We'd have to let go of our egos for this to work.

@rilesOrama

9 жыл бұрын

Jacob Foster And greed

@RBMDragon

8 жыл бұрын

+Riles Orama First question where greed comes from? What are the "requirements" for the behavior to emerge.

@rilesOrama

8 жыл бұрын

RBMDragon greed comes from people wanting power in the form of money

@Newlinjim

3 жыл бұрын

SERVO TV Yes, this would realistically require at least two generations given our current basis.

@singingnymph

3 жыл бұрын

Good, let's get started.

There is only one problem with a resource based economy, and it is this. Not enough people are aware of it. We need to really try and pound it into people's heads intellectually.

@flowerfairybird

10 жыл бұрын

Well Jeffrey, Wonder who you are and why You Tube won't let me give you a thumbs down on all your disparaging remarks. I tried on several different places you made similar remarks. Interesting.

@flowerfairybird

10 жыл бұрын

You don't know who you are? Ok well there you go. Now I know why you think this is such a dumb idea.

@GuillermoValleCosmos

10 жыл бұрын

You are right. You'll be happy to know that Ben McLeish from the Zeitgeist Movement will be talking in the 'Anticipating 2025' conference in London, together with many well known futurists and technologists. We need RBE in one of the big TED talks though..

@RamiroS77

10 жыл бұрын

***** It is possible... but the trick is that you cnanot just show the ideas and expect people to catch up and understand (like most of today's obsolete educational systems do). People who is into educate other people need to understan people, speak their own way, and present the ideas in a way that they understand, otherwise is is counterproductive.

@rashadal-safar1931

10 жыл бұрын

There is another problem with this system. It offers no structure to manage the human decision making process. who will program the computers? who will choose which resources that get assigned to certain projects over another project? who will be the first one to travel to mars? who will create laws? who will enforce those laws? who will design testing and education institutions? If there is no democratic system involved then how can human decisions be made fairly for the good of all?

Remember this isn't showing the only option, or saying it's a perfect system and it's going to be easy... However, they're showing how the world can look if we make changes, just look at black Friday it's sickening... And rubber tires on cars that pollute the air? We're living in the stone age...

Science and spirit. The two can not work without the other.

Wow. This guy was ahead of his time. He's literally describing the sharing economy at 10:50. Prophetic.

@jedijamesmullady

2 жыл бұрын

Dude, you’ll be blown away over Jacque Fresco, the man was going on about RBE 90 years ago lol

@jedijamesmullady

2 жыл бұрын

Or Karl Marx for that matter, he seem the failings of capitalism very early, as have many tbh but we kill them people.

It's bahfaling how people can't see passed their ingarined ideologies.

I'm an engineering student myself. It takes a lot of work to create a piece of technology. Also tech life corresponds to fatigue, material properties etc all of which are based according to access. It requires much more time, sophisticated materials and research to make exceptional tech. There's a reason that the Voyager spacecraft still works 30 years later. It was F-ing hard to make, required a large team years of crafting and hard to manufacture components. That's why it was so expensive

@NicholasMuscat-cl1qo

10 ай бұрын

If you add it up in the long run its still the best way. Life Expectancy= Work Done x Quality

Hey Chuck, I'm a computer science major who's also pre-med. Just throwing my 2 cents in " The mechanism of pricing is one of the most efficient creations of humanity which is repeatedly proven by economists of the Austrian School Economics" Except pricing doesn't take human quality of life, environmental sustainability into account. If it did, there would be no such thing as money, because it would simply "cost to much" to proliferate equality through modular technological innovation.

I am amazed at how many people are so unable to think outside of the "haves and have nots" model you have been conditioned to! Do you all realize that something like half the world population lives in poverty! Do you understand that automation will increase to a point that unprecedented numbers of people will be out of work? You or your kids may end up in that growing poverty population! Please wake up if we don't change to a cooperative system there will be chaos and a lot of suffering, well there already is but it will begin to touch most of our lives.

@JChang0114

9 жыл бұрын

Liza Roocroft You should go to Africa to help the poor.

@nevadataylor

9 жыл бұрын

Liza Roocroft Welcome to capitalism at its finist!

@garrett45388

9 жыл бұрын

Liza Roocroft Struggle is necessary for survival. Losing ones job to automation would require more tech training. So you cant put the tooth paste cap on by hand anymore? Learn how to program the robot that does it for you then regain your job. I feel bad for the impoverished, but a lot of the time they do it to themselves. They make too many babies they cant support, tribes fight over religion and they have no want for education. My children will never be without nor their children. They will be taught to appreciate what they have and have the tools to make things happen for themselves. Our current system is the greatest system to come about in human history. Without it we wouldn't be talking on youtube. This system recognizes its flaws, but its greatest threat is a hope for a better one and not improving it. There is always room for improvement, but humans have to want to improve themselves.

