A World Without Money

[silentcomposition]

I got to thinking about money and how it basically controls the universe and human emotions. Money makes the world go round.
Discuss.

People strive for money because their top priority in life is survival.
Since we have set up a system that works around the exchange of currency, instead of direct trade.
Then it is only natural to strive towards what you need to survive.

Another huge priority people have is protection.
Ingrained into our hind-brains from years before us.
Thus making people that have collected money, afraid to lose their money, and in extreme cases hoard all their money away from the world.

After that people are worried about procreation.
Since we have set up a system where having more things equates to being more suitable as a mate.
Then people are going to use their spare money on fancy things, instead of helping others in need, and lowering their suitablity.


If we were to take away money itself.
These instincts would still be there, people would only find other ways to do them.

In order for a utopian society to work.
You would have to reprogram people as a species to not fear death, to look at all prospective mates as equal, and to not have any qualms with giving away whatever they have for the better of humanity.



If you watch this video it will explain that people with economic differences suffer through greater depression the wider the gap.
http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html


The best thing to remember is to not let what others have get you down about what you can do with your life.

[Xephon0930]

In other words,that is when humanity stops becoming human. I remember an Arthur C. Clarke novel called Childhood's End tackling the same subject.

[thehurricanekid]

People strive for money because their top priority in life is survival.
Since we have set up a system that works around the exchange of currency, instead of direct trade.
Then it is only natural to strive towards what you need to survive.

Another huge priority people have is protection.
Ingrained into our hind-brains from years before us.
Thus making people that have collected money, afraid to lose their money, and in extreme cases hoard all their money away from the world.

After that people are worried about procreation.
Since we have set up a system where having more things equates to being more suitable as a mate.
Then people are going to use their spare money on fancy things, instead of helping others in need, and lowering their suitablity.


If we were to take away money itself.
These instincts would still be there, people would only find other ways to do them.

In order for a utopian society to work.
You would have to reprogram people as a species to not fear death, to look at all prospective mates as equal, and to not have any qualms with giving away whatever they have for the better of humanity.



If you watch this video it will explain that people with economic differences suffer through greater depression the wider the gap.
http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html


The best thing to remember is to not let what others have get you down about what you can do with your life.

I'm not sure I get your vision of utopia. You say we'd have to not fear death. So life would be better if we all rode our bikes without helmets and crossed the road without looking? Similarly, if we didn't care about how much money we had and about our ability to get what we need, we'd all just starve to death. Friends and family and not to mention world leaders dropping off at any given moment? Is that an ideal situation to you? It seems like you're making the argument that improving our species entails getting rid of the same aspects that have kept our civilizations going so long.

[Xephon0930]

I think silentcomposition was going with humanity not having to worry anything is more of humanity being given everything that they need and are content with what they have in front of them. That would mean a world without any sort of possession which is something I can't 100% understand and no other human would.

[thehurricanekid]

Even that viewpoint asks that humanity shed one of its more intrinsic qualities. We're always thinking of ways to make everything better. Just look at voice acting as an example. Even peeps we know to be great at it, folks like sinscale or AnathJackson still actively seek feedback for advice on how to get better.

[Geist X]

The problem with bartering is that it requires a coincidence of wants. If you're a beet farmer, you have to hope that someone who sells stuff like bread or water also happens to want beets. If not, there's no way to get everything you need. That's why you need money. You can exchange that for whatever.

Barter is a double-edged sword. If you have something that is not in demand within a certain group, you will have to trade it for modest prices, or search for people from a different group who specifically need what you're offering. You have to be very diligent.

On the other hand the benefit of barter is that value is relative to need. You may have a surplus of something that is in high demand. Or perhaps it's not in great demand, but there are a few individuals who need what you have, and are willing to trade a lot for it. Sometimes with barter you can come out with a lot more than you started with.

Beets can be used to make Wine, and sugar can be extracted from them. Perhaps raw Beets might not suit the fancy of many, but with Sugar and Wine a Beet farmer should be able to do very well if they know what they're doing.

I've had mostly positive experiences with barter. Some people will try to dupe you, but if you've got something decent to offer, you should be able to get something good in exchange. And...as strange as this seems, sometimes when you need something and people have a surplus...they'll just give it to you.

[thehurricanekid]

I don't deny the versatility of beets, believe me. The problem is that there is no way to guarantee that you'll be able to trade beets (or any singular commodity for that matter, I just used that as an example) for everything you need because, like I said, there's no guarantee any particular person will want beets. With currency, however, there is a guarantee that any vendor will want that, so it's a certainty that you'll be able to get whatever it is you need so long as you have enough money. What you're talking about in terms of making many things from a single product (wine, sugar, etc. from a single beet) requires diversification of labor, which actually is quite inefficient. Even basic macroeconomic theory has proven that society as a whole is more efficient when people perform a limited set of tasks that they are particularly well-suited to carry out. This way, you get the best results with the least amount of inputs because all an individual's inputs are being invested in an activity to which they are most capable of doing.