tend to identify with others who share commonalities with us- forming in-groups/out-goups. As long as we maintain that mentality, we'll never be able to pursue what this video proposes. Also, some humans are greedy, others are lazy, and some can't stand to have their views challenged. @W1z3k, ty, u proved my point- yep, i'm an idiot
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 I'm well aware of our tendency to identify ourselves with groups, and still, we disagree. I'm sorry for you that you bought into pessimism = associated yourself with a group wich hoped but eventually gave up. I'd rather see myself in the group which succedes in making such a world a reality. You could also, just find someone you could take refference of, a new person, or group of people. As soon as you start looking on yourself as one of them, you will experience optimism one again.
W1z3k 1 year ago
@W1z3k You missed my point. Identifying with a subgroup of our species rather than our entire species (or entire planet) is part of the problem. When we do this, and resources are limited, we tend to 'protect' our own group's interests rather than the interests of all. You seem to advocate belonging to a group, but doing so causes wars and other negative things.Please don't feel sorry for me I never bought into pessimism. I think I'm a realist and my views are founded on empirical research.
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 Wars only occur if a group chooses to go on war with another. Which only occurs if they don't know any alternative to war. I chose to associate myself with a group who knows better than declaring war on another group. We will never initiate such thing, and due to our structure (I'm not only speaking of the ZM) it would be almost impossible to practise any kind of warfare against us. We are tolerant and patient towards other groups, and let them feel free to join ours whenever they like
W1z3k 1 year ago
@boocat65 you're views, while historically empirical, fail to take into account that our tendency to identify with a subgroup has always manifested in a world where it was pure imagination/impossibility for the world to communicate en mass, hence extending our empathy to the entire planet. Today, we live in a world of global interconnectedness, and if you've done any research into human nature, you'll know that learning new behaviours when our environment allows it is one of our specialties.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 The ability to communicate in mass will not necessarily enhance empathy. As long as humans continue to identify w/ groups there will be friction. Also, there are individual differences- some people are just plain greedy. I think I'm familiar with human nature, I'm a psychologist. My view stem from both history and research.
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 "some people are just plain greedy."
I repect that you're a psychologist, and have experience dealing with how people are, and why they are that way. Do you think people are BORN greedy, or is that something that happens to them as a child? Current genetic research suggests that genes are rarely (if ever) directly responsible for behavior (just proclivities, which are exaserbated [or not] by our environment... want links?).
IE; they've never found a greed, criminal, or gay gene.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 Have you heard of moderators & mediators? Many behaviors stem to indiv. personality traits and fear. I commend your video but you proposed an idea without a solution. So everyone in the world is free to do whatever they want and has everything they need, right? How would housing, utilities, food, medical, etc be provided to everyone? Is everyone's contribution considered =? If so, what's the incentive for someone to do an undesireable job, take more years of education, etc?
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 if you read the description of the video, I say that if you have no background in what I'm talking about, you'll end up with more questions than answers. I knew that making it... that's why I implore people to look deeper into the system I'm proposing. There is a lot of material behind it.
To answer your question, housing, utilities, food, etc, are provided by a globally automated robotic manufacturing and delivery system, this will eliminate most menial labour pretty quickly.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 To make your argument stronger, it would be beneficial for you to flesh it out more. Ok, so "globally automated robotic..", who transforms the raw material to create it? who build it? who maintains it? where is the energy to run it coming from? and who will be monitoring that? how is the product shipped? who does all this work?
"I work with what is considered healthy individuals" Behavior is on a continuum.
boocat65 1 year ago
@boocat65 all very reasonable and important questions. this video was meant to raise these questions. some good resources are the 2009 zeitgeist movement orientation video, and the venus project's main website FAQ.
There is a lot more information available to help answer all these questions. on both the zeitgeist movement and venus project sites, as well as the hundreds of supporting sites.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@boocat65 Aside from that, people, if freed from wage slavery, wouldn't want to just sit in their house doing nothing all day.
They'd want to help, where they can, they'd want to learn and study and experiment. If humans do have a basic nature, it's that of curiosity. The profit incentive has shown to be actually less effective than NO INCENTIVE in a few studies where people were asked to do creative or thoughtful tasks.
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@boocat65 "Have you heard of moderators & mediators?"
No, but I'll look into them.
"Many behaviors stem to indiv. personality traits and fear."
True, but where do these traits and fears stem from? Science is showing that it isn't our genetic code. So it seems it must be... our environments (for the most part).
saydaysago2008 1 year ago
@saydaysago2008 Oh, have you investigated animal behavior? Chimps will wage war to protect their territory (resources). Lions, wolves, etc. claim territory too. It is part of survival. No creature wants to die (even if they're not aware of what death is, they are hard-wired to survive, or try to at least). Humans are not that far removed from animals. When resources are threatened, you see this behavior. Turn to history- holocaust, khmer rouge, rwandan genocide, and so on. No empathy there-
boocat65 1 year ago