@nevadataylor

9 жыл бұрын

garrett Fleming "Struggle is necessary for survival."

@kaufmanat1

9 жыл бұрын

Time will show you to be completely wrong... Unfortunately that takes time, unless you look at societies in the the last 10,000 years, found many of same concerns consistently debunked, decade after decade.

I can't see another way forward really. This solution addresses every real problem we have. The best by far that has ever come to the table. I think if everyone was really educated about this, they would all want it. Unless they are playing devils advocate, stand to lose from it or fear they may lose from it.

@mpmitchell2112

8 жыл бұрын

+mantonio121773 " I think if everyone was really educated about this, they would all want it. Unless they are playing devils advocate, stand to lose from it or fear they may lose from it." sorry Mantonio, but there are plenty of educated people who see the glaring flaws in this type of system. The science of economics (sound economics, not that keynesian nonsense they teach in school) shows that a system like this has a fundamental economic calculation problem and cannot rationally allocate resources because it lacks a price system. I don't expect that to make sense, because it requires a strong grasp of economics, but just be aware that there are plenty of educated people who rightly oppose such a system like an RBE because of the havoc it would wreak on society....we realize the intentions are good, its just that there is no way to perform economic calculation without prices.... its not a problem of technology.

@mantonio121773

8 жыл бұрын

Mike Mitchell Mike - it makes perfect sense. You are unable to break out of the paradigm your mind was locked into. Price mechanism.?? You didn't pay attention did you. Watch more and related videos if you care.

@mpmitchell2112

8 жыл бұрын

mantonio121773 "You are unable to break out of the paradigm your mind was locked into." lol, such typical RBE nonsense. So if i just say that you are locked into a paradigm, without actually explaining how, that means its true? that passes for argument in the RBE crowd? yes yes, i know my "paradigm" is "truncated" and "antiquated" and all the other PJ word salad I've spent hours upon hours eating. I would like to challenge the assertion that I'm locked into some paradigm. its just such an ironic accusation because its the RBE crowd and PJ that are in fact locked into the false "paradigm" of marxist theory which includes, but is not limited to, voluntary exchange is exploitative, money is bad, private property is bad, pursuit of profit is bad etc. Its just such a blatant and incredible case of "the pot calling the kettle black." Marx was wrong on those things, so you RBE people do not get to go around acting as if that stuff has never been refuted and pretending its gospel and accusing everyone else of not being able to think outside the box, when its you guys who cant think outside of your marxist anti-money anti-private property "structural violence" box. do you see the difference there? instead of just calling your views a "paradigm" and leaving it at that, i explain WHY thats the case.... because RBE is based on the same "truncated" and "antiquated" views that Marx had, which have been destroyed by various great thinkers over the last 150 years or so. "Price mechanism??" yes... price mechanism, price system, whatever you want to call it. in a market economy which is necessarily based on private property, prices emerge from voluntary exchange and guide resource allocation through the profit and loss test (which you RBE guys sorely do not understand). Prices communicate vital information about scarcity and valuation that the RBE planners could not have. Mises painstakingly explained why those systems of equations could not be used to replicate economic calculation and coordinate a complex economy with change and uncertainty present. Theres no excuse for being ignorant on this point. Oh thats right, to save yourselves from having to grapple with that brilliant insight, you just dismiss it as antiquated and move on... so intellectually dishonest. Thats why a lot of people don't take this kind of thing seriously and treat for what it is: a weird flavor of marxism with robots and computers running things. Its not a new idea. "You didn't pay attention did you. Watch more and related videos if you care." I've paid so much attention to PJ and TVP and zeitgesit that I've been shitting word salad for weeks now. I'm getting tired of watching things that claim to answer the calculation problem, but dont even comprehend it, let alone present a solution. it just falls on deaf ears lol... Mises: central economic planning doesnt work because of the calculation problem" every socialist/RBE'er: "we can solve the calculation problem by central economic planning, see? just look at the equations, jeez, how can you be so locked into your antiquated paradigm" Mises: face palm if I am allowed to stoop to your level of argument, i could just call YOUR view antiquated or a paradigm or whatever, and be victoriously done with it... but no, i really do care, so that would be insufficient for rebutting a position.

@YTuseraL2694

2 жыл бұрын

@@mpmitchell2112 whoa, what a load of horseshit. And don't even attempt to label me with those brainless generalizations "RBE crowd", "socialist" etc. My years of studying economics for a diploma were the most painful thing ever, as I saw yet another artificial and needlessly complex man-made social science that IS INDEED wrapped in a current monetary based dogma/paradigm and operates on those terms, as you and your word salad for price-advocation and RBE-rejection clearly shows. Just as same as law and legislative sciences - in a real, natural world needless and meaningless, while only being given an artificial authority and weight by our increasingly obsolete culture and mentalities. Your comments are the typical example of a intellectualist in a try, but unsuccessful. And also, you're free to continue to advocate for a status quo with your "academic" essays on YT and attempts to stomp/discredit the change proposals, but you'll very likely have a lot to explain to your grand-children when they ask you why is the environment polluted beyond repair, water is drinkable only through filtration and there is only money for dinner. And rest assured, I'm at least equally capable of spewing my academic knowledge here but I've by now seen the current economic sciences for what they really are and you demostrated it.

