Yes, but working together in the realisation that some small group has already hunted and gathered everything and trying to redress the balance by using a different socio-economic model - it seems to work for them at least.
Lol…I think you’re having a hard time reconciling the fact that you have invested in something that could potentially be the means to an anti-Capitalist, Liberal, Sandal-wearing, Tofu-munching, resource-sharing, eco-friendly, beard-sporting, Libertarian, Green, Tree-hugging, welfare paying, sharing economy…
I think you and Al_Kafir are missing the point: without any surplus of inputs over outputs there’s no way to maintain, let alone increase their living standard. They are clearly not producing anything beyond what’s require for day to day living.
No way to replace or upkeep those buildings, provide for kids, pay their healthcare, or invest. That’s what happens when you don’t save (don’t produce more than you spend)
You’re not going to propose a tax system are you?
Actually, that’s where the Faircoin idea comes in, along with a saving and funding mechanism - like a bank that funds various Cooperative projects.
And which of the modern Capitalist countries manages to do this? The Capitalist system is now operating on debt. I admit that I don’t get the need for constant growth or surplus or “accumulating” stuff - that’s the mind virus that has got us where we are.
@Al_Kafir may I politely suggest that you spend some time reading economic literature (of any kind) to be able to better engage in these discussions.
The current system is not capitalist and yes, it is operating on debt because the way modern central banking (a state invention of course) works but that’s not how capitalism works. By definition in free capitalism there’s no central banking and fiat money.
The need for surplus: that’s why I mention you should read about that if you don’t understand it.
To make a simple example: those buildings where those guys live need to be maintained. If they last 50 years, every year, every year the community needs to create a surplus equal to 2% of the buildings’ value so that a new one can be built when the current ones become unfit for living. The same goes for all capital they have - laptops, etc.
There is no need to hoard anything. You need to produce more than you “need” just to be able to maintain your current standard of living.
The fact that they don’t produce more that they spend means the long term result is poverty.
On top of that any extra savings (above the amount required to replenish the current capital stock) can be used to invest in improving the current standard of living.
If you don’t support “hoarding”, as you call it, then you support the debt system, so what’s the difference between this “new” (actually not new at all) system and the current system? The only difference is how they distribute what they steal.
If redistribution wasn’t the sole purpose of this coin, they could use bitcoin and use their time to actually create some useful apps. In short: another shitecoin (rather than “shitcoin” which I understand is a coin worth investing in).
Lol …of course you may, what a splendid suggestion.
May I in return, invite you to participate in a Cooperative joint venture that I’m hoping may also interest Happybeing?
I think the first thing to do would be to send me all the literature on Austrian economics etc that you’d like me to read, so I can acquaint myself with it, as you suggest.
As I was saying earlier to Happy, I’d be interested in being part of a Cooperative production process with different parts of the process being handled in different locations and workers basically owning the “company”.
I’m thinking I could design molds on my Google Sketch-up and Happy could 3D print the molds and send back to me to complete the production process. This would involve filling the molds with papier mache. Once hardened I can then post all the Austrian economics literature back to you in suppository form.
I must politely decline because I’ve got too many things going on at the moment.
Don’t think I’m arguing here for the sake of winning an argument. It would do me no pleasure to see you guys fail. It’s more of a warning that this idea is crap.
This won’t be the first Lenincoin to fail. I wonder why the founders didn’t join How does it work? since it’s already out there and they could have used the saved time to plant carrots, fixed the roof or something.
I have a number of issues myself - I’m not an advocate of every aspect and take on board your points. I look at the whole thing as something to “pick the bones” out of when thinking about different socio-economic models.
I think we both recognise the current system is broken, though ascribe different reasons for this largely, as we are coming from different sides of the political spectrum I think.
Ultimately, I think the broad spectrum of “reasonable” (not extreme) political opinion recognises the system is broken, so surely we can all come together to find a more equitable system for all of us. I think we can take inspiration from and pick the bones from previous socio- economic models, but I honestly think that this is going to involve a sea change in how we think about money/wealth.
