Resource-Based Economy

Fuckpencil calls me Zeppo for some reason.

Which means you all have to call Acecombat 'Lacey' and all the other nicknames he gives everyone.

Tired-Hippo wrote:

mrblackbat wrote:

You're like a broken record.

Po/kettle/black?

Er, no, that doesn't really work there....

Everyone knows Winslow's a dog, it's hardly precedent.

mrblackbat wrote:

Tired-Hippo wrote:

mrblackbat wrote:

You're like a broken record.

Po/kettle/black?

Er, no, that doesn't really work there....

It does, because you're accusing me of being repetative inspite of your regular over use of the pot/kettle/black thing.

The pot calling the kettle black implies hypocrisy not repetition.

Read it again then think about it, or I'll have to use the....misses the point thing.

plus i think you bring up the pot kettle thing to blackbat more than blackbat uses it anyway.

Now that's an outright lie...he's even got a favourite picture of it.

harmar wrote:

It's always the girl left with the responsibilty of holding the baby.

Whether you think its a good thing or a bad thing it's still a responsibility.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that.
Many people who end up in this situation weren't happy to begin with though, which is partly why they go round fucking anything that walks.
These things tend to happen much more in poverty striking areas, and systems that cause isolation, boredom, etc.
I think this probably plays quite a big role in sexual promiscuity as well, and saying that it all comes down to biological urges is an oversimplified view.
Especially when you take into account we also have strong neutering instincts as well.
Like I said before, a number of species will chose one mate for life, so to say we're designed to be sexual promiscuous is a bit of an assumption to make.

...But If people wanna fuck about a bit, and do so in a responsible manner, use protection, not cause suffering to others a result, then I don't see it as a huge problem.

Narg wrote:

Getting rid of money altogether is simply infeasible at the present time. The mind boggles at how you could possibly instigate that, or try to convince anyone other than free-living hippies that it's the best way.

Common sense?

Common sense is what gave humans the idea for money in the first place. Just look at how incredibly useful it was when it was introduced.

Bit outdated now though...

I think weather we have physical money or not, we will always use some sort of currency take US prisons, when they banned fags in them, which had previously been swapped for goods and services, an economy developed using tinned mackeral.

That's kinda the idea of this though.
Having an economy based on resources available, not bits of paper that have no "real" worth.

So you want the world to ditch money for say....slices of bacon?

I havn't read the thread topic. I should start looking before leaping.

It doesn't matter though, really - all currency is is an easy way to understand what the resources are worth. Swapping tins of beans for houses, say, becomes a bit hard when you don't have a unit which signifies what either a tin of beans or a house is worth independently.

if i had any skills i'd work for bacon.

Tired-Hippo wrote:

So you want the world to ditch money for say....slices of bacon?

Bacon wouldn't work but the idea in principle is a good one.

Paper money was orginally only brought about for large transaction though, and I think the same issue applies today. How would one buy a house in material goods, without having to shift a large amount of it around, then comes the problem of storage, and security.

How many tins of beans would a house be worth?

Would it be easier to make a house out of the tins of beans instead?

It would cause issues on things like busses as well, how would the bus driver find space to store all the items and the passengers?

What would happen if all money became worthless ie Zimbabwe?

Bartering.

I don't know how they go on with buses ... if they still have buses.

Spectral Knight wrote:

It doesn't matter though, really - all currency is is an easy way to understand what the resources are worth. Swapping tins of beans for houses, say, becomes a bit hard when you don't have a unit which signifies what either a tin of beans or a house is worth independently.

Swapping tins of beans for houses is barter though.
If you can get it into your head that there really is no need for barter to take place because there is already enough to go round food wise, etc, or at least there would be if people worked together instead of in a competitive manner.
You don't need to worry about having to trade one thing for another, because the other thing is already assessable to you.

Tired-Hippo wrote:

mrblackbat wrote:

Tired-Hippo wrote:

mrblackbat wrote:

You're like a broken record.

Po/kettle/black?

Er, no, that doesn't really work there....

It does, because you're accusing me of being repetative inspite of your regular over use of the pot/kettle/black thing.

I used that pic for about a day; you've gone on about it for months following that.

I was looking for the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe page but it's gone. It had my favourite quote of all time from Gideon Gono.

"Failure is not an option."

This is nearly as good ...

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/11/blog-post.html

'From the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (boldface theirs):
As Monetary Authorities, we have been humbled and have taken heart in the realization that some leading Central Banks, including those in the USA and the UK, are now not just talking of, but also actually implementing flexible and pragmatic central bank support programmes where these are deemed necessary in their National interests.'

I saw a good Shakespeare Quote somewhere ...

'N'er black cloud clears without a storm.'

I just keep the house stocked with food.