Watch the video. 1. Material science would be used to determine which materials are best suited (based on their physical properties) for the product's intended use. It would be made to be as efficient, updatable, recyclable and long-lasting as possible. Its "cost" would be determined through a sustainability-determination. 2. Automated/cybernated robot systems would gather the required natural resources. 3. By the society in question, or by the planet, or no one (depending on how you see it).

@jake44514 Studies at MIT have concluded that when it comes to simple tasks, like running a mile, monetary (reward) incentives work as expected. But when it comes to complex tasks, like engineering, healthcare, research, education, humans are motivated by three other things. Mastery: Being able to master a skill. Autonomy: Having the freedom to work in way and in a place you enjoy. Purpose: Making a contribution to society. These would be the pillars of labor in a Resource Based Economy.

Technically the economy wouldn't really be that much different than it will be already. The very bases of an economy is to believe all things are scarce and that's why prices exist. The price doesn't disappear if someone removes money, it just becomes time, labor, and entrepreneurship unless humans were vegetables. Any basic economics class would teach you that businesses are only supposed to make the decision that best makes them profits. It is inefficient to use more labor on something that will end up costing more then the public is willing to pay (time and labor for example). Which is why businesses do things over long periods of time, it's considered "efficient." This clip just states a lot of ideas that the world economy would just normally progress to in a more "efficient" manner than proposed. Water plants in the U.S., for example, recycle human waste guess he didn't know they did that. How "unsustainable" of them. All technologies end up being standardized because it becomes cost effective, but I guess "science" needs it now! Also the words "resource based economy" already existed to describe an economy that is mainly made up of producing natural resources and sadly that makes me wonder of the credentials of not only the director, but the ones they cite if they even have more than one person cited.

@sainchawlonen

9 жыл бұрын

very good review of this. and no zeitgeister called you an idiot for pointing all this out. great comment. Peter Joseph, the director, is IMO a creep.

IMAGINE - a world without conservatives or liberals. We'd have peace.

@ashleycasey2093

10 жыл бұрын

i KNOW :D

@Swordsquire

6 жыл бұрын

Yeah, because, damn those hateful, war mongering liberals....

What a wonderful explanation of RBE (Resource Based Economy).

Reading the comments has made me realize why a system of this type will never work. A more Old Testament approach would be needed; we would all needed to lose everything but the necessities and an entire generation would have to die off to introduce the new concept. Since that's not likely to happen on a global scale, this is a noble thought.

@deniseward002

7 жыл бұрын

Nonsense! How do you know something like this cannot work? You're putting the kibosh on it before it even gets off the ground. We have all the resources such as computers and technology to live absolutely fabulous lives. The more people who see the writing on the wall, the sooner we'll create a system that works in accord with nature and ourselves. This is very doable, and indeed, will produce the most desirable lives, healthy, strong, happy.

@DavidMontgomeryMSF

7 жыл бұрын

Moses and the Hebrews didn't roam the wilderness for 40 years for nothing. The mindset had to die out before they could move forward. Such is the necessity for this proposal to be successful.

@There-Is-No-Virus

7 жыл бұрын

I'm wondering if it could happen if just 1 country wanted to do it, or would it only work if a few big countries wanted it

There are some good ideas in here. But it brushes aside a lot of major problems as "easily computed". It's really not that trivial to, say, calculate the sustainability of every resource on the planet, and track the location of every product. Just as it's not trivial to calculate an objective, indisputable universal model of economics, or climatology.

@jakegamesnake

8 жыл бұрын

+Andy Brice "It's really not that trivial to, say, calculate the sustainability of every resource on the planet, and track the location of every product." why not?

@iAmTheSquidThing

8 жыл бұрын

jakegamesnake Well, try it and see.

@RBMDragon

8 жыл бұрын

+Andy Brice Of course it is not trivial, but neither is it impossible. We don't need to track every gram of it either, just to a certain precision.

@iAmTheSquidThing

8 жыл бұрын

+RBMDragon Oh sure. I don't think it's impossible to estimate. It would still be a dramatic shift though.

@iAmTheSquidThing

8 жыл бұрын

+jakegamesnake Oh no. My Jimmies. I never even knew it was possible for them to be this rustled.

Who decided who gets what? So demand and supply dictate production but what about when the demand is higher the the sustainable production? If one region needs more oil for heat and another region needs more oil to transport water due to a heatwave... who will decide who gets what and how much of it? Considering people could actually die in some situation this computer would leave human with no choice over who lives and who dies based on its own biased view.