I think one basic Human thing that Capitalism does cater for is the desire for competition and gives “incentives/kudos etc.”. If we can start valuing/respecting other attributes other than wealth, then I think we can move forward as a species.
At the end of the day, we need to cater for these basic Human drives too, which some alternative models do not appear to do.
We have to think about Psychology too basically - it is a psychological fact that Humans have a much more deep seated objection to others “getting away with shit” (not playing by the rules) than others having more “things/money” than themselves.
This would be my main objection to how the Capitalist system has developed - actually, it’s more that the rules are being made by those who benefit from them nowadays…The natural Human desire for competition has mutated into a system that rewards sociopathic behaviour.
Fail at what? You seem to assume there’s some kind of plan, and we’re (me and @al_kafir?) about to set sail… I haven’t even read about Faircoin and Faircoop beyond the article I posted. Like a good capitalist I’m leaving that to @al_kafir so I can profit from his labour if he turns up anything worthy of my investment. Waiting… :-\
At whatever type of “post-capitalist” community or venture you invest your time in.
I said in comments posted under similar topics here, attempts to “fix” free market capitalism by improving it with funny schemes are doomed to fail.
I can’t really save anyone who disagrees with me, but I’d be glad to revisit doomed projects at a later time to see how they will have done.
@janitor its not like something is going to fail over depreciation which can be added into to current spending. That’s not a huge burden especially if people choose durable design.
As to whether we’ve seen capitalism, we have have. The suggestion that we haven’t would be held by the extreme minority in the economics profession. Its also aiming way too low. The idea that capitalism even of the fabled sort would be the best we could do represents a totally tragic mindset. It was never sufficient not even in its most idealistic forumulation. Unfortunately for capitalism as a religion, Marx was correct, it was a phase, we had it for a while, it delivered and being a stage it couldn’t last. Its not like getting rid of the state would result naturally in peaceful capitalism. No, Capitalism requires a state to exist.
In any acceptable system with profit, the profit scheme would have to be tied to profit efficiency. And things that are not profit efficient should be precluded or taxed from existence as their equity and opportunity costs are too high. As to exactly how or who decides profit efficiency, its a bit of a problem and consensus may not be sufficient but some stuff is obvious and some of it we know when we see it. Systems of all-you-can-steal just lead to violent upheavals. The idea that markets are self sustaining or adequate mechanisms of distribution doesn’t hold up. Its like saying poker games are adequate mechanisms of distribution and are self sustaining. Market worshipers are like fire worshipers- its the faith that something good will emerge from the fire, its superstitious to think of markets as more than tools.
No system where the main focus is having a class of rich who remain comfortable and powerful is acceptable. Systems that view the associated wealth of the rich as a luxury are getting much closer to what is acceptable and sustainable. This is why rational tax systems view the wealth of the personal wealth of the rich in luxury terms. US billionaires with a few exceptions are huge embarrassment. For all the wealth abuse maximizing spew-age about charity the average US billionaire’s giving is 1%. Greenspan’s admission that his main job was keeping the average person in a state of fear (sustained terror really) so they could not advocate for a higher standard of living tells us everything about the post Nixon US. Russians coming over to the US and then wanting to go back to communist Russia is also quite telling about the actual US standard of living. The US tried over and over again to go more ‘free-market’ than the US, and the result was places like Chile and Argentina. It doesn’t work.
If 25000 years ago we got by on 4 hrs a day of work outside the home, and that was prior to language and tools, and that didn’t involved war and constant conflict, if we use the tech from today and cut the rich parasites off their artificial scarcity dole, we ought to be able to get our freedom and reduce drudge work to almost nothing while still having pain killers, antibiotics surgery toilet paper and all the comforts. Its time for societies cash in. The hunger and the slavery today are the result of simple oppression through sponsored debt and wage suppression etc., for the benefit of those who have proven they should not have power.
