|
Money?
Apr 16, 2010 22:26:10 GMT -5
Post by straemer on Apr 16, 2010 22:26:10 GMT -5
So I am a firm believer that money is an unnecessary evil holding society back. Now if I suggest that a society is created without money, people immediately jump back with the counter-argument that nobody would be encouraged to work. This is far from true. In fact, the people most active in society (engineers, doctors, teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc.) would be the most likely to remain working, as for many of them, their primary goal is to benefit society. Now with this, the only area really at risk that is needed would be people in the skilled trades (plumbers, construction workers, road workers, etc.). However, with the advancement of technology, these positions are being replaced with machines, and could probably be completely replaced by machines within a matter of years. Because of this, we should form a society without money. Besides the fact that this would be nearly impossible to accomplish without some sort of global take-over, what would be the detriments of a money-less society?
|
|
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 2:48:25 GMT -5
Post by paradoxasaurus on Apr 17, 2010 2:48:25 GMT -5
I think money is probably a step up from regular trading. It's just more convenient, so it being taken away would take away the convenience. Instead of having to haggle with a shop keep to trade your cow for their tools, one can just put a monetary unit on an item. It is also just easier to handle, with the next step up that we are currently working on being credit cards and the like.
|
|
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 3:14:03 GMT -5
Post by DubiousKing on Apr 17, 2010 3:14:03 GMT -5
How would you negotiate trade? The only way I can see to do this without currency is to revert to the barter system, which is inherently flawed because the worth of an item is completely subjective this way.
Hypothetical sutiation: If you were to trade to a man 10 apples for 2 watermelons, then another man were to trade him 10 oranges for 4 watermelons, you'd likely get upset because (in your mind) apples and oranges are worth fairly the same. But to the man with the watermelons, he prefers to eat oranges so he puts more worth into them.
Now imagine that hypothetical situation on an international scale. This sort of trading system, when applied to large groups, can cause a lot of tension. Tension can lead to conflict, which can easily lead to war.
I'm not saying that the barter system will definitely lead to war, or that this is the only alternative to currency (though it's the only one I can think of), just that the most likely outcome is not too happy.
|
|
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 3:31:49 GMT -5
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 17, 2010 3:31:49 GMT -5
While a moneyless society certainly seems like a good idea for a utopia, there are some potential problems with it.
Someone above mentioned the problems of trade without money - the main reason for money is to make trade much easier to handle. Perhaps you would suggest a society without trade (i.e. everything is free). A problem with this is that it could result in extreme waste. Without a market, how would anyone know how much of something (or what) is good to produce?
Say someone liked making widgets, but not many other people liked widgets. In a market, not many people would buy widgets (at least not for very much money) and the maker would soon realize that he couldn't continue making widgets, or he'd go out of business. However, without a market, it may not be so apparent to the widget maker that he is not making a decent contribution to society, and thus he continues to make them, wasting the resource that could be put to better use to society.
Another problem that I see, is simply that money is not the root of all evil, as you may think. Money is simply a medium of exchange and is valueless on its own. So the attributes of money are derived from other items of value (goods and services). As far as I can see, as long as we ascribe value to material things, we are going to have all the problems that we currently have with money - it would simply be replaced with other commodities. So really, our utopia can only come about if people in general learn to become much less materialistic and to value people and society above personal gain and luxury. Ultimately, if that happened money would lose its usefulness in society and fade away. Simply removing money from our existing society would do little to help things, as well as create a bunch of new problems.
|
|
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 19:48:20 GMT -5
Post by straemer on Apr 17, 2010 19:48:20 GMT -5
While a moneyless society certainly seems like a good idea for a utopia, there are some potential problems with it. Someone above mentioned the problems of trade without money - the main reason for money is to make trade much easier to handle. Perhaps you would suggest a society without trade (i.e. everything is free). A problem with this is that it could result in extreme waste. Without a market, how would anyone know how much of something (or what) is good to produce? Say someone liked making widgets, but not many other people liked widgets. In a market, not many people would buy widgets (at least not for very much money) and the maker would soon realize that he couldn't continue making widgets, or he'd go out of business. However, without a market, it may not be so apparent to the widget maker that he is not making a decent contribution to society, and thus he continues to make them, wasting the resource that could be put to better use to society. Another problem that I see, is simply that money is not the root of all evil, as you may think. Money is simply a medium of exchange and is valueless on its own. So the attributes of money are derived from other items of value (goods and services). As far as I can see, as long as we ascribe value to material things, we are going to have all the problems that we currently have with money - it would simply be replaced with other commodities. So really, our utopia can only come about if people in general learn to become much less materialistic and to value people and society above personal gain and luxury. Ultimately, if that happened money would lose its usefulness in society and fade away. Simply removing money from our existing society would do little to help things, as well as create a bunch of new problems. Yes, I suppose I should have made it more explicit that I would be proposing a society where everything is free. You bring up a good point about waste, however I believe that a lack of money would actually decrease waste. First of all, the "economy" would become entirely resource-based. This would mean that rather than focusing on maximizing profit, we would focus on minimizing waste. For example, one of the major reasons we don't just create a lot of windmills is because they are expensive, whereas something like coal is cheap. In a resource based economy however, it would be noted that a windmill is much more beneficial, as we won't run out of wind, and less maintenance would be required. The same general idea would eventually come out in day-to-day products. Rather than throwing everything in a giant pile of garbage (that is a landfill), we would be reusing and recycling used/broken products. Also, with your example of a widget-maker, the individual probably wouldn't be the only one who wanted to make widgets. Other people would also join him and help him make better widgets that people would actually want. Without any competition, there would be no patents to stop people from copying other ideas and embellishing them, making an overall better widget. And no, money is not the root of all evil, I believe that is greed. However, money is a significant contributor to greed. Of course you couldn't just take money away suddenly; this would just lead to disorganized anarchy. The only feasible method to implement this that I can think of would be to progressively increase taxes, as well as services provided by the government.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 22:58:31 GMT -5
Post by Cortney on Apr 17, 2010 22:58:31 GMT -5
You can't make a society where everything is free, because people don't work that way. On paper it sounds wonderful, but in reality it would never work. If everything were free people would get more than they need. If everything were free and rationed, people would complain about not getting enough.
Plus, money > bartering. Always.
I hate money, but it's needed for a human society to function.
|
|
bleabot
Moon
Set phazors to dance, Mr. Warf.
Posts: 109
|
Money?
Apr 17, 2010 23:55:08 GMT -5
Post by bleabot on Apr 17, 2010 23:55:08 GMT -5
^ What she said.
I really want to believe that such a society could exist on earth. I want to believe that humanity can get rid of the money-based economy that is hurting more than it's helping. However, humans don't work like that. There will be a select few who would work for the good of mankind with the advantages that come with everything being free and accessible, but from what I've seen, most will misuse that luxury. Greed is certainly pretty bad (understatement!), but getting rid of money will actually allow people to act upon that greed instead of leaving it as a feeling. Even gradually letting people adapt to such a society wouldn't be very productive.
I hate money and what it turns people in to, but it's a necessary evil until humanity as a whole changes. I don't see that happening any time soon.
|
|
|
Money?
Apr 18, 2010 1:02:53 GMT -5
Post by newschooled on Apr 18, 2010 1:02:53 GMT -5
Here's the weird thing-
I could afford to go to college. So I did. Now I make SOME money. I have friends who couldn't afford to go to college, so they didn't. They went into blue collar industry or are on government subsidies and make LOTS of money.
Oh, the irony.
|
|