@RamiroS77

10 жыл бұрын

Humans, as we do now, will program (based on human needs and not politics or corruption) the systems. You are thinking about it in today's frame of reference. As the systems are implemented the planning and the predictability (via simulations, for example) will be a must, a built-in into the system. Shortages (most likely) will never happen as they do now. If something can't be done the same system as a whole will look for alternatives. And since transportation will be more efficient and faster even carrying water should be much more easier than what it is today. Hope that answers it. If not, just ask.

@RandomDirectors

10 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the reply, Sure the more streamlined processes will by far reduce shortages. Perhaps the water example was too simple. What happens when all the children want a new phone? Whose children get the new toys and who decides if they should or not? How do we calculate who deserves 'scarce' resources that can not be given to everybody that wants/needs them? In today's world, however unfair you think the system might be, we would use money. Do people have money or some sort of virtual coupons in this model?

@rdlineberry

9 жыл бұрын

Redundant Paperclip A phone is nothing more than a handfull of silicon, metal and plastic, with tiny amounts of a few other minerals mixed in. We could make them for next to nothing these days. Advertising is what makes them expensive. If we made them of higher quality materials and made them easily updatable/repairable, we could have the same phone for decades, or until a better technology evolves.

Great! This is all interesting, but I just have one question. How would housing work in this system?

@nevadataylor

9 жыл бұрын

MrTokomaki I havent read through it in its entirety, but my guess is that it might be introduced in "Zeitgeist Movement Defined"? ... have a look -> www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/uploads/upload/file/19/The_Zeitgeist_Movement_Defined_PDF_Final.pdf

@MrTokomaki

9 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

For the people claiming this idea is stolen from Jacque Fresco consider this: 'Man invented fire and didn't sue anyone for copyrights.' No single idea is original.

I don't want to live in a world like that, it seems like it would be oppressed and unhappy.

@Inannawhimsey

9 жыл бұрын

*chuckle* by the time a world like that happens, you won't have to -- you'll be able to live with like-minded folk on Europa or even the Oort cloud...we'll spread out from this earth and speciate, becoming even more diverse...or something like that

@shakespeare_hall4788

9 жыл бұрын

***** What Drugs are you taking Man ???

@EngineeringNS

9 жыл бұрын

Bradley Goodchild he is on LSD

@Mungodog100

9 жыл бұрын

If anything the world you live in now is oppressed and unhappy. 80% of the worlds population now live on less than $10 a day. Using the authority of the money system a small percentage of the population has hoarded the majority of the resources of this planet, causing poverty worldwide.

@EngineeringNS

9 жыл бұрын

Erik Richardson this is true, but a refined version of communism is not the solution. Strengthening the world economy is the solution. China has the worlds fastest up growing economy.

The difficulty of attaining such a society would be its transition from the money based economy due to human greed. I do wish it were possible yet do not have enough faith in human nature.

@Mahartinba

10 жыл бұрын

Sorry to say this, but the ultimate tool for change in any system is war. War creates the level of disruption where thinking is automatically changed to surviving mode, there is then no greed for money as it is loosing its value. The greed is then changed to hunt/greed for resources. Sad as it is, the stronger then wins. In this age the natural process of elimination a.e.weak or not being able to survive, has been suppressed by our intelligence, emotion and care. Yes, we are humans. We've evolved to consume, not to retain. Nobody wants war, so we rather choose the suffering in "ideal" world eating what is put in front of us, rather then re-claiming or re-producing from the area inhabitable and available to us.

@floridtv

10 жыл бұрын

dont confuse human nature with human behavior which is based on the conditioning of this current system.

@floridtv

10 жыл бұрын

Mahartinba you wouldn't need war. we'd basically have to just acknowledge that this is a more healthy, efficient, and prosperous overall and basically ween off of this horrible way of life that has proven to only generate tribulation and discontent. what we need is awareness and a long transition period.

@rashadal-safar1931

10 жыл бұрын

The problem is that there are no details as to how we will manage ourselves under this type of system. who will program the computers? who will choose which resources that get assigned to certain projects over another project? who will be the first one to travel to mars? who will create laws? who will enforce those laws? who will design testing and education institutions? If there is no democratic system involved then how can human decisions be made fairly for the good of all?

@floridtv

10 жыл бұрын

Rashad al-safar people that are willing and qualified obviously.

@kajmobile Good points! 1. The goal is eliminate human suffering, not just money. Suffering occurs as basic needs are unmet due to resource scarcity. Scarcity is required for profit so the monetary system guarantees human suffering 2. Some subjectivity may be inevitable. But if we agree suffering is bad, it matters less how we subjectively choose a method since survival needs are objectively measurable 3. Even if it could fail, it's still irrational to continue what we already KNOW fails

There would be an abundance of access, because sharing requires less production (and thus less resources) to meet demand than ownership does, and even less than a market with private property. For example, compare a library to a bookstore.

I was so persuaded! This sounded so good… but then it said “its a glorified calculator”, “take surveys” to find demand, and that private ownership was wasteful… *Sigh* I felt like I was in the future, but now its 1917 all over again. As other users have noted: it is a beautiful idea but it is just not realistic.

@robertbones326

8 жыл бұрын

+Disableton 1917 man on the moon wasn't realistic. people like you are what keep society stupid.

@disableton6946

8 жыл бұрын

Robert Bones lol Throwing out wild comparisons and ad hominem attacks is the exact response that one might expect from a supporter of this movement. However, that’s a little hypocritical of me to say, isn’t it? I suppose that’s beside the point. It is the year 2016. We have put the human race on the moon and yet… Socialism is still no closer to, hear me now, any success. In fact, Venezuela has officially had enough (last I checked) and cut ties with the Socialist movement due to national starvation and hyper inflation (amongst other reasons). So, apparently not much has changed in 99 years. I’m sorry Robert. I do not mean to “keep society stupid.” Such a task may be left to those who want to keep on using the same broken system and expect different results.

@robertbones326

8 жыл бұрын

We're talking about RBE, not socialism. Socialism in a monetary system doesn't work, I don't know why I'm explaining this to you. You don't know what RBE is. And what does Venezuela have to do with anything? It's a developing country with a history a corrupt politicians. I bet you think RBE is communism in Cuba. Do some research before dismissing ideas.

@disableton6946

8 жыл бұрын

Robert Bones lol it’s central planning in a nutshell. This video states it wants survey all resources in order to plan their use. THIS DOES NOT WORK. People make mistakes, stats are not collected properly and not everything can truly even be collected via stats. IF your model of RBE is that of this video it will NOT work. It has been attempted and there are simply too many factors at play. A decentralized, or even mixed, system will always be more efficient. As I’ve said, its a noble theory but about as realistic as a timothy leary day dream. You say do some research, yet it seems you have only researched one field and have barely provided any groundwork from that.

@robertbones326

8 жыл бұрын

Disableton You've proven my point. How can you plan the use of resources without knowing what's available? Okay let's suppose there's margin of error for whatever reason, why would screw up the entire economy? Today we're using dozens of barrels of oil for each barrel we find, you seriously think this is a better management of resources? Yeah, I stand by my statement - do some fucking research.

There are already thousands of books on nutrition and medicine online, "all" you need to do is make a program that guides you through the relevant knowledge, by letting you choose categories/subjects, answer questions, select symptoms etc. Hell, I've gotten some nutritional info just by using Google. What people want is determined by what they use, and how much/often.

to comment on what squareoaky stewart said, It is my opinion that most of the Bible is talking about how humans should treat each other. What he meant by a social system is how humans treat the planets resources. Revelation 11:18 - "The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small-- and for destroying those who destroy the earth."

i miss the technocracy with their red & white Tao

it's an interesting dilemma. through the late 18th and early 19th century, wage labor was looked down upon and viewed as a type of slavery that needed to be eliminated. The question of wage labor is how do you get people to do things they don't want to do, or do things you yourself don't want to do. And as you stated, that is a hierarchical relationship. What we are talking about here is eliminating hierarchical relationships.

That's not how the RBE works, but you have the right to join or form a society that uses private property. You can read more on The Venus Project's website.

@goldensleeves This solves the "Paying the employee" concept. Robots work for free, and are scientifically more efficient in every sector than us humans. More importantly, their ability to reference knowledge (or information) electronically is one of the main aspects of a Resource Based Economy.

I hope we get to see a resource based economy, I'm spreading the word as much as I can. Let's change our world for the better

What are those questions/issues? (I'm not saying I will be able to answer them, I'm just curious.)

I just want to say I am trying to start a chapter in New York City, the first one of it's kind in the area. We need to get people thinking about a reality that benefits the many and not the few. We can do this it just takes effort, intelligence and diligence.

When it comes to a transition, I would predict that automation which is gradually replacing and challenging the modern workforce will be what will push public mood in favor for a resource based economy, or an economic system which is somewhat similar to the one in the video. When people are out of work in this "you earn your living or stay poor" system, they won't be able to buy goods correct? So even if these cooperations make their goods cheaper with automation, it still wont fix the economy

Don't comment you want this or not without understanding the full concept.

- as filling the role that companies play in the present(obviously, we still need people to manufacture and transport goods, provide services, etc. while we get it all sorted out). It will be particularly difficult as we will still have to have some rudimentary system of resource usage monitoring in place, possibly manual log-keeping, until we get the networks set up. In addition, people simply aren't used to living like that, adding another layer of difficulty. And these are just the first -

How are they supposed to obtain the resources? Are they just surveying resource sites or seizing/advocating seizure of resources?

@robertbrothers2099

10 жыл бұрын

I've spent at least 3 hours specifically what this is arguing, and I am still not confident in inferring the position.

@LizaPolitical

9 жыл бұрын

I believe what is intended is for a linear sharing system organized through technology so there isn't a higher power structure. Resources are surveyed and determined through technology where the resources are needed and that is where they go based upon population and need around the world.

Can any system be 100% worked out? What system do you propose?

I'm an engineering graduate myself, and I truly want to live in this world, but it seems pretty obvious that PJ isn't an engineer himself. This video is the equivalent of saying "In this new world, we will have tele-porters to transport goods efficiently." Where are the lines of code needed for this system? Who is going to actually mine for the materials? Classless society?You mean Jacque gets to sit at a desk drawing pretty pictures while others have to erect huge girders/mine for iron?

People who defend the staus quo so vehemently are either gaining something from it or they're suffering like the rest of the majority but they don't want to view themselves as being duped by the system, as just wage slaves. Keep communicating the message even if people get defensive. Stay calm, mature and patient. Someday these people will be more open to seeing the cracks in the current system and they'll remember what you had to say and have a change of heart.

@YTuseraL2694

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, there was in the comments this "Mike Mitchell", a supposed intellectual who is soooo knowledgeable yet so stupid.

The problem here is that we have the wrong goal in mind. If we were given a natural resourced environment our goal should not be to survive, it should be to live and enjoy what has been given. The quest for knowledge generates the idea of a goal for survival which creates greed and other destructive traits in humanity.

1. What kind of "cost/value" are you referring to? You'll have to be more specific. 2. Again, there are no payments. A person can take/order a product, use it, and - in most cases - return it for someone else to use. 3. Most of society is automated.

(cont1) You may look at the amount of injuries, but you cannot determine between someone who is unlucky, someone forced to take risks, someone abused, or a myriad or other circumstances. There is no "blanket" way of distributing the resources fairly without some sort of omniscience. Worse, more will risk more (as it can be more fun) as a part of thrill seeking. Even those who don't won't contribute more to ensure the shortfall is made up for. They are guaranteed fairness. (cont2)

- as even with an overwhelming majority(+90%) of people calling for an RBE, there will still be a few stragglers who refuse to live that way. Living in the transition period will no doubt be difficult, as nearly everyone who can contribute would have to. Engineers from all fields, scientists, cryptographers - all of the world's greatest minds will be needed for planning and design. People unable to help with designing will at least be needed for the manual labor to assemble machinery, as well -

Here's a little fly for your ointment (google it): In this resource-based economy utopia, who gets to make all the decisions? I mean to say, who is at the top of the food chain? Who will watch the watchers? "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." - Lord Acton Feel me?

- things that come to mind. The actual transition will no doubt be very complex, and any amount of speculation is just that: speculation. I don't believe the human mind can account for all the intricacies involved in such a wide-scale project. We'll just have to try it and see where it takes us

you hit the nail on the head when you said they are financed by companies who pay for certain results. why would they lie if there was NO financial reason to do so?

* Make an example relevant to the RBE - What artificial control does it [supposedly] include? * Reality. We live in groups (societies) for a reason. * "Stress typically describes a negative condition that can have an impact on an organism's mental and physical well-being."

uuuuuuuh we kind of already do a lot of this?? Except for the speed boat library. I'm down for the speed boat library.

@saeedbaig4249

8 жыл бұрын

+garrett Fleming You wouldn't download a boat would you... THEN WHY WOULD YOU DOWNLOAD A MOVI- Oh wait, I would download a boat. Very much. Ok then... carry on.

@saeedbaig4249

7 жыл бұрын

william dechant The future is here:)

Has anyone tried to make this resource tracking system?

Decisions aren't "made" in an RBE. They are arrived at based on the Scientific Method. The work would be done by interdisciplinary teams and the scientists in these teams would have to be able to prove that what they are proposing we do is the most efficient. There would have to be Scientific consensus. In an RBE all education is freely accessible so anyone who wanted to, could educate themselves and join the teams that are doing the work.

I'll agree on that.

A computer program that has decided from conception to death every minute of every day. When you wake up where you work and where and when you,marry , vacation , your friends , there would be no class,or wealth or innovation. Everyone would have equal voice and a computer would make the final choice The status Quote would never want to give up power and black markets would thrive.People would enter data that the computer wanted and the system would crash.

It is unfortunate that many miss a lot of information. Many often say 'human greed' without much knowledge about it. And many miss the fact that we cannot exceed the planets capacities. That's it. If you have a better alternative, please share, with scientific proof, but please research this first. I can first recommend Zeitgeist Moving Forward, as there is huge amount of information in this movie.

98% of crime is directly monetary related, not including what is indirect. Resource-Based economy "prisons" are already in place today. Norway has implemented it, it has the lowset reoffending rate in Europe and has one of the top 10 lowest crime rates in the world. The system works. A RBE would eliminate the reason to thieve, as everyone is provided with the necessities of life. It works very similar to a public library where everything is available to everyone without a price tag.

@goldensleeves I never said ALL humans would be replaced. This is not possible from the near paradox you just pointed out. But based on volunteer statistics taken through polls and studies, the volunteer man hours for the average country exceeds that required for an RBE to run. It would require less than 4-5 man-hours per person per week, to run properly once set up.

you make it sound like it basically means lets decide how much stuff there is and divide it up equally and then you all go out and do what you want and use what is given you to trade with others to get what you need, (like having monetary or asset capital) and you spend it instead of invest it or innovate or increase the assets worth and use by mulitiplying it is this right? so what happens when you used up your share? will others be forced to give you some of theirs to equal everything out?

I haven't read much on economics (but plan on doing so at some point in the future), but I don't see how your comment refutes anything I wrote.

@Stillillgal it's not 'stolen', the film gives fresco full credit, and fresco is in the movie. stealing the idea would be to claim it was his own.

And what does "on its own principles" mean in this context? How do you know that it's more nature than nurture (i.e. more genetic factors than environmental)? I want to create an environment where the reaction of critical thought can occur.

Everything that will demand resources= teachers, textbooks, metals, research development, and etc. Free markets tend to balance these resources by itself, that's why capitalistic utopias exists as well (even if they never would work in practice). I hope you understand. I think I can put it simply by saying it like this, the reason there is not robots instead of laborers at this moment is because it would acquire more resources- in form of development, research, engineers, teaching and etc.

technology footprints change by necessity. Faster processing, more storage, longer battery life, and smaller footprint. We cannot design a physical technology footprint to accomodate all future upgrades. So, another solution here is needed. What needs to happen is: all materials used in technology need to be easily recyclable.

Hi, Aegis...just wanted to adress this very quickly.. "This video is the equivalent of saying "In this new world, we will have tele-porters to transport goods efficiently." Where are the lines of code needed for this system? Who is going to actually mine for the materials? " We wouldn't teleport materials, though the technology to tele-port has been researched since the 70's. The materials will be mined by automation, primarily. And in all seriousness, Jacque will probably be dead by then :(

It's the stress over debt and bills that is driving people crazy and making them depressed as they see the only purpose of their life is to keep money in circulation. That's not exactly a meaningful existence.

You don't "get" a yacht, you can use one and then leave it for others to use. If there isn't any unused at a given time, you will simply have to wait (which shouldn't be a problem, considering you have an entire world of possibilities). If neccessary, a new one could be produced. Why wouldn't the RBE be able to produce everything we need?

can we make an abundance of the periodic table such as gold and silver? if we cant then the resource based economy will hit an obstacle

@AngelZlayer Fair point. I actually don't know how I missed that haha.

I found such a place where I couldn't agree with people more! ;D

I love this... however... in comparing to a library... when people borrow a book, they pay the library to borrow it. That gives them the right to access the book. In our society, the reason the library is kept clean, organized, and monitored for inventory is bc people are paid money to upkeep the system for a population. What, other than money (which is motivating bc it gives access to limited resources) in a resource-based economy would motivate people to upkeep something like a library?

I hope you are right. I believe the future of our species depends on as many people as possible believing as you do. I like what you said in another comment about people imagining another way of living, much more just and environmentally sane. I, personally, see many, many people who almost fanatically defend the status quo, but hopefully more people are open to very different type of lifestyle and economy.

"[...]The cost of producing robots and engineers would be far greater [...]" What kind of cost are you referring to?

I do think we need rewards for human labor. So for example if apartments are the standard issued living space, if the person wants more, they could sign up for labor a job, and hence be rewarded with a nice home, yard, etc... This basically is how it works now. The poorest amongst us lives in trailers & apartments and the higher earners have nice homes generally speaking of course. So in this sense people still have freedom to upgrade their lifestyle.

I'm not aware of any such videos being made, though I imagine the transition to be somewhat hectic. We'd have to have our best people look at each and every process that we need as a society, and find ways to optimize(resource allocation, construction, communication, and so on). Of course, that comes in two parts; planning and implementation. It will take a long time for both phases, even if all goes well. Expect crazies to be turning themselves into bombs to stifle progress(ala Contact) -

It isn't human nature. Human nature is actually cooperative and empathetic. It's the system we currently live under that distorts or supresses these natural impulses. In a RBE you would do surgery and help others for the good of helping them and you wouldn't be over-worked for some hospital or HMO's bottom line so you would be more inclined to do it freely and without resentment.

It's interesting to me that the only arguments anyone could possibly make against these proposals is "money". Guess money needs to go!

TURN ON THE FUCKING VOLUME FOR STARTERS

@BarrySlisk

7 жыл бұрын

The magic computer decided that this is the volume you need!

We use the money we don't have, to buy stuff we don't need, to impress people we don't like!

Using force as defense is not the same as initiating it (unintimidated).

@Juands10 We live in a monetary based economy

How does one profit without money? In constructing an RBE, you're basically talking about incorporating sustainability into every element of our societies. To be able to fulfill recurring needs with as few external inputs as possible, optimally 0. If you have a garden, you can grow much of the food you would otherwise buy at the store. You also have the added benefit of being connected to your food, knowing where it actually comes from. This is security. This is what all people need.

but I humbly thank you for your response. :)

@goldensleeves Why is it that these conversation always end up with me spending exorbitant amounts of time trying to enlighten someone, only for them to turn around and say "Nah You just dont have an answer"? You're probably the 14th or 15th person to ask the exact same questions. -"Money creates value" "In a world of abundance value doesnt exist" -"Who will do the work to creates this abundance?" "Robots" -"Who will fix the robots if all jobs are robots?" (Ive heard this one 10000 times)

One thing for an example is called human-capital. It measures the value of one profession. Let's say there is a lack of engineers, their income would rise because they are rarer. Let's say that the venus utopia would be a real thing, it would then require a lot more engineers than our educational systems produce. So if no one would work. The cost of producing robots and engineers would be far greater and logically the outcome would be a constant demand for both human, development, and resources.

I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean, but go ahead, let me know when the image is done. The Venus Project could need a more detailed plan.

Thanks for the reply. I understand the two concepts are different. I was merely using socialism as an example for how something in its conception is not always how it functions in practice. A resource based economy seems like an idealistic pipe dream to me, at least, for us modern humans. More directly, I'm asking how such a system could be implemented on a global scale in a realistic, tangible way without the distortion of opposing worldviews.

Big Things have small beginnings.

On a realistic level, if we slow down the tides, via tidal energy, could that not have huge effect on the ecosystems of the world as well, hypothetically?

(cont2) It's not that they are being mean, simply that there are many pressing concerns and priorities in each different person's life. You would have to "enforce" fairness somehow. And this is where it gets ugly. Some central deciding vehicle has to be constructed. And to determine maximum fairness it has to have maximum knowledge. Which means surveillance. And you are already down the same twisted and broken road as before. The RBE assumes abundance. (cont3)

You can ask questions directly to TVP and they will answer all of them (which is much more than what any politian does). People will be needed to create technology, they will always be needed. As some people today are interested in law and politics, in the future people will be interested in engineering and science (which is what life is about). What they say is that monotonous jobs won't exist. In fact, they will be extint in this system too, but you'll be unemployed and will die starving.

It was a different time back then. Today we can spread awareness online, and pretty much anyone can buy textbooks and educate themselves. Finding the time and motivation is still an issue though, but one step at a time. As for the plan, there are different ideas. Did you delete your other reply?

@Funkyflorist "Specialization" is in large part due to a lack of interdisciplinary learning. The education process is focused on mass producing specialized workers A RBE assumes no monetary system is in effect (no jobs pushing money around) so there will be many ppl with extra time on their hands, therefore more volunteers As for water management. Design and build many more efficient water treatment plants that maximize automated/cybernated processes. Improve existing processes (out o words)

@Anubis7169 ... My answer to your question: Your comment gives the impression you don't know the answer. The reason it appears that way is because you took out lots of time to write a complaint about having to deal with answering a question as if it was a burden instead of answering the question. And just because we're conversing on a youtube video doesn't make it any less valuable of a communication medium.

Goals =/= method. If someone wants to achieve world peace by using violence and oppression, do you conclude that his/her method is bad, or that the concept of world peace is bad? The Venus Project doesn't advocate violence or central power.

Thank you for the challenge mike58241. I know what we understand the answer to question we will kNOw what to do. But you know what my brother, my dear friend. We Will Win.

Human's aren't always sensible under the current system but the more these ideas get out there for consumption, the more people will have the opportunity to imagine a different kind of reality for themselves. Everyone may not be on board now, today. But if these ideas about a RBE can be shared and talked about then they will surely spread and gain acceptance as people see that what we're currently doing is not working in the least.

That price tag would be meaningless in a RBE-society, but like I wrote to hellacool1975: If people want to trade, they have the right to join or form a society that does.

What human nature? No counter-argument, just an empty statement. Name these obstacles.

@goldensleeves 1. "Scarcity is required for profit so the monetary system guarantees human suffering" That is not how our economy works. Profit does not rely on scarcity. It relies on being able to generate more revenue than expenses. If capital owners collect all the profits, that will lead to increasing inequality which causes suffering. The solution is better allocation of income, not eliminating money. i think capital should be democratically owned and its income equally distributed

If prices and money are left alone, they will pretty much serve as this calculator. Bonus, if someone wants to live inefficiently, they can but they'll produce at least enough to pay